Labour Party Leadership

[High-On-Hibs]

Ahh ok so we will reverse globalisation then and implement socialist policies that have been proven to work so effectively time and again?

Funny that you say that. Because based on the evidence of reality, it's the right that are reversing globalisation and determined to rip an entire continent apart.

I haven't once heard Jeremy Corbyn talk down private business or ownership. If he had some kind of Marxist/Leninist agenda, he would be against any form of private ownership, which he quite clearly isn't.

I'm no fan of Labour in their current form, but the stick Corbyn puts up with is absolutely ridiculous.

[RyeSloan]

Funny that you say that. Because based on the evidence of reality, it's the right that are reversing globalisation and determined to rip an entire continent apart. I haven't once heard Jeremy Corbyn talk down private business or ownership. If he had some kind of Marxist/Leninist agenda, he would be against any form of private ownership, which he quite clearly isn't. I'm no fan of Labour in their current form, but the stick Corbyn puts up with is absolutely ridiculous.

Nonsense...being free to negotiate your own trade agreements is not reversing globalisation.

As for Corbyn he gets stick largely because he deserves it...this article sums up just one of the reasons and is a small window on some of the ruinous policies Jeremy has spent so long supporting.

http://capx.co/corbyn-looks-the-other-way-as-venezuela-self-destructs/

[High-On-Hibs]

Nonsense...being free to negotiate your own trade agreements is not reversing globalisation.

As for Corbyn he gets stick largely because he deserves it...this article sums up just one of the reasons and is a small window on some of the ruinous policies Jeremy has spent so long supporting.

http://capx.co/corbyn-looks-the-other-way-as-venezuela-self-destructs/

Except they are quite clearly not "free" to negotiate their own trade agreements. Its this arrogance from the UK Government and British minded people in general that will ultimately be the UKs biggest down fall. Britain is not bigger than Europe and it's going to find that out the hard way.

Aye ok. The democratically elected leader of the Labour Party deserves stick for remaining as leader.

[High-On-Hibs]

Also. You're article from "CapX" does not contain one quote from Jeremy Corbyn.

[marinello59]

You're saying he has no leadership skills. But how would you define leadership skills in the context of UK politics? Another faceless mannequin with a suit and tie? Corbyn is something different. The establishment don't like that and are desperate to replace him with one of their own as soon as possible. I'm no Labour fan boy by any means, but I respect Corbyn for hanging in there.

He isn't the problem IMO. The problem is that he needs MPs in his party that actually represent his views. Because he currently doesn't, his arguments are not reaching the electorate anywhere near as effectively as they should be.

The majority of the MPs he was supposed to be leading in the EU referundum were in favour of staying in yet he still failed to deliver anything like strong leadership. Why do you think that was?

[RyeSloan]

Also. You're article from "CapX" does not contain one quote from Jeremy Corbyn.

Yes it does. He's quoted right in the middle of the article.

[High-On-Hibs]

The majority of the MPs he was supposed to be leading in the EU referundum were in favour of staying in yet he still failed to deliver anything like strong leadership. Why do you think that was?

Well if they were so in favour of staying in, what did they do themselves to try and ensure that the vote would be remain?

Here's what I think. They weren't as pro-eu as the party line would suggest and they saw opportunism to overthrow the labour leadership in the event of a leave vote. I don't think the Labour MPs sticking the boot into Corbyn will be that disappointed about a leave vote. It's all about advancing their own careers at the end of the day. To hell with everybody else!

[marinello59]

Well if they were so in favour of staying in, what did they do themselves to try and ensure that the vote would be remain?

Here's what I think. They weren't as pro-eu as the party line would suggest and they saw opportunism to overthrow the labour leadership in the event of a leave vote. I don't think the Labour MPs sticking the boot into Corbyn will be that disappointed about a leave vote. It's all about advancing their own careers at the end of the day. To hell with everybody else!

:faf:

[RyeSloan]

Except they are quite clearly not "free" to negotiate their own trade agreements. Its this arrogance from the UK Government and British minded people in general that will ultimately be the UKs biggest down fall. Britain is not bigger than Europe and it's going to find that out the hard way. Aye ok. The democratically elected leader of the Labour Party deserves stick for remaining as leader.

Who is saying the UK is bigger than Europe? Peru is smaller than Europe but has proven quite adept at negotiating trade deals with the US, EU and many others so as the saying goes size isn't everything. Much more likely for the success of head agreements is the flexibility to negotiate deals that are mutually beneficial and flexibility is hardly an EU watch word.

And of course once out of the EU the UK will be free to negotiate trade agreements with whoever it wishes. I would be interested in your explanation as to how it would be otherwise.

Did you not post your dislike of TTIP? Yet that is an EU negotiated (potential) agreement...are your views on that not rather contrary to your stance here?

[Hibernia&Alba]

Ahh ok so we will reverse globalisation then and implement socialist policies that have been proven to work so effectively time and again?

And once again you suggest that we have a neo-liberal agenda. You can repeat that all you want but it's not true. Government and central bank interference in the workings of the market has never been greater...and we can see how well that's worked out, yet you want more government interference (as long as it's the right colour of government of course)?

And as for house building...the answer is relatively straight forward. Reduce planning hurdles and open up the green belt and you would soon see land prices go down, house building go up and affordability increased. Yet instead we have Government cash give aways and people demanding rent controls...all very neo liberal (not).

We're never going to agree. I'm firmly of the opinion that 35 years of monetarism, privatisation, the shifting of taxation from direct to indirect, and laissez faire economics has fractured the country and created inequality and lack of social mobility. All the evidence suggest that the more equal a country is, the better educated, more socially mobile, the more peaceful and happier a society is: look at Scandinavia, Germany or even Japan. Cut throat competition isn't the answer to humanity's problems, IMHO, but merely reduces everything to the lowest common denominator - so much potential is thrown away as the ruthless take all. It isn't a numbers game to me, it's a matter of what it is to be human and how we should live. Money and economies are human creations; we're the only species of animals to use it, yet we act like it's something beyond our control, that has a will of its own that we must obey.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Is Corbyn going to stand again, now he's lost the support of the PLP so overwhelmingly? 172-40 is a mauling.

[Hibbyradge]

Is Corbyn going to stand again, now he's lost the support of the PLP so overwhelmingly? 172-40 is a mauling.

He'll need 50 signatures to nominate him, no?

[Hibernia&Alba]

He'll need 50 signatures to nominate him, no?

Aye, I think so. He already says he won't resign, though. Seems determined to run again just now.

[Hibbyradge]

Aye, I think so. He already says he won't resign, though. Seems determined to run again just now.

I've been trying to amend my post to say that.

The party will split.

[RyeSloan]

We're never going to agree. I'm firmly of the opinion that 35 years of monetarism, privatisation, the shifting of taxation from direct to indirect, and laissez faire economics has fractured the country and created inequality and lack of social mobility. All the evidence suggest that the more equal a country is, the better educated, more socially mobile, the more peaceful and happier a society is: look at Scandinavia, Germany or even Japan. Cut throat competition isn't the answer to humanity's problems, IMHO, but merely reduces everything to the lowest common denominator - so much potential is thrown away as the ruthless take all. It isn't a numbers game to me, it's a matter of what it is to be human and how we should live. Money and economies are human creations; we're the only species of animals to use it, yet we act like it's something beyond our control, that has a will of its own that we must obey.

I don't think we disagree on your equality comments, it's the reasons you attribute today's problems to is where we diverge.

Competition drives productivity and its productivity that drives wealth creation. It's the restriction of that through governments supporting vested interests and poorly designed policies that have done the most to stifle that. A good example is QE...there is nothing on earth that has done more to drive wealth to those that have (those with existing assets) from those that have not. Add in super low interest rates and again you have support for zombie industries and silly house prices over providing a return to savers or those that might wish to purchase property for the first time. None of that laissez faire nor neo liberal, in fact quite the opposite it is direct intervention from governments and central banks to the long term detriment of us all.

So I don't think disagree with you on that something should be done to increase the lot for all, we merely completely disagree on how we got here and how it might be resolved ;-)

[Hibernia&Alba]

I don't think we disagree on your equality comments, it's the reasons you attribute today's problems to is where we diverge.

Competition drives productivity and its productivity that drives wealth creation. It's the restriction of that through governments supporting vested interests and poorly designed policies that have done the most to stifle that. A good example is QE...there is nothing on earth that has done more to drive wealth to those that have (those with existing assets) from those that have not. Add in super low interest rates and again you have support for zombie industries and silly house prices over providing a return to savers or those that might wish to purchase property for the first time. None of that laissez faire nor neo liberal, in fact quite the opposite it is direct intervention from governments and central banks to the long term detriment of us all.

So I don't think disagree with you on that something should be done to increase the lot for all, we merely completely disagree on how we got here and how it might be resolved ;-)

I certainly don't agree with that. There is no such things as free markets. The very companies who champion free markets and absence of government interference don't actually want to compete, hence we get takeovers and cartels in all sectors. When a company grows it immediately tries to remove its competition - look at the supermarkets, the energy sector, the banks. The so called free market always tends towards oligopoly; and the very same companies come running to taxpayer after destroying themselves. Furthermore, it's elected governments who set the framework in which a free market operates, which is in itself a contradiction of the idea of truly free markets. I think the best way to improve the lot of all is less competition, more cooperation, more organisations owned and democratically controlled by those who work in them. More liberalised markets creates more inequality and powerlessness, as wealth and control concentrates in ever fewer hands. A society and economy can't succeed unless the vast majority are able to participate, but we're seeing the expansion of low paid, insecure work for millions, which has done such harm to those in the middle and at the bottom of the income scale. America has gone even further down that road. For 35 years we have bought into the nonsense of trickledown theory, which clearly hasn't worked. It's given us food banks, a million people in temporary accommodation, zero hour contracts, record personal and national debt.

[High-On-Hibs]

Every single time I see John 'lets privatize the NHS' McTernan on TV, I have to resist the urge to stick my boot through it. :grr:

[High-On-Hibs]

I agree that competition drives productivity and wealth creation. However, the modern form of far right capitalism drives multinational monopolization which effectively kills competition by creating conditions where new businesses simply can not compete on a level playing field. That's why governments need to step in from time to time to ensure that competition can actually develop. Giving dominant corporations a free run is not the way to drive up productivity.

[RyeSloan]

I agree that competition drives productivity and wealth creation. However, the modern form of far right capitalism drives multinational monopolization which effectively kills competition by creating conditions where new businesses simply can not compete on a level playing field. That's why governments need to step in from time to time to ensure that competition can actually develop. Giving dominant corporations a free run is not the way to drive up productivity.

No body said it was but neither do we live in a world with 'far right capitalism' in fact I would go as far as saying we don't have much or any real capitalism at all.

[High-On-Hibs]

No body said it was but neither do we live in a world with 'far right capitalism' in fact I would go as far as saying we don't have much or any real capitalism at all.

Look. When Socialism goes wrong, we continue to call it Socialism. But when Capitalism goes wrong, we're always determined to give it another name. Whether you consider the way things are now to be Capitalism or not. it doesn't change the fact that Capitalism was the building blocks to where we find ourselves now.

[Kavinho]

I certainly don't agree with that. There is no such things as free markets. The very companies who champion free markets and absence of government interference don't actually want to compete, hence we get takeovers and cartels in all sectors. When a company grows it immediately tries to remove its competition - look at the supermarkets, the energy sector, the banks. The so called free market always tends towards oligopoly; and the very same companies come running to taxpayer after destroying themselves. Furthermore, it's elected governments who set the framework in which a free market operates, which is in itself a contradiction of the idea of truly free markets. I think the best way to improve the lot of all is less competition, more cooperation, more organisations owned and democratically controlled by those who work in them. More liberalised markets creates more inequality and powerlessness, as wealth and control concentrates in ever fewer hands. A society and economy can't succeed unless the vast majority are able to participate, but we're seeing the expansion of low paid, insecure work for millions, which has done such harm to those in the middle and at the bottom of the income scale. America has gone even further down that road. For 35 years we have bought into the nonsense of trickledown theory, which clearly hasn't worked. It's given us food banks, a million people in temporary accommodation, zero hour contracts, record personal and national debt.



hear! hear!

[RyeSloan]

I certainly don't agree with that. There is no such things as free markets. The very companies who champion free markets and absence of government interference don't actually want to compete, hence we get takeovers and cartels in all sectors. When a company grows it immediately tries to remove its competition - look at the supermarkets, the energy sector, the banks. The so called free market always tends towards oligopoly; and the very same companies come running to taxpayer after destroying themselves. Furthermore, it's elected governments who set the framework in which a free market operates, which is in itself a contradiction of the idea of truly free markets. I think the best way to improve the lot of all is less competition, more cooperation, more organisations owned and democratically controlled by those who work in them. More liberalised markets creates more inequality and powerlessness, as wealth and control concentrates in ever fewer hands. A society and economy can't succeed unless the vast majority are able to participate, but we're seeing the expansion of low paid, insecure work for millions, which has done such harm to those in the middle and at the bottom of the income scale. America has gone even further down that road. For 35 years we have bought into the nonsense of trickledown theory, which clearly hasn't worked. It's given us food banks, a million people in temporary accommodation, zero hour contracts, record personal and national debt.

Fair points and to some degree there is a lot I agree with in there. I don't however believe that governments have any clue how to control economies or create wealth for their citizens, there is simply very little evidence to suggest they do.

I'm also not advocating totally free markets, as you say I doubt there is such a thing and the ultimate end game is indeed often a oligopoly.

We are not going to agree on the how liberalised markets should be not that less competition will be a good thing but let me be clear in that all effective markets need a rule of law and to some degree a regulatory market to work within, I have no issues with that and governments seem to fit the bill nicely to provide that.

As for the states, totally agree their inequality is a disgrace but that's more to do with their state being overtaken by the few for the benefit of the few combined with vested interests demanding more pork whenever they can.

Anyhow as I said I don't disagree that the policies of the past have failed (at least to some degree, depends how far back you want to go as living standard did rose sharply for quite some time)...you can probably trace all the current nonsense back to Nixon, from that point on it was those that controlled the money made the money and those that made things no longer gained the benefit of doing so. That's not right and should be corrected so maybe we are agreeing but just describing and seeing the causes differently ;-)

[Hibernia&Alba]

Channel 4 news suggesting Corbyn may automatically be on the leadership ballot paper as incumbent. If that's true and he stands, surely he would win again via the membership. What the PLP do then? Huge can of worms.


Huge pro-EU demo outside Westminster on Channel 4 news right now.

[Hibbyradge]

What a terrible mess.

Labour should have a fantastic chance of winning a snap election, but even if the PLP was making supportive noises, the Tories and the media would make mincemeat of Corbyn.

Theor attacks on him to date haven't been particularly aggressive because he's been so ineffective. However, if there was any possibility of the Tories not winning an overall majority, they'd let the hounds out and there are so many areas in his past they can mail.

The only chance in my view, is if Labour can remove him then get wholly behind the new leader with a pro EU stance.

If he stays, Labour are goosed.

All on my opinion, of course.

[Hibbyradge]

Huge pro-EU demo outside Westminster on Channel 4 news right now.

This is what Labour should be supporting and encouraging, if not even organising, across the country.

But no, Jeremy "did all he could" during the campaign. My arse.

[High-On-Hibs]

What a terrible mess.

Labour should have a fantastic chance of winning a snap election, but even if the PLP was making supportive noises, the Tories and the media would make mincemeat of Corbyn.

Theor attacks on him to date haven't been particularly aggressive because he's been so ineffective. However, if there was any possibility of the Tories not winning an overall majority, they'd let the hounds out and there are so many areas in his past they can mail.

The only chance in my view, is if Labour can remove him then get wholly behind the new leader with a pro EU stance.

If he stays, Labour are goosed.

All on my opinion, of course.

The Conservatives have left a huge open goal. Yet you have the right leaning wing within the Labour Party choosing this as the perfect moment to create huge divide within the Labour Party. If they think they're going to win an election by taking the media focus off the Conservative Party and landing it squarely on the Labour Party, then they're either very mistaken, or very (in my view) intentional.

[High-On-Hibs]

This is what Labour should be supporting and encouraging, if not even organising, across the country.

But no, Jeremy "did all he could" during the campaign. My arse.

You're absolutely correct with the top part. So why are the blairites using this time to divide the Labour Party? Surely they should be uniting together and using this as a golden opportunity to cause some serious damage to the opposition?..... But no, the Blairites within the Labour Party just love taking the pressure off their beloved Conservatives and placing it directly on the Labour Party. It's an absolute farce.

[Hibbyradge]

The Conservatives have left a huge open goal. Yet you have the right leaning wing within the Labour Party choosing this as the perfect moment to create huge divide within the Labour Party. If they think they're going to win an election by taking the media focus off the Conservative Party and landing it squarely on the Labour Party, then they're either very mistaken, or very (in my view) intentional.

They'll have a chance of winning if Corbyn goes.

If he stays, they have lost before they've started no matter how united they might try to appear.

By the time the election comes, to Tories will have regrouped and will tear Corbyn to bits.

[High-On-Hibs]

They'll have a chance of winning if Corbyn goes.

If he stays, they have lost before they've started no matter how united they might try to appear.

By the time the election comes, to Tories will have regrouped and will tear Corbyn to bits.

If they force Corbyn out this way, then they will have no chance of winning. I keep hearing "Labour needs more votes than the membership". That does not mean that Corbyn only appeals to the membership. There is half a country right now who are absolutely furious with the Conservative Party. They're looking around for an alternative, only to see a Labour Party in utter disarray. Labour need unity in order to win votes. If they eject Corbyn this way, then they will inevitably split. That's not what Labour needs right now.

[Hibbyradge]

You're absolutely correct with the top part. So why are the blairites using this time to divide the Labour Party? Surely they should be uniting together and using this as a golden opportunity to cause some serious damage to the opposition?..... But no, the Blairites within the Labour Party just love taking the pressure off their beloved Conservatives and placing it directly on the Labour Party. It's an absolute farce.

:faf:

That's one of the stupidest, most I'll informed posts I've read from you and you've written a few beauts!

Senseless drivel.

It's so difficult to have a rational conversation with you that I'm coming to the conclusion that you're a wind up merchant, a troll.

[Hibbyradge]

If they force Corbyn out this way, then they will have no chance of winning. I keep hearing "Labour needs more votes than the membership". That does not mean that Corbyn only appeals to the membership. There is half a country right now who are absolutely furious with the Conservative Party. They're looking around for an alternative, only to see a Labour Party in utter disarray. Labour need unity in order to win votes. If they eject Corbyn this way, then they will inevitably split. That's not what Labour needs right now.

Half the country is absolutely furious with the Leave campaign, which was given tacit support from Corbyn and direct support from some other idiot Labour MPs.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I heard a good point mentioned earlier regarding the anti-establishment sentiment of the referendum result. If the PLP force Corbyn out and replace him with a more establishment figure, isn't there the risk of another backlash from the electorate? Perhaps all this shows how difficult it is to gain consensus anywhere at a time when society is divided on so many fronts.

[Finn2015]

Just sad that the mess labour are in will surely mean the Tories will get in again! What a mess politics is in

[Colr]

Channel 4 news suggesting Corbyn may automatically be on the leadership ballot paper as incumbent. If that's true and he stands, surely he would win again via the membership. What the PLP do then? Huge can of worms.


Huge pro-EU demo outside Westminster on Channel 4 news right now.

It's not just the membership. Anyone can pay their £3 and vote.

I did last time and f all effect it had. Maybe more people will this time.

Our collective futures are being compromised by headbangers like Farage and Corbyn.

[High-On-Hibs]

:faf:

That's one of the stupidest, most I'll informed posts I've read from you and you've written a few beauts!

Senseless drivel. : bitchy:

It's so difficult to have a rational conversation with you that I'm coming to the conclusion that you're a wind up merchant, a troll.

Look, if you can't put forward a sensible argument to prove me wrong, please don't result to these low grade posts that offer nothing to the discussion. I personally believe there are MPs within the Labour Party who are determined to keep Labour out of power for as long as possible. That's the impression they give me and millions of other people who can see it. They are absolutely determined to destroy the Labour Party from the inside out. If they were truly Labour, they would be uniting behind the leadership at this time.

[High-On-Hibs]

Half the country is absolutely furious with the Leave campaign, which was given tacit support from Corbyn and direct support from some other idiot Labour MPs.

Those idiot Labour MPs who knew that a leave vote would give them the perfect opportunity they needed to pull the knives out. Why on earth would they have tried during the campaign?

[Hibbyradge]

I heard a good point mentioned earlier regarding the anti-establishment sentiment of the referendum result. If the PLP force Corbyn out and replace him with a more establishment figure, isn't there the risk of another backlash from the electorate? Perhaps all this shows how difficult it is to gain consensus anywhere at a time when society is divided on so many fronts.

Yes, it's all very complex. :wink:

Even if the new leader had strong left wing views, if they had some presence and were prepared to commit to supporting party policy on the EU, Labour would have a chance.

Corbyn has been utterly ineffectual. His "Lucy from Stockton" approach was intriguing for a week or 2 then it became comedic.

His inability to hurt the Tories when IDS resigned was a disgrace.

New politics? New doesn't always mean better or even any good at all.

[Hibbyradge]

Look, if you can't put forward a sensible argument to prove me wrong, please don't result to these low grade posts that offer nothing to the discussion. I personally believe there are MPs within the Labour Party who are determined to keep Labour out of power for as long as possible. That's the impression they give me and millions of other people who can see it. They are absolutely determined to destroy the Labour Party from the inside out. If they were truly Labour, they would be uniting behind the leadership at this time.

The Blairites want to protect the conservatives is a sensible argument? :faf:

Labour MPs want Labour to lose? :faf:

I genuinely believe you really are high on something or trolling. Probably the latter given the cost of foreign gear since the referendum. :wink:

[High-On-Hibs]

The Blairites want to protect the conservatives is a sensible argument? :faf:

Labour MPs want Labour to lose? :faf:

I genuinely believe you really are high on something or trolling. Probably the latter given the cost of foreign gear since the referendum. : wink:

Your idea of Labour "winning" is a Tony Blair style of Labour which is every bit as much Conservative as the Conservative Party, which wouldn't really be Labour winning at all.

[Hibbyradge]

Those idiot Labour MPs who knew that a leave vote would give them the perfect opportunity they needed to pull the knives out. Why on earth would they have tried during the campaign?

What are you talking about?

Labour MPs openly voted Leave, a decision tacitly supported by Corbyn, so they could get the knives out?

Awesome.

[Hibbyradge]

You're idea of Labour "winning" is a Tony Blair style of Labour which is every bit as much Conservative as the Conservative Party, which wouldn't really be Labour winning at all.

You're a funny guy.

:faf:

[High-On-Hibs]

What are you talking about?

Labour MPs openly voted Leave, a decision tacitly supported by Corbyn, so they could get the knives out?

Awesome.

You know full well I was referring to the one's who pretended to support "remain" and are acting all so outraged about the result, using any leverage they can to force out Corbyn.

Clearly you're completely oblivious to just how dirty politics can be.

[High-On-Hibs]

You're a funny guy.

:faf:

Ok. Seeing as you aren't capable of replying with anything coherent to the debate, we'll just leave it there.

[Hibbyradge]

You know full well I was referring to the one's who pretended to support "remain" and are acting all so outraged about the result, using any leverage they can to force out Corbyn.

Clearly you're completely oblivious to just how dirty politics can be.

Who were they again? Nah, don't bother answering. You'll just make up some unsubstantiated rubbish which is impossible to prove or refute.

Have you been reading the Idiot's Guide to Trot arguments?.

You were replying to my post. You must have forgotten which MPs I was discussing.

On the second point, you're "obviously" way off the mark. Way off.

[ronaldo7]

So, when's Chilcot out? Will Jezza hang on to hang Blair?

[Hibbyradge]

So, when's Chilcot out? Will Jezza hang on to hang Blair?

You're a bad man.

You should be building rapport instead of taking the pish! :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

You're a bad man.

You should be building rapport instead of taking the pish! :greengrin

So much ammunition:greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

So much ammunition:greengrin

I know. I've genuinely no idea what I'm going to do.

Tory MP in York outer. Labour in rag bag trot control, £3 membership anyway and no sign of the liberals.

I'll check out the local Labour Party, even if it's only to vote against Jezza.

[ronaldo7]

I know. I've genuinely no idea what I'm going to do.

Tory MP in York outer. Labour in rag bag trot control, £3 membership anyway and no sign of the liberals.

I'll check out the local Labour Party, even if it's only to vote against Jezza.

Vote against Jezza might be closer this time, but I think he'll still win.

[ronaldo7]

#Labourcoup

https://t.co/t7qKhHkjZk

Intersting.:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Just sad that the mess labour are in will surely mean the Tories will get in again! What a mess politics is in

And they say we get the politicians we deserve...

[R'Albin]

#Labourcoup

https://t.co/t7qKhHkjZk

Intersting.:greengrin


Was coming in here to link that. Is the Canary a reliable source?

[ronaldo7]

Was coming in here to link that. Is the Canary a reliable source?

One of those social media sites which have sprung up in the last few years, which has independent journos doing investigations into the day to day news. Take from it what you will. It might not appeal to all.:wink:

Certainly not MSM:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

He'll need 50 signatures to nominate him, no?

In the case of an election of a leader/deputy leader where there is no vacancy, the incumbent is automatically on the ballot paper along with the challenger(s)

[Hibbyradge]

In the case of an election of a leader/deputy leader where there is no vacancy, the incumbent is automatically on the ballot paper along with the challenger(s)

So I've read.

Oh well, that's another 5 years of Tory government to look forward to and, if indy 2 doesn't succeed, Scottish voters are royally screwed on all counts.

[steakbake]

Corbin should hang on till Chilcott, which is precisely why the Blairites are making their move now.

[marinello59]

Corbin should hang on till Chilcott, which is precisely why the Blairites are making their move now.

It's not just Blairites wanting Corbyn out. The party have to act sooner rather than later to get somebody in who might offer a decent chamce of actually winning an election. Corbyn certainly didn't manage to speak to the disaffected Labour voters during the EU campaign. He is a failure.
As for Chilcott, Blair is going to be totally savaged whether Corbyn is in place or not.

[pacoluna]

I don't get this argument that each individual labour MP elected when combined have more of a mandate to decide who the leader of labour is than the mandate corbyn has been provided by the membership of his party by selecting him with over 60% of the vote.


These MP's have to remember when they were selected to represent their constituency it was due to loyal activists,MEMBERS, members who democratically voted for corbyn to be their leader knocking on the doors, canvassing engaging with the public.

These MP's quitting are back stabbing careerists clearly out of touch with the labour membership.

[Hibbyradge]

These MP's quitting are back stabbing careerists clearly out of touch with the labour membership.

I'm not a careerist politician and I believe that if Corbyn stays as leader, Labour will lose the next election. I don't want that to happen. I'm frightened about what a reinvigorated Tory party will do to the country.

Don't you think it's possible that the MPs who have voted for the vote of no confidence, some of whom were Corbyn allies, might feel the same?

[pacoluna]

I'm not a careerist politician and I believe that if Corbyn stays as leader, Labour will lose the next election. I don't want that to happen. I'm frightened about what a reinvigorated Tory party will do to the country.

Don't you think it's possible that the MPs who have voted for the vote of no confidence, some of whom were Corbyn allies, might feel the same?

you agree with my previous paragraphs then as you have chosen to ignore them?

Your frightened of a reinvigorated torie party so you scrap the democratic vote that has giving corbyn the mandate to lead the party?

[Hibbyradge]

you agree with my previous paragraphs then as you have chosen to ignore them?

Your frightened of a reinvigorated torie party so you scrap the democratic vote that has giving corbyn the mandate to lead the party?

No, I ignored them. I couldn't be arsed rehashing the £3 membership argument. Tories and trots all helped get Corbyn elected, but that's not my idea of democracy.

What are you talking about? I've not scrapped anything. I'm not even a LP member.

The MPs in the PLP have no confidence in their leader, regardless of how he was elected, and they've decided to do something about it as they are entitled to do.

His presence as leader helps the Tories. It wouldn't matter if he'd been appointed by Lord God almighty, I'd want him out so we can stop them.

[Future17]

The SNP has applied to be the official opposition in Westminster as it claims its Commons leader has the support of more MPs than Corbyn.

[Hibbyradge]

The SNP has applied to be the official opposition in Westminster as it claims its Commons leader has the support of more MPs than Corbyn.

Cheeky move, but unlikely to succeed.

[Hibbyradge]

David Blanchflower, Thomas Piketty and Richard Murphy have all left McDonnell's Economic Advisory Panel over Jeremy Corbyn's attitude towards the EU!

Careerist politicians they are not, but I'm waiting for the Momentum tweets about them being part of a Blairite plot!

[pacoluna]

David Blanchflower, Thomas Piketty and Richard Murphy have all left McDonnell's Economic Advisory Panel over Jeremy Corbyn's attitude towards the EU!

Careerist politicians they are not, but I'm waiting for the Momentum tweets about them being part of a Blairite plot!


I don't particularly care about labour or any of their members or Mp's however from the outside looking in its simple... any political get together to oust Corbyn would be undemocratic.

I understand your point of view and would be inclined to agree with it if I voted for labour, however what ever anyone's opinion is even if it was my opinion my point would still stand - democracy has took place through membership and corbyn is the leader unless he chooses to resign in which case corbyn would be betraying the membership that voted for him.

[Hibbyradge]

I don't particularly care about labour or any of their members or Mp's however from the outside looking in its simple... any political get together to oust Corbyn would be undemocratic.

I understand your point of view and would be inclined to agree with it if I voted for labour, however what ever anyone's opinion is even if it was my opinion my point would still stand - democracy has took place through membership and corbyn is the leader unless he chooses to resign in which case corbyn would be betraying the membership that voted for him.

Seriously? The leader should be able to stay in place, regardless of what he does or says, and whether he carries out party policy or not?

Imagine if he'd been elected and given a mandate by the party to oppose the privatisation of the NHS, but he decided not to bother. That would be OK because he was elected?

Wow. Unsackable. Not many jobs like that and it doesn't sound too democratic to me.

[High-On-Hibs]

I don't particularly care about labour or any of their members or Mp's however from the outside looking in its simple... any political get together to oust Corbyn would be undemocratic.

I understand your point of view and would be inclined to agree with it if I voted for labour, however what ever anyone's opinion is even if it was my opinion my point would still stand - democracy has took place through membership and corbyn is the leader unless he chooses to resign in which case corbyn would be betraying the membership that voted for him.

You're wasting your time mate. Some people want to replace the Conservative Party with the Conservative Party. They don't like there to be any alternative.

[pacoluna]

Seriously? The leader should be able to stay in place, regardless of what he does or says, and whether he carries out party policy or not?

Imagine if he'd been elected and given a mandate by the party to oppose the privatisation of the NHS, but he decided not to bother. That would be OK because he was elected?

Wow. Unsackable. Not many jobs like that and it doesn't sound too democratic to me.

in response to quote in bold - No however that is not going to happen is it?

Yes in my view at this moment he is unsackable as he has not betrayed or done anything significant that has opposed the mandate he was elected on! He has only been leader for 9 month! its clear that there is a political agenda against him and that they are using brexit as ammunition.

Socialism is dying in england he is their last hope!

[cabbageandribs1875]

david cameron just told corbyn at PMQ's ... for the sake of your party just GO !!

[High-On-Hibs]

david cameron just told corbyn at PMQ's ... for the sake of your party just GO !!

He doesn't do hypocrisy does he?

[Hibbyradge]

He doesn't do hypocrisy does he?

Cameron is going.

[Hibbyradge]

in response to quote in bold - No however that is not going to happen is it?

Yes in my view at this moment he is unsackable as he has not betrayed or done anything significant that has opposed the mandate he was elected on! He has only been leader for 9 month! its clear that there is a political agenda against him and that they are using brexit as ammunition.

Socialism is dying in england he is their last hope!

He has betrayed his party and the country with his deliberate and thought out non campsign on the EU. That's why three of his most loyal advisors have resigned.

[pacoluna]

He has betrayed his party and the country with his deliberate and thought out non campsign on the EU. That's why three of his most loyal advisors have resigned.
Or more like he didn't share a platform with Tories as he seen what happened in Scotland?

[Hibbyradge]

You're wasting your time mate. Some people want to replace the Conservative Party with the Conservative Party. They don't like there to be any alternative.

I see you're well rehearsed in passive aggressive behaviour as well as trolling.

However, I'm not golfing today as it's raining too heavily, so I'll indulge the juvenile nonsense.

Do you think three of Corbyn's most loyal left wing advisors resigned so they could elect a conservative government?

You might as well say yes. It's about as sensible as almost everything else you say.

[Hibbyradge]

Or more like he didn't share a platform with Tories as he seen what happened in Scotland?

You think three left wing Corbyn loyalists resigned because he wouldn't share a platform with the Tories? Seriously?

I don't know if you've read this, or if you will, but the reality is that Corbyn's behaviour was much more treacherous than you'd like it to be.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/26/corbyn-must-resign-inadequate-leader-betrayal?client=ms-android-samsung#

Sorry I can't post links from my phone.

[High-On-Hibs]

I see you're well rehearsed in passive aggressive behaviour as well as trolling.

However, I'm not golfing today as it's raining too heavily, so I'll indulge the juvenile nonsense.

Do you think three of Corbyn's most loyal left wing advisors resigned so they could elect a conservative government?

You might as well say yes. It's about as sensible as almost everything else you say.

They resigned because they know the party is already far too damaged now as a result of the other resignations. They wouldn't have resigned if those other resignations hadn't happened.

Absolutely ridiculous behaviour today in PMQs by the opportunistic careerists with zero class.

[pacoluna]

You think three left wing Corbyn loyalists resigned because he wouldn't share a platform with the Tories? Seriously?

I don't know if you've read this, or if you will, but the reality is that Corbyn's behaviours was much more treacherous than you'd like it to be.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/26/corbyn-must-resign-inadequate-leader-betrayal?client=ms-android-samsung#

Sorry I can't post links from my phone.

As said before I understand your reasoning- however what happens if they hold a re election and Corbyn once again stands and wins majority of membership vote? due to the democratic process he would be able to dismiss those who called for his head, select new pro socialist/corbyn constituation candidates for next general election and have a supportive front bench? Only other solution is a break away and what political spectrum would they stand on? Certainly couldn't be socialism.

Labour are in absolute turmoil.

[marinello59]

They resigned because they know the party is already far too damaged now as a result of the other resignations. They wouldn't have resigned if those other resignations hadn't happened.

:faf:

[Hibbyradge]

They resigned because they know the party is already far too damaged now as a result of the other resignations. They wouldn't have resigned if those other resignations hadn't happened.

Absolutely ridiculous behaviour today in PMQs by the opportunistic careerists with zero class.

Again, seriousky?

I wonder why previous Corbyn loyalists would blame him on their way out, instead of the others who made them do it.

It's like you'll make anything up in order not to concede a point.

I didn't see pmq's so I can't comment. I'll try to catch the reports later.

[JeMeSouviens]

The Beeb's Norman Smith:


Journalists sat staring at Jeremy Corbyn's front bench, trying to work out who everyone was

:greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

The Beeb's Norman Smith:



:greengrin

Wait till the trots carry out their "cull" and deselect all the Blairites, of whom there are more than there ever were under Blair! :greengrin:

[lucky]

I think Corbyn will stand for reelection and win then resign. Politicians don't like votes of No confidence. I just can see how he will survive but do feel this has been an opportunist move by the Labour Right

Then it will be run off between Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham who have both been very quiet on the vote of No Confidence

[ronaldo7]

The Beeb's Norman Smith:



:greengrin

That's because THE SNP were sitting there...no wait...that's tomorrow.:greengrin

[High-On-Hibs]

:faf:

Do you honestly think they would have resigned regardless? Or are you just going to reply with daft GIFS?

[Hibbyradge]

I think Corbyn will stand for reelection and win then resign. Politicians don't like votes of No confidence.

I think that's the least likely scenario. If he stands again, then resigns, he'll have let down absolutely everyone.

He's already betrayed party conference decision on the EU, he's betrayed the country at the same time, he's making the party unelectable so he's letting down the PLP and if he does that, he'll let down his groupies in the membership.

He'd rather lose and be able to blame everyone else.

[Hibbyradge]

Do you honestly think they would have resigned regardless? Or are you just going to reply with daft GIFS?

I replied to your bizarre imaginings, but you decided to ignore that.

[marinello59]

Do you honestly think they would have resigned regardless? Or are you just going to reply with daft GIFS?

Sorry, I didn't realise you were being serious.

[High-On-Hibs]

Sorry, I didn't realise you were being serious.

You still didn't answer the question. Do you think they would have still resigned if mass resignations hadn't already occurred?

[marinello59]

You still didn't answer the question. Do you think they would have still resigned if mass resignations hadn't already occurred?

I have no idea. If they were loyal to Corbyn they wouldn't have resigned at all though which makes the timing irrelevant.

[High-On-Hibs]

What an absolute mess the Tories within the Labour Party have created. They want to force Corbyn out, but can't even find one person to challenge him in a leadership contest. More than likely because they know they wouldn't stand a chance?

Still, they'll see this as "mission accomplished", as they've successfully taken all the pressure off the Conservatives.

[Moulin Yarns]

Glad to see they are following party protocol.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmMIqRfXIAA9sZF.jpg:large

[johnbc70]

Without following the ins and outs of this surely only David Milliband is the one person that can ride in and sort out this mess. Even as a non labour supporter I can picture him as a future PM.

[bigwheel]

Without following the ins and outs of this surely only David Milliband is the one person that can ride in and sort out this mess. Even as a non labour supporter I can picture him as a future PM.

A Blairite, who is comes over less comfortable engaging with people than his brother Ed is.....I think he missed his chance when he lost to Ed...don't think he offers anything to the many who supported change through Corbyn

[JimBHibees]

Without following the ins and outs of this surely only David Milliband is the one person that can ride in and sort out this mess. Even as a non labour supporter I can picture him as a future PM.

Tend to agree Campbell mentioned him in one of his interviews. Wouldnt be a surprise if he turned up now.

[High-On-Hibs]

Without following the ins and outs of this surely only David Milliband is the one person that can ride in and sort out this mess. Even as a non labour supporter I can picture him as a future PM.

Well they've already lost the old vote. May as well throw the young vote away as well.

[RyeSloan]

What an absolute mess the Tories within the Labour Party have created. They want to force Corbyn out, but can't even find one person to challenge him in a leadership contest. More than likely because they know they wouldn't stand a chance? Still, they'll see this as "mission accomplished", as they've successfully taken all the pressure off the Conservatives.

Ha ha so anyone who is not in Momentum or a Corbynista is a Tory?

[High-On-Hibs]

Ha ha so anyone who is not in Momentum or a Corbynista is a Tory?

Oh sorry, I forgot. "Moderate" is the politically correct term for Tory now.

[marinello59]

Oh sorry, I forgot. "Moderate" is the politically correct term for Tory now.

I take it you are a Labour voter and will continue to be if Corbyn stays in place.

[High-On-Hibs]

I take it you are a Labour voter and will continue to be if Corbyn stays in place.

Nope, SNP through and through. As much as I should be enjoying the implosion of the Labour Party, I can't help feeling that it's completely shan in the way that a party would treat it's democratically elected leader, especially during a period where the opposition have scored arguably their biggest own goal in history.

[marinello59]

Nope, SNP through and through. As much as I should be enjoying the implosion of the Labour Party, I can't help feeling that it's completely shan in the way that a party would treat it's democratically elected leader, especially during a period where the opposition have scored arguably their biggest own goal in history.

Ah, I see. Your posts, or the motivation for them, makes more sense now.

[High-On-Hibs]

Ah, I see. Your posts, or the motivation for them, makes more sense now.

Aye that's right. Because there isn't any supporters of the Labour Party out there saying the same thing? I may be an SNP supporter, but i'm not so naive to refuse to accept that the only political party on a UK wide basis that can stand up to these narcissistic psychopaths are the Labour Party.

Why oh why are Labour MPs within the Labour Party wasting this golden opportunity to stick the boot into a divided Conservative Party by causing division within their own party?

Where is the logic in that?

[marinello59]

Aye that's right. Because there isn't any supporters of the Labour Party out there saying the same thing? I may be an SNP supporter, but i'm not so naive to refuse to accept that the only political party on a UK wide basis that can stand up to these narcissistic psychopaths are the Labour Party.

Why oh why are Labour MPs within the Labour Party wasting this golden opportunity to stick the boot into a divided Conservative Party by causing division within their own party?

Where is the logic in that?

You won't get any arguments from me about the state of the Labour Party. It's a mess, an utter mess.
I won't be making ridiculous statements claiming that the "tories" in the Labour Party have deliberately done this to take the pressure off the Conservative Party. They have got to this point through tragic incompetence, not by design.

[High-On-Hibs]

You won't get any arguments from me about the state of the Labour Party. It's a mess, an utter mess.
I won't be making ridiculous statements claiming that the "tories" in the Labour Party have deliberately done this to take the pressure off the Conservative Party. They have got to this point through tragic incompetence, not by design.

Well ok, perhaps it was unfair for me to jump to that conclusion.

However, it still doesn't explain why they picked this moment of all moments to unleash their coup. It was evident that they weren't happy with his appointment right from the start, despite being given a democratic mandate from the party membership. So it's really a rather odd time to do this now.

As I understand it. The Labour membership still only stands at £3. If Labour supporters really want him out, they'll pay their £3 and will vote him out when the leadership challenge comes up. If he still wins by a whopping margin, then they have to put this nonsense to bed once and for all.

[ronaldo7]

Glad to see they are following party protocol.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmMIqRfXIAA9sZF.jpg:large

They even got councillors on a list they say want Corbyn out, when in reality some on the list actually support him 100%

Councillors on social media going mental a central party office.

What a ***** mess.

[Hiber-nation]

It's really funny how a character from The Thick Of It has managed to pose as a Labour MP and actually seems to have been promoted twice in the last week.

Or is Emily Thornberry a real Labour MP? Surely not....

[One Day Soon]

Well ok, perhaps it was unfair for me to jump to that conclusion.

However, it still doesn't explain why they picked this moment of all moments to unleash their coup. It was evident that they weren't happy with his appointment right from the start, despite being given a democratic mandate from the party membership. So it's really a rather odd time to do this now.

As I understand it. The Labour membership still only stands at £3. If Labour supporters really want him out, they'll pay their £3 and will vote him out when the leadership challenge comes up. If he still wins by a whopping margin, then they have to put this nonsense to bed once and for all.


He's utterly gash and has been from the beginning. His deeply suspect activities over the EU Referendum are what has brought this to a head now because they realise that if he'd thrown himself into it then Remain might have won. There's a strong suspicion he didn't vote Remain and it is certainly the case that people around him were -at best - unhelpful to the Remain campaign. That has triggered it now along with the realisation that if he stays in post Labour will be eviscerated at the next election. He is being asked to stand down by a range of MPs including Blairites, some pretty hard left wingers and a load of others in between. Bear in mind that they are doing this knowing that the overwhelming mass of the membership was a pro-Corbyn influx and that consequently this move is like to lead to many de-selections, not to the advancement of their careers.

Beneath his 'leadership' is a deeply unpleasant tail that follows behind him. The Labour Party used to be a broad church embracing almost all wings on the left. The decision to allow pretty much anyone to join the Party for £3 and then vote in the last leadership contest was exploited by a whole range of people to deliver Corbyn. This saw Tories, Nats, Greens, SWP and a whole range of other people on the hard left - plus well intentioned members of the public - join up. Consequently they ended up electing a guy almost wholly unfit for the job.

I don't know how many parties to the discussion on this thread have actually met Corbyn or the people around him. I have and I have had dealings with some of them. I found them as despicable on the far left as Farage is on the far right. Working class people - and everyone else - will pay a high price repeatedly if he remains in charge because he will not win any election and won't be particularly bothered if he doesn't either. That sect is far more comfortable mouthing off its opposition to eg the Bedroom Tax than it is trying to build a coalition of interest capable of winning a General Election in order to be able to have the power to actually stop it.

If Corbyn was half way competent and on the hard left there would still be disagreement but almost certainly not a leadership challenge. If they were clever he would stand down and they'd field someone else with broadly his politics to run against Angela Eagle. Can't see how they could lose that with the current membership. Unfortunately.

[One Day Soon]

Glad to see they are following party protocol.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmMIqRfXIAA9sZF.jpg:large


This makes literally no sense whatsoever.

[High-On-Hibs]

He's utterly gash and has been from the beginning. His deeply suspect activities over the EU Referendum are what has brought this to a head now because they realise that if he'd thrown himself into it then Remain might have won. There's a strong suspicion he didn't vote Remain and it is certainly the case that people around him were -at best - unhelpful to the Remain campaign. That has triggered it now along with the realisation that if he stays in post Labour will be eviscerated at the next election. He is being asked to stand down by a range of MPs including Blairites, some pretty hard left wingers and a load of others in between. Bear in mind that they are doing this knowing that the overwhelming mass of the membership was a pro-Corbyn influx and that consequently this move is like to lead to many de-selections, not to the advancement of their careers.

Beneath his 'leadership' is a deeply unpleasant tail that follows behind him. The Labour Party used to be a broad church embracing almost all wings on the left. The decision to allow pretty much anyone to join the Party for £3 and then vote in the last leadership contest was exploited by a whole range of people to deliver Corbyn. This saw Tories, Nats, Greens, SWP and a whole range of other people on the hard left - plus well intentioned members of the public - join up. Consequently they ended up electing a guy almost wholly unfit for the job.

I don't know how many parties to the discussion on this thread have actually met Corbyn or the people around him. I have and I have had dealings with some of them. I found them as despicable on the far left as Farage is on the far right. Working class people - and everyone else - will pay a high price repeatedly if he remains in charge because he will not win any election and won't be particularly bothered if he doesn't either. That sect is far more comfortable mouthing off its opposition to eg the Bedroom Tax than it is trying to build a coalition of interest capable of winning a General Election in order to be able to have the power to actually stop it.

If Corbyn was half way competent and on the hard left there would still be disagreement but almost certainly not a leadership challenge. If they were clever he would stand down and they'd field someone else with broadly his politics to run against Angela Eagle. Can't see how they could lose that with the current membership. Unfortunately.

He will not stand down. He is the "democratically elected leader" of the Labour Party. If they want to remove him, then they will have to remove him under the same rules that got him elected. To betray democracy would be to betray the young people that he has galvanized since he became leader.

I know there are a lot of "old" people out there who would love to see young people shoved back in their boxes again. Because apparently "old" people always know better (that's why they voted in favour of ruining the UK Economy). Well it's not going to happen. He's there to stay until somebody else is given a democratic mandate to replace him. It doesn't matter what you say, or anybody else for that matter. As long as he has the support of the members, he will remain in office.

[One Day Soon]

He will not stand down. He is the "democratically elected leader" of the Labour Party. If they want to remove him, then they will have to remove him under the same rules that got him elected. To betray democracy would be to betray the young people that he has galvanized since he became leader.

I know there are a lot of "old" people out there who would love to see young people shoved back in their boxes again. Because apparently "old" people always know better (that's why they voted in favour of ruining the UK Economy). Well it's not going to happen. He's there to stay until somebody else is given a democratic mandate to replace him. It doesn't matter what you say, or anybody else for that matter. As long as he has the support of the members, he will remain in office.


You asked for an explanation of why he is being challenged at this point. I've given you that and you've ignored it. It is pretty simple, a significant proportion of people think his politics and his crapness is killing the party electorally. There is a big difference between storming it with the membership and winning in the country.

Now you are for some inexplicable reason setting up some paper tiger old people versus young people squirrel. This divide is political, not age based, and that is evident from the division on this within the party which I witness as a Labour Party member.

[High-On-Hibs]

You asked for an explanation of why he is being challenged at this point. I've given you that and you've ignored it. It is pretty simple, a significant proportion of people think his politics and his crapness is killing the party electorally. There is a big difference between storming it with the membership and winning in the country.

Now you are for some inexplicable reason setting up some paper tiger old people versus young people squirrel. This divide is political, not age based, and that is evident from the division on this within the party which I witness as a Labour Party member.

No, there is no explanation here. Just your opinion. An opinion I don't happen to agree with. You say a "significant proportion of people". Well I must say, that's quite a lot of people to know. What you consider to be "crapness", younger people clearly don't.

The political divide is quite clearly age based. Both referendums proved this to be the case. A hundred odd careerist politicians can hardly be used to judge differently.

[hibsbollah]

There are no facts in this debate, only distorted opinions and a shameless smear campaign that has left all of society, not just the party, poorer as a result.

As of yesterday, 54% of Labour voters still support him. There is still no official challenger among the disloyal MPs in the PLP. Probably these two facts are not entirely unconnected. As long as he can still stand (emotionally?psychologically?)the relentless battering he's been taking from the Westminster and media bubble, and draw strength from the support he's still getting from the membership, and from whom he has stil has an overwhelming mandate, I still have some hope for the democratic process.

[One Day Soon]

No, there is no explanation here. Just your opinion. An opinion I don't happen to agree with. You say a "significant proportion of people". Well I must say, that's quite a lot of people to know. What you consider to be "crapness", younger people clearly don't.

The political divide is quite clearly age based. Both referendums proved this to be the case. A hundred odd careerist politicians can hardly be used to judge differently.


You are wrong I'm afraid, unless you are meaning to say that young people voted Remain in the EU but No to Scottish independence. This link evidences that 51% of 16 to 24 year olds voted No in the Indyref: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13181487.Full_indyref_survey_reveals_young_voters_ voted_No_and_only_25_39_age_group_said_Yes/

(http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13181487.Full_indyref_survey_reveals_young_voters_ voted_No_and_only_25_39_age_group_said_Yes/) I think 172 MPs voted against Corbyn. Are you saying they are careerist, all of them?Including those on the left who previously supported him?

[One Day Soon]

There are no facts in this debate, only distorted opinions and a shameless smear campaign that has left all of society, not just the party, poorer as a result.

As of yesterday, 54% of Labour voters still support him. There is still no official challenger among the disloyal MPs in the PLP. Probably these two facts are not entirely unconnected. As long as he can still stand (emotionally?psychologically?)the relentless battering he's been taking from the Westminster and media bubble, and draw strength from the support he's still getting from the membership, and from whom he has stil has an overwhelming mandate, I still have some hope for the democratic process.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Completely.

[High-On-Hibs]

You are wrong I'm afraid, unless you are meaning to say that young people voted Remain in the EU but No to Scottish independence. This link evidences that 51% of 16 to 24 year olds voted No in the Indyref: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13181487.Full_indyref_survey_reveals_young_voters_ voted_No_and_only_25_39_age_group_said_Yes/

(http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13181487.Full_indyref_survey_reveals_young_voters_ voted_No_and_only_25_39_age_group_said_Yes/) I think 172 MPs voted against Corbyn. Are you saying they are careerist, all of them?Including those on the left who previously supported him?

I'm well aware of the independence referendum results for each age range. I was just stating that there were stark differences between voting outcomes between those of lower age range and those of higher age ranges. For example as you rightly pointed out 16 to 24 year olds voted 51/49 in favour of NO. But then again, people aged 16-17 did vote in favour of YES by a strong 71/29. Compare that to 65+ who voted against Scottish Independence by a whopping 73/27. 18-24 was actually the only exception for all ages under 55.

Here is the data chart for the Scottish Referendum:
http://oi63.tinypic.com/2mhevlc.jpg

Here is the one for the UK referendum:
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2hmhpo3.jpg
Sorry, but there is no denying that there are stark differences between the youngest age groups and the oldest ones by far.

As for the MPs voting against him. It doesn't really matter because it doesn't give them a legal mandate to remove him. Most of them would have voted against him because they don't like his "radical" policies, such as building affordable housing and scrapping the bedroom tax. The remaining few will have voted against him because they would have felt that they had no other choice after finding out how many were planning to vote against him.

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm well aware of the independence referendum results for each age range. I was just stating that there were stark differences between voting outcomes between those of lower age range and those of higher age ranges. For example as you rightly pointed out 16 to 24 year olds voted 51/49 in favour of NO. But then again, people aged 16-17 did vote in favour of YES by a strong 71/29. Compare that to 65+ who voted against Scottish Independence by a whopping 73/27. 18-24 was actually the only exception for all ages under 55.

Here is the data chart for the Scottish Referendum:
http://oi63.tinypic.com/2mhevlc.jpg

Here is the one for the UK referendum:
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2hmhpo3.jpg
Sorry, but there is no denying that there are stark differences between the youngest age groups and the oldest ones by far.

As for the MPs voting against him. It doesn't really matter because it doesn't give them a legal mandate to remove him. Most of them would have voted against him because they don't like his "radical" policies, such as building affordable housing and scrapping the bedroom tax. The remaining few will have voted against him because they would have felt that they had no other choice after finding out how many were planning to vote against him.

When did we stop singing "Rule Brittania" in our schools?

[High-On-Hibs]

When did we stop singing "Rule Brittania" in our schools?

When funding was cut and we couldne afford anymore fitbaws? :dunno:

[Colr]

I'm well aware of the independence referendum results for each age range. I was just stating that there were stark differences between voting outcomes between those of lower age range and those of higher age ranges. For example as you rightly pointed out 16 to 24 year olds voted 51/49 in favour of NO. But then again, people aged 16-17 did vote in favour of YES by a strong 71/29. Compare that to 65+ who voted against Scottish Independence by a whopping 73/27. 18-24 was actually the only exception for all ages under 55.

Here is the data chart for the Scottish Referendum:
http://oi63.tinypic.com/2mhevlc.jpg

Here is the one for the UK referendum:
http://oi66.tinypic.com/2hmhpo3.jpg
Sorry, but there is no denying that there are stark differences between the youngest age groups and the oldest ones by far.

As for the MPs voting against him. It doesn't really matter because it doesn't give them a legal mandate to remove him. Most of them would have voted against him because they don't like his "radical" policies, such as building affordable housing and scrapping the bedroom tax. The remaining few will have voted against him because they would have felt that they had no other choice after finding out how many were planning to vote against him.

The voting age needs to be dropped to 16 for the next election.

[High-On-Hibs]

The voting age needs to be dropped to 16 for the next election.

:aok:

Will never happen though. It's the old vote that keep these lot in power with a nice wee pension bribe. They will never legislate for the younger and better informed people to get their vote.

I probably sound outstandingly arrogant with that comment and mean no disrespect to some of the highly intelligent seniors on here.

[Rasta_Hibs]

:aok:

Will never happen though. It's the old vote that keep these lot in power with a nice wee pension bribe. They will never legislate for the younger and better informed people to get their vote.

I probably sound outstandingly arrogant with that comment and mean no disrespect to some of the highly intelligent seniors on here.

You do sound very arrogant!

If you really do seek scottish independence then your role in the campaign would be best suited to the flag waving!

As with every comment you make it's a blow for the SNP - Another poster had said to you that the SNP need to try and win people over to their argument but to me it seems your comments would have the opposite effect.

[CropleyWasGod]

:aok:

Will never happen though. It's the old vote that keep these lot in power with a nice wee pension bribe. They will never legislate for the younger and better informed people to get their vote.

I probably sound outstandingly arrogant with that comment and mean no disrespect to some of the highly intelligent seniors on here.

You may not mean it, but that's what it comes across. What is your evidence to support your assertion that younger people are better-informed?

[High-On-Hibs]

You do sound very arrogant!

If you really do seek scottish independence then your role in the campaign would be best suited to the flag waving!

As with every comment you make it's a blow for the SNP - Another poster had said to you that the SNP need to try and win people over to their argument but to me it seems your comments would have the opposite effect.

Yeah, people told me the same thing during the first campaign. Our support still grew from under 25% to nearly 45%. If people don't like what I have to say on the matter, then they're more than welcome to do their own research, rather than going onto a football club message board for convincing.

[marinello59]

Yeah, people told me the same thing during the first campaign. Our support still grew from under 25% to nearly 45%. If people don't like what I have to say on the matter, then they're more than welcome to do their own research, rather than going onto a football club message board for convincing.

When you said that you had absolutely no interest in winning people round to your point of view you weren't kidding were you. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

:idea:

Maybe Rasta and High-on could get their own sub-forum and just go mano a mano?

[marinello59]

:idea:

Maybe Rasta and High-on could get their own sub-forum and just go mano a mano?

I like it. :greengrin

[Rasta_Hibs]

Hmmm I don't see the fun in that myself!

[Moulin Yarns]

I like it. :greengrin

selling tickets?

[Johnny Clash]

The Durham miners gala takes place on Saturday 9th July. This is now the biggest gathering of working class solidarity in the country. Over 150,000 attended last year and it is a very prestigious event amongst communities, progressive organisations and MPs who want to be seen supporting working class struggles.

The Durham Miners Committee has now written to all Labour MPs who betrayed rank and file members by voting to do Corbyn in and withdrew their invites. Jeremy Corbyn is their main speaker at the gala so we can expect more than 150k turning out this year!

Durham miners recognise Corbyn as a legitimate leader with solid principles who inspires countless people and especially the younger generations who had all but given up hope with perceived corrupt, selfish careerists politicians. 60,000 new members joined Labour in Iast week. I personally know a few very young people who were motivated to join their first political party in order to support Jeremy Corbyn.

Some try make out JC only appeals to the trendy left but you can't get any more working class than the miners and the trade unions ! The NUM have condemned the disloyal labour MPs as have the unions of rail workers, public service employees,,fire fighters ... pretty much the entire trade union movement.

Corbyn threatens the establishment - as you will see when the long overdue Chilcot Inquiry Report is finally published on Wednesday 6th July. It's a massive document - four times the size of War and Peace. Those who have read advance copies will no doubt be deeply concerned and that's why they have had to act fast - the establishment simply can't have Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition as he will not brush war crimes under the carpet !!

[Betty Boop]

The Durham miners gala takes place on Saturday 9th July. This is now the biggest gathering of working class solidarity in the country. Over 150,000 attended last year and it is a very prestigious event amongst communities, progressive organisations and MPs who want to be seen supporting working class struggles.

The Durham Miners Committee has now written to all Labour MPs who betrayed rank and file members by voting to do Corbyn in and withdrew their invites. Jeremy Corbyn is their main speaker at the gala so we can expect more than 150k turning out this year!

Durham miners recognise Corbyn as a legitimate leader with solid principles who inspires countless people and especially the younger generations who had all but given up hope with perceived corrupt, selfish careerists politicians. 60,000 new members joined Labour in Iast week. I personally know a few very young people who were motivated to join their first political party in order to support Jereny Corbyn.

Some try make out JC only appeals to the trendy left but you can't get any more working class than the miners and the trade unions ! The NUM have condemned the disloyal labour MPs as have the unions of rail workers, public service employees,,fire fighters ... pretty much the entire trade union movement.

Corbyn threatens the establishment - as you will see when the long overdue Chilcot Inquiry Report is finally published on Wednesday 6th July. It's a massive document - four times the size of War and Peace. Those who have read advance copies will no doubt be deeply concerned and that's why they have over fast - the establishment simply can't have Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition as he will not brush war crimes under the carpet !!

Great post Johnny ! :top marks

[steakbake]

The Durham miners gala takes place on Saturday 9th July. This is now the biggest gathering of working class solidarity in the country. Over 150,000 attended last year and it is a very prestigious event amongst communities, progressive organisations and MPs who want to be seen supporting working class struggles.

The Durham Miners Committee has now written to all Labour MPs who betrayed rank and file members by voting to do Corbyn in and withdrew their invites. Jeremy Corbyn is their main speaker at the gala so we can expect more than 150k turning out this year!

Durham miners recognise Corbyn as a legitimate leader with solid principles who inspires countless people and especially the younger generations who had all but given up hope with perceived corrupt, selfish careerists politicians. 60,000 new members joined Labour in Iast week. I personally know a few very young people who were motivated to join their first political party in order to support Jereny Corbyn.

Some try make out JC only appeals to the trendy left but you can't get any more working class than the miners and the trade unions ! The NUM have condemned the disloyal labour MPs as have the unions of rail workers, public service employees,,fire fighters ... pretty much the entire trade union movement.

Corbyn threatens the establishment - as you will see when the long overdue Chilcot Inquiry Report is finally published on Wednesday 6th July. It's a massive document - four times the size of War and Peace. Those who have read advance copies will no doubt be deeply concerned and that's why they have had to act fast - the establishment simply can't have Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition as he will not brush war crimes under the carpet !!

This is the gist of it - the Blairites want Corbyn out before the report. I'd love to see Blair sent to the Hague.

[snooky]

The voting age needs to be dropped to 16 for the next election.

I agree and while they are at it, stop old farts over 65 (like me) getting a vote.
We are not the future. :tin hat:



(Okay, I'm trolling just a wee bit there :greengrin)

[RyeSloan]

I agree and while they are at it, stop old farts over 65 (like me) getting a vote. We are not the future. :tin hat: (Okay, I'm trolling just a wee bit there :greengrin)

Too right...you old lot are just not as informed as the young team and don't bother coming back with some pathetic nonsense life your life experience has given you a different perspective on things and that it's possible that perspective should be considered important or the like cause we all know you are only interested in preserving the triple lock pension and to hell with everyone and everything else.

[pacoluna]

Labour MP Gisela Stewart sat on a platform, shared the vote leave bus with BJ, Douglas carswell and Gove, she was the one who came up with the "350million a week" lie that was plastered all over the side of the bus. Yet somehow right-wing Labour MPs are accusing corbyn for brexit?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Labour MP Gisela Stewart sat on a platform, shared the vote leave bus with BJ, Douglas carswell and Gove, she was the one who came up with the "350million a week" lie that was plastered all over the side of the bus. Yet somehow right-wing Labour MPs are accusing corbyn for brexit?

His meek defence of it belied his own ambivalence - ambivalence he clearly does not have when it comes to pet issues such as arab-israrli conflict - which few people care about.

Its more to do with his lack of leadership and muddled focus i think.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Well ok, perhaps it was unfair for me to jump to that conclusion.

However, it still doesn't explain why they picked this moment of all moments to unleash their coup. It was evident that they weren't happy with his appointment right from the start, despite being given a democratic mandate from the party membership. So it's really a rather odd time to do this now.

As I understand it. The Labour membership still only stands at £3. If Labour supporters really want him out, they'll pay their £3 and will vote him out when the leadership challenge comes up. If he still wins by a whopping margin, then they have to put this nonsense to bed once and for all.

I think it may be the prospect of a new election comig up, coupled with the destabilisation of a hitherto stable govermment. Coupled with the first really tangible effect ofnhis leadership - or percieved effect.

Do you think labour should split?

[hibsbollah]

The Durham miners gala takes place on Saturday 9th July. This is now the biggest gathering of working class solidarity in the country. Over 150,000 attended last year and it is a very prestigious event amongst communities, progressive organisations and MPs who want to be seen supporting working class struggles.

The Durham Miners Committee has now written to all Labour MPs who betrayed rank and file members by voting to do Corbyn in and withdrew their invites. Jeremy Corbyn is their main speaker at the gala so we can expect more than 150k turning out this year!

Durham miners recognise Corbyn as a legitimate leader with solid principles who inspires countless people and especially the younger generations who had all but given up hope with perceived corrupt, selfish careerists politicians. 60,000 new members joined Labour in Iast week. I personally know a few very young people who were motivated to join their first political party in order to support Jeremy Corbyn.

Some try make out JC only appeals to the trendy left but you can't get any more working class than the miners and the trade unions ! The NUM have condemned the disloyal labour MPs as have the unions of rail workers, public service employees,,fire fighters ... pretty much the entire trade union movement.

Corbyn threatens the establishment - as you will see when the long overdue Chilcot Inquiry Report is finally published on Wednesday 6th July. It's a massive document - four times the size of War and Peace. Those who have read advance copies will no doubt be deeply concerned and that's why they have had to act fast - the establishment simply can't have Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition as he will not brush war crimes under the carpet !!

:top marks

It's evident from the Telegraph prediction of the PLP coup two weeks before it happened, that it was a planned rebellion by the blairrites, timing was everything.

[High-On-Hibs]

I think it may be the prospect of a new election comig up, coupled with the destabilisation of a hitherto stable govermment. Coupled with the first really tangible effect ofnhis leadership - or percieved effect.

Do you think labour should split?

Labour will split regardless, even if they force out Corbyn in an undemocratic manner. I reckon Corbyn commands more support than he's given credit for and the inevitable split will be an absolute disaster, regardless of where your position is on the party.

Whatever happens, millions of people are going to be left extremely angered regardless of their position. Labour are in a situation where they simply can't win the next election, regardless of what they do.

[Betty Boop]

When are the backstabbers going to mount a challenge ? It's all went rather quiet.

[ronaldo7]

When are the backstabbers going to mount a challenge ? It's all went rather quiet.

They're to busy trying to get someone to become Shadow Scottish secretary...Oh wait...The person they appointed Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary on 27th June could now become Shadow Scottish secretary as well.

I know he's a big lad, but this is a slap in the puss to all in Scotland and Northern Ireland, if this happens.

https://t.co/LNoygxODv5

They're just making it up now. Labour have totally lost the plot.

[lord bunberry]

Corbyn won't resign. He is the very definition of the old left wing socialist movement, he will be relishing this challenge. If all the rebel MPs feel so strongly they should resign their seats and let the people decide which way they want the party to go in.

[The_Todd]

Any chat of Corbyn being chucked out because of Chilcott is just wild. Take it from a Labour activist, there is a deep and full disappointment from those of us who believe the Labour Party needs to win elections in order to achieve its aims.

The funny thing about all this is I keep getting lectured on Corbyn and his leadership by Green and SNP members. Let's be honest, neither SNP nor Greens would want JC as their leader. He's not up to it. The SNP have swallowed the New Labour playbook whole, they're a centrist party. They'd run a mile from a Corbyn style leader.

And it's all well and good putting the boot into the PLP but he's not leading them effectively. We need a leader who can relate to the PLP and the membership. He can't do it.

[hibsbollah]

Any chat of Corbyn being chucked out because of Chilcott is just wild. Take it from a Labour activist, there is a deep and full disappointment from those of us who believe the Labour Party needs to win elections in order to achieve its aims.

The funny thing about all this is I keep getting lectured on Corbyn and his leadership by Green and SNP members. Let's be honest, neither SNP nor Greens would want JC as their leader. He's not up to it. The SNP have swallowed the New Labour playbook whole, they're a centrist party. They'd run a mile from a Corbyn style leader.

And it's all well and good putting the boot into the PLP but he's not leading them effectively. We need a leader who can relate to the PLP and the membership. He can't do it.

So put up a candidate who you think can beat him. It's that simple.

[Betty Boop]

So put up a candidate who you think can beat him. It's that simple.

Amen.

[ronaldo7]

So put up a candidate who you think can beat him. It's that simple.

It seems some in the Labour party don't do democracy. It's all the SNP and Greens fault...Oh look, a squirrel.

[marinello59]

It seems some in the Labour party don't do democracy. It's all the SNP and Greens fault...Oh look, a squirrel.

I haven't seen anybody blaming the SNP or the Greens. It has been pointed out that the main concern about Corbyn and his 'unfair' treatment comes from SNP supporters. It's almost touching. :greengrin
Even the most diehard Labour member will know and admit that this mess is all of their own making. It will be a long long time before we see a Labour Westminster Government again. Scottish Labour should really think about backing Independence now if they want to become relevant in Scotland again. Breaking away from the UK party now wouldn't do them any harm either.

[ronaldo7]

I haven't seen anybody blaming the SNP or the Greens. It has been pointed out that the main concern about Corbyn and his 'unfair' treatment comes from SNP supporters. It's almost touching. :greengrin
Even the most diehard Labour member will know and admit that this mess is all of their own making. It will be a long long time before we see a Labour Westminster Government again. Scottish Labour should really think about backing Independence now if they want to become relevant in Scotland again. Breaking away from the UK party now wouldn't do them any harm either.

I wouldn't say the main concern has come from SNP supporters, certainly not if you look at the demos in London, Manchester etc. My twitter feed is awash with corbynistas going mental about his treatment. If the party membership want rid of him it's easy, just put up a candidate to oppose him. On your points re slab, I agree.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I haven't seen anybody blaming the SNP or the Greens. It has been pointed out that the main concern about Corbyn and his 'unfair' treatment comes from SNP supporters. It's almost touching. :greengrin
Even the most diehard Labour member will know and admit that this mess is all of their own making. It will be a long long time before we see a Labour Westminster Government again. Scottish Labour should really think about backing Independence now if they want to become relevant in Scotland again. Breaking away from the UK party now wouldn't do them any harm either.


The welsh FM has called for federalism - i think SLAB are touting that too - would be a good consensus option (depending on what happens with eu membership)

[High-On-Hibs]

I haven't seen anybody blaming the SNP or the Greens. It has been pointed out that the main concern about Corbyn and his 'unfair' treatment comes from SNP supporters. It's almost touching. :greengrin
Even the most diehard Labour member will know and admit that this mess is all of their own making. It will be a long long time before we see a Labour Westminster Government again. Scottish Labour should really think about backing Independence now if they want to become relevant in Scotland again. Breaking away from the UK party now wouldn't do them any harm either.

Who are Scottish Labour? You mean the branch office that do what they're told?

Even if they did disobey their overlords, they're still lost forever to Scotland. It's only a small minority now that cling on to the falsehood that they'll spring back one day as something remotely credible.

[steakbake]

Who are Scottish Labour? You mean the branch office that do what they're told?

Even if they did disobey their overlords, they're still lost forever to Scotland. It's only a small minority now that cling on to the falsehood that they'll spring back one day as something remotely credible.

I don't know about that. If Labour can come up with a convincing "full federalism" model and not some cooked up Devo Max position, they may get somewhere between the Tories and SNP positions. They shouldn't try to 'out union' the Tories. I think their opportunity lies in pulling votes from the SNP.

There is a possibility for them. Ruth Davidson's hubris will come back to bite her on the arse after bragging about 'slaying Nats' at the Wembley debate. Her own party's disarray, comments she made about No being the only way to Remain and the consequences of a Brexit result puts her in an awkward position. I expect whoever wins the Tory nomination will be looking at ways to stifle the Scottish Parliament - Gove has already hinted at budget cuts after spending the campaign saying that Lrave would result in more powers.

[RyeSloan]

I don't know about that. If Labour can come up with a convincing "full federalism" model and not some cooked up Devo Max position, they may get somewhere between the Tories and SNP positions. They shouldn't try to 'out union' the Tories. I think their opportunity lies in pulling votes from the SNP. There is a possibility for them. Ruth Davidson's hubris will come back to bite her on the arse after bragging about 'slaying Nats' at the Wembley debate. Her own party's disarray, comments she made about No being the only way to Remain and the consequences of a Brexit result puts her in an awkward position. I expect whoever wins the Tory nomination will be looking at ways to stifle the Scottish Parliament - Gove has already hinted at budget cuts after spending the campaign saying that Lrave would result in more powers.

It's a good observation...Labour have been squeezed from both sides and desperately need something to differentiate themselves (and no not more campaigns based on tax rises!).

A full federal model might be quite difficult to get to work but it is at least a response to the ever growing muddle of devolution and the full fat unionism of the Tories while not quite landing in the SNP full Indy camp. It's an interesting concept and one that you could see being a fertile area for them.

[marinello59]

I wouldn't say the main concern has come from SNP supporters, certainly not if you look at the demos in London, Manchester etc. My twitter feed is awash with corbynistas going mental about his treatment. If the party membership want rid of him it's easy, just put up a candidate to oppose him. On your points re slab, I agree.

I was talking about comments made on this thread.:greengrin

[One Day Soon]

So put up a candidate who you think can beat him. It's that simple.


There must be a reason why they haven't put up a candidate so far, but I don't know what it is.

Perhaps they think they can't beat him with the mass of entryists now in the party? If he resigned would that result in an earlier leadership election than if they have to formally challenge him in post? Does Eagle think that if she is first to challenge him she may do enough to bring him down but damage her own chances of winning in the process?

With the Party effectively under the control of Momentum and a cabal of ultra leftists around Corbyn it perfectly represents the majority of members, at least as their views stood at the last leadership election. The only wee snag is that this outlook doesn't represent what the public think and want. Miliband lost the last election, badly, despite tacking to the left - admitedly that was partly because the public couldn't see him as a Prime Minister. The chances of people in the next election seeing Corbyn as Prime Minister material are slim to none. This is what is motivating the MPs who have asked him to stand down. I cannot see how all this can be labelled as just a Blairite coup - there are many MPs and others calling for him to go who are well on the left of the party.

Of course all of this is also a rich seam for members and supporters of other parties - especially Greens and the SNP - crying crocodile tears and happily sticking their large spoons in to stir the pot.

I'm interested to know whether posters think Corbyn is a) competent as leader and b) the right person to lead Labour into the next election.

[steakbake]

It's a good observation...Labour have been squeezed from both sides and desperately need something to differentiate themselves (and no not more campaigns based on tax rises!).

A full federal model might be quite difficult to get to work but it is at least a response to the ever growing muddle of devolution and the full fat unionism of the Tories while not quite landing in the SNP full Indy camp. It's an interesting concept and one that you could see being a fertile area for them.

I think so. It will all be about events though and those are largely out of anyone's control. Seems to be that policy responses will be reactive to consequences over the next few years, if you see what I mean.

Full federalism, while very tricky, might suit the gradualist SNP wing and also be a response to the Reverse Greenland, should that be on the table.

Greenland/Faroes remain part of the Kingdom of Denmark, but are pretty much autonomous in most areas of government policy except Foreign Affairs and Defence. They have their own passports and Faroes have their own currency. If Labour want to kill nationalism 'stone dead', that might be their last roll of the dice.

[RyeSloan]

I think so. It will all be about events though and those are largely out of anyone's control. Seems to be that policy responses will be reactive to consequences over the next few years, if you see what I mean. Full federalism, while very tricky, might suit the gradualist SNP wing and also be a response to the Reverse Greenland, should that be on the table. Greenland/Faroes remain part of the Kingdom of Denmark, but are pretty much autonomous in most areas of government policy except Foreign Affairs and Defence. They have their own passports and Faroes have their own currency. If Labour want to kill nationalism 'stone dead', that might be their last roll of the dice.

I'm not sure Greenland can be used as an sort of example. It's a tiny nation that relies on Denmark for a huge portion of its budget. Still it goes to show that there are many ways to cut a cake so Labour should sit down and come up with a plan.

Sadly they are too busy fighting amongst themselves. Corbyn and his Momentum movement have done a sound job so it doesn't look like they will be uniting around anybody anytime soon so clarity of thought on policy and devising a brave but potentially vote winning alternative for the UK's rather endless internal power struggles looks a long way away.

[hibsbollah]

There must be a reason why they haven't put up a candidate so far, but I don't know what it is.

Perhaps they think they can't beat him with the mass of entryists now in the party? If he resigned would that result in an earlier leadership election than if they have to formally challenge him in post? Does Eagle think that if she is first to challenge him she may do enough to bring him down but damage her own chances of winning in the process?

With the Party effectively under the control of Momentum and a cabal of ultra leftists around Corbyn it perfectly represents the majority of members, at least as their views stood at the last leadership election. The only wee snag is that this outlook doesn't represent what the public think and want. Miliband lost the last election, badly, despite tacking to the left - admitedly that was partly because the public couldn't see him as a Prime Minister. The chances of people in the next election seeing Corbyn as Prime Minister material are slim to none. This is what is motivating the MPs who have asked him to stand down. I cannot see how all this can be labelled as just a Blairite coup - there are many MPs and others calling for him to go who are well on the left of the party.

Of course all of this is also a rich seam for members and supporters of other parties - especially Greens and the SNP - crying crocodile tears and happily sticking their large spoons in to stir the pot.

I'm interested to know whether posters think Corbyn is a) competent as leader and b) the right person to lead Labour into the next election.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/26/corbyn-leader-brexit-labour-rebels-sabotage

Paul Mason encapsulates my views pretty well. Theres a few fundamental flaws in your argument ( 'entrists'??? You make these people sound ominous, instead of a good thing, normal labour voters returning to the post Blair fold, 'cabal' round Corbyn? He pulled together the most inclusive and conciliatory shadow cabinet EVER) but what the ****, I'm on my holidays and I'm drinking in the sun and the drink and about to watch the game, im not in the mood for argument and we're both Forza Italia and (hopefully still) Forza Labour so let's leave it at that :greengrin

[One Day Soon]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/26/corbyn-leader-brexit-labour-rebels-sabotage

Paul Mason encapsulates my views pretty well. Theres a few fundamental flaws in your argument ( 'entrists'??? You make these people sound ominous, instead of a good thing, normal labour voters returning to the post Blair fold, 'cabal' round Corbyn? He pulled together the most inclusive and conciliatory shadow cabinet EVER) but what the ****, I'm on my holidays and I'm drinking in the sun and the drink and about to watch the game, im not in the mood for argument and we're both Forza Italia and (hopefully still) Forza Labour so let's leave it at that :greengrin


:aok: Have a great holiday bud.

[ronaldo7]

Len McCluskey now asking the BBC to do and investigation into Portland Comms if they want to find the truth behind the #Labourcoup #Chicken coup.

Alternatively you could listen to Lord Kinnock saying Corbyn needs to go.

I just wish they'd get on and run the UK, and sort out the debacle that sees an English Mp sitting as Shadow Northern Ireland minister, along with the Shadow Scotland minister.

[Bristolhibby]

I haven't seen anybody blaming the SNP or the Greens. It has been pointed out that the main concern about Corbyn and his 'unfair' treatment comes from SNP supporters. It's almost touching. :greengrin
Even the most diehard Labour member will know and admit that this mess is all of their own making. It will be a long long time before we see a Labour Westminster Government again. Scottish Labour should really think about backing Independence now if they want to become relevant in Scotland again. Breaking away from the UK party now wouldn't do them any harm either.

This. The writings in the wall. Be a bit player in British politics or Taj the Independence bull by the horns, purge themselves and have a genuine shot of leadership. Same can be said for the Tories as well BTW. A complete break from London and dare I say it, join in on the Independence bandwagon. I'm sure there are more small c conservatives in Scotland than we give them credit for.

J

[Colr]

Chilcott report out this week.

This will be used to purge the Blairites from the Labour Party.

Corbyn will go to a contest. He will win.

The Blairites will have to buckle under or split, SDP style.

The split may be bigger than the Labour Party!!!

Either way, Tories will be in power for a decade at least.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Chilcott report out this week.

This will be used to purge the Blairites from the Labour Party.

Corbyn will go to a contest. He will win.

The Blairites will have to buckle under or split, SDP style.

The split may be bigger than the Labour Party!!!

Either way, Tories will be in power for a decade at least.

I agree a split is looking increasingly likely. I wonder if the centre right of the party would ever consider joining with the Lib Dems. There doesn't seem much between these days (although I'll admit I don't know a huge amount about eithers manifesto, if such things even exist).

I used to consider Labour as a party that's main objective was to stand up for the working class however in recent years they've turned in to diet-torys and have lost their identity and purpose. Miliband might have been a bit further to the left but he'd have a hard job convincing anyone that he understands problems faced by 'normal' people. Corbyn was a step back in this direction but seems to be quite different the other Labour MPs. What a mess.

[Colr]

I agree a split is looking increasingly likely. I wonder if the centre right of the party would ever consider joining with the Lib Dems. There doesn't seem much between these days (although I'll admit I don't know a huge amount about eithers manifesto, if such things even exist).

I used to consider Labour as a party that's main objective was to stand up for the working class however in recent years they've turned in to diet-torys and have lost their identity and purpose. Miliband might have been a bit further to the left but he'd have a hard job convincing anyone that he understands problems faced by 'normal' people. Corbyn was a step back in this direction but seems to be quite different the other Labour MPs. What a mess.

I feel utterly betrayed by Labour since 2008.

LibDem is a poisoned brand, they would be more likely to be absorbed by 140 breakaway MPs.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I feel utterly betrayed by Labour since 2008.

LibDem is a poisoned brand, they would be more likely to be absorbed by 140 breakaway MPs.

Maybe 'join forces with' the lib Dems is a better way of putting it. Not much between the parties and as you say, some rebranding is need on both sides.

The referendum showed the huge decide between wealthy areas, particularly cities, and the rest of the country. If Labour are to recover, appointing a leader that lives or has lived outside Oxbridge and the M25 would be a good start.

[High-On-Hibs]

What a nasty piece of work that Tessa Jowell is. Being totally disrespectful to the young Labour activist from Glasgow. Another horrible careerist politician.

[ronaldo7]

The Plot(ters) thickens.

Blairites getting down in the dirt to get Corbyn out. #chickencoup

https://t.co/qCjprphn7w

[Colr]

The Plot(ters) thickens.

Blairites getting down in the dirt to get Corbyn out. #chickencoup

https://t.co/qCjprphn7w

It'll get pretty bloody tomorrow!!

Comrade Corbyn will denounce the traitor Blair for his actions in Eastasia who have always been our allies. Meanwhile at Momentum a period of hate will commence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk

[ronaldo7]

Where Eagles dare, or not as might be the case. It seems Jezza has seen off the Red Tories.:greengrin

https://t.co/JPhVrvYmXC

[AndyM_1875]

Where Eagles dare, or not as might be the case. It seems Jezza has seen off the Red Tories.:greengrin

https://t.co/JPhVrvYmXC

We are at an impasse. The PLP who have behaved appallingly hate him and see him as a delusional old dinosaur who has presided over failure to hold a pretty rank Tory Government to account and allowing in a load of £3 entry level Trots to the Labour party aided an abetted by the Momentum mob.

Local CLPs won't deselect popular MPs (Stella Creasey, Chuka Umunna, Jess Phillips, Jamie Reed, Dan Jarvis, Heidi Alexander etc) that make Corbyn's life hell though and that means the Corbynites can't shake up the party the way they want. If new probable PM Teresa May calls an election early Labour will wither to sub 150 seats suffering losses mainly to the LibDems(who will run on an anti Brexit ticket) and UKIP (still the same racist pricks they always have been) in England and Wales. If he hangs on till 2020 then he'll be 71.
Either way its a disaster.

Personally I'm glad to be away from it all now and am all for IndyRef2 before 2019.

[Betty Boop]

We are at an impasse. The PLP who have behaved appallingly hate him and see him as a delusional old dinosaur who has presided over failure to hold a pretty rank Tory Government to account and allowing in a load of £3 entry level Trots to the Labour party aided an abetted by the Momentum mob.

Local CLPs won't deselect popular MPs (Stella Creasey, Chuka Umunna, Jess Phillips, Jamie Reed, Dan Jarvis, Heidi Alexander etc) that make Corbyn's life hell though and that means the Corbynites can't shake up the party the way they want. If new probable PM Teresa May calls an election early Labour will wither to sub 150 seats suffering losses mainly to the LibDems(who will run on an anti Brexit ticket) and UKIP (still the same racist pricks they always have been) in England and Wales. If he hangs on till 2020 then he'll be 71.
Either way its a disaster.

Personally I'm glad to be away from it all now and am all for IndyRef2 before 2019.

The Momentum mob ? What's that supposed to mean like ?

[Moulin Yarns]

The Momentum mob ? What's that supposed to mean like ?


OOOOH Betty!! I think you need to read this.

http://www.peoplesmomentum.com/

[Betty Boop]

OOOOH Betty!! I think you need to read this.

http://www.peoplesmomentum.com/

Yea I joined a few weeks ago, hardly a mob. Its a grassroots movement. :agree:

[High-On-Hibs]

Momentum is a protest movement. Idealists without tangible solutions. It's the fatal flaw of the far left. They can see what the problems are, they just can't remedy them. It's all well and good shouting out about all of the injustices in the world, but without real workable solutions, it can never move beyond protest.

[AndyM_1875]

The Momentum mob ? What's that supposed to mean like ?

Exactly what it says.

I'm currently a member of the Labour party (although probably not for much longer).
I didn't join Momentum and I'm not interested in their cult worship of Corbyn and any of the other nonsense that involves protesting moderate centre left Labour MPs and trying to de-select them.

[Betty Boop]

This is why we support Jeremy Corbyn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tb8ezQG7t1Y

[GlesgaeHibby]

Angela Eagle to face vote of no confidence from her Constituency Labour Party :top marks:greengrin:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

The Eagle has finally landed, just to find out the press have done a runner. What a great start Angela:faf:

https://t.co/cbdBZQXBZ7

Meanwhile ASLEF demand that Corbyn is on the ballot paper. The train is coming off the tracks.

https://t.co/zNTdspwmkI

[High-On-Hibs]

Corbyn is going nowhere. :na na:

[hibsbollah]

So some democracy still exists. Corbyn is on the ballot by 18-14.

If you like Corbyn, now's the time to vote for him.

[High-On-Hibs]

So some democracy still exists. Corbyn is on the ballot by 18-14.

If you like Corbyn, now's the time to vote for him.

Could never bring myself to vote for the joke of a Scottish branch. However, i've got plenty of respect for the man. He's been heckled relentlessly by the establishment who said he was too weak to be a leader. Well now who's looking weak? Good on him for standing firm.

[stantonhibby]

I'm no fan of Corbyn but he had to be on the ballot. Would have been civil war if he wasn't (still going to be messy)

[Betty Boop]

[QUOTE=stantonhibby;4758048]I'm no fan of Corbyn but he had to be on the ballot. Would have been civil war if he wasn't (still going to be messy)[/QUOTE

He's on it just been announced. :agree:

[Hibbyradge]

Oh well, at least Labour are only 8 points behind the Tories. Jezza will soon catch that up.

Teresa May must be cracking herself.

[RyeSloan]

I'm no fan of Corbyn but he had to be on the ballot. Would have been civil war if he wasn't (still going to be messy)

Totally...farcical that they didn't have clear rules in the first place.

But will be very interesting now, I suspect he will be returned by the £3 membership as leader which will leave a huge portion of the current MP's with no where to go but out. A huge split looks increasingly likely...the could always call their party New Labour of course :-)

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

[High-On-Hibs]

Oh well, at least Labour are only 8 points behind the Tories. Jezza will soon catch that up.

Teresa May must be cracking herself.

I really don't get this attitude from some people. The man has added an excitement and enthusiasm that has been missing from Labour for quite some time. This is great for the younger generation right across the country. I wish old people would drop this believe that politics is exclusive to them only. It's a new world and young people are getting involved and having their say. Good on them I say. :aok:

[High-On-Hibs]

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

Is she? Or is that what the Blairite side of Labour are now hoping?

[hibsbollah]

Totally...farcical that they didn't have clear rules in the first place.

But will be very interesting now, I suspect he will be returned by the £3 membership as leader which will leave a huge portion of the current MP's with no where to go but out. A huge split looks increasingly likely...the could always call their party New Labour of course :-)

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

The '£3 membership' shtick is a diversion, Simar. It suggests that Trots, Greens and maybe Tories originally taking the piss got him in through the back door. All categories of membership returned him as leader last time with a massive majority.

[Hibbyradge]

Totally...farcical that they didn't have clear rules in the first place.

But will be very interesting now, I suspect he will be returned by the £3 membership as leader which will leave a huge portion of the current MP's with no where to go but out. A huge split looks increasingly likely...the could always call their party New Labour of course :-)

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

It's funny how flooding the party with £3 members is democratic, but trying to get rid of a leader who has lost the confidence his colleagues, and most of the country, isn't! :hilarious:

I imagine Corbyn will win again, but I don't think Labour will split.

I think Theresa May will want her own mandate and will call an election soon enough. When Labour get trounced, and lose even more ground to UKIP, who are currently only 15 points behind them, Corbyn will go.

He will, won't he?

[High-On-Hibs]

Listening to the state of McTernan on BBC News shows these kind of "people" up for what they are. Good riddance to bad rubbish!

[Hibbyradge]

I really don't get this attitude from some people. The man has added an excitement and enthusiasm that has been missing from Labour for quite some time. This is great for the younger generation right across the country. I wish old people would drop this believe that politics is exclusive to them only. It's a new world and young people are getting involved and having their say. Good on them I say. :aok:

Excitement? He's as dull as dishwater and he's losing voters by the thousand.

Politics and old people? How old is Corbyn? :faf:

You really are a troll. :faf:

[stantonhibby]

Totally...farcical that they didn't have clear rules in the first place.

But will be very interesting now, I suspect he will be returned by the £3 membership as leader which will leave a huge portion of the current MP's with no where to go but out. A huge split looks increasingly likely...the could always call their party New Labour of course :-)

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

To think he only got on the original ballot because some MP's lent him their nomination only to widen the debate.

[High-On-Hibs]

Excitement? He's as dull as dishwater and he's losing voters by the thousand.

Politics and old people? How old is Corbyn? :faf:

You really are a troll. :faf:

Oh dear, you're not taking this well.

I'm sure you'll be oh so disappointed when he continues to surprise people who are desperate for him to fail.

[ronaldo7]

Poor wee Angela.:greengrin

17122

[hibsbollah]

Listening to the state of McTernan on BBC News shows these kind of "people" up for what they are. Good riddance to bad rubbish!

Why anybody is expected to listen to the views of Blair's 'director of political operations 2005-2007' is beyond me. So this is 'the end of the labour party' is it? Since thats your opinion, Hopefully that means you can **** off and form SDP2.

[stantonhibby]

Oh dear, you're not taking this well.

I'm sure you'll be oh so disappointed when he continues to surprise people who are desperate for him to fail.

Surprise them by doing what exactly?

[ronaldo7]

Why anybody is expected to listen to the views of Blair's 'director of political operations 2005-2007' is beyond me. So this is 'the end of the labour party' is it? Since thats your opinion, Hopefully that means you can **** off and form SDP2.

It's what the BBC do unfortunately.

[High-On-Hibs]

Why anybody is expected to listen to the views of Blair's 'director of political operations 2005-2007' is beyond me. So this is 'the end of the labour party' is it? Since thats your opinion, Hopefully that means you can **** off and form SDP2.

He was claiming that the unions "killed" labour. It just shows what people of his ilk make of the unions. Even if the unions had of killed Labour (which they certainly haven't), it isn't like they killed tens of thousands of Iraqi Citizens on a war built on a lie.

[High-On-Hibs]

Surprise them by doing what exactly?

Something different which is exactly what the UK needs.

[hibsbollah]

He was claiming that the unions "killed" labour. It just shows what people of his ilk make of the unions. Even if the unions had of killed Labour (which they certainly haven't), it isn't like they killed tens of thousands of Iraqi Citizens on a war built on a lie.

Since the Unions actually birthed labour, maybe he was being ironic. I doubt it. But who cares. Im sure James Harding will be instructing Kuennsberg et al to continue making sure irrelevancies like McTernan attempt to tell people how to think. Doesnt seem to be working so far.

[ronaldo7]

Who's got money on a couple more Blairites coming out from behind the curtains to run? Or will they just leave wee Ange to take the heat?

[Hibbyradge]

Oh dear, you're not taking this well.

I'm sure you'll be oh so disappointed when he continues to surprise people who are desperate for him to fail.

The only surprise is how fast he's losing Labour voters.

Secondly, as soon as you found out I'm older than you, you make a stupid comment about older people, forgetting that your new surrogate hero, is 67 and will be 71 by the time of the next scheduled GE. :faf:

M59 said he couldn't work out why your arguments are so inconsistent. We'll, I know why and I've said it before. You are pure and simply at it.

You're an Internet troll.

[RyeSloan]

The '£3 membership' shtick is a diversion, Simar. It suggests that Trots, Greens and maybe Tories originally taking the piss got him in through the back door. All categories of membership returned him as leader last time with a massive majority.

Aye fair enough but it certainly doesn't help that there could be a large amount of labour members that in reality are nothing of the sort.

I don't really get the Corbyn love in to be honest, to me it's pretty clear he doesn't have the tools for the job. And although I've not followed it too closely I'm not sure I fully understand his 'new politics' stuff either. Anyway not getting into too deep a discussion about the man as he clearly has his backers and good on them for supporting someone the believe in...just don't be surprised if the voters don't.

[High-On-Hibs]

The only surprise is how fast he's losing Labour voters.

Secondly, as soon as you found out I'm older than you, you make a stupid comment about older people, forgetting that your new surrogate hero, is 67 and will be 71 by the time of the next scheduled GE. :faf:

M59 said he couldn't work out why your arguments are so inconsistent. We'll, I know why and I've said it before. You are pure and simply at it.

You're an Internet troll.

Considerably older. :wink:

I couldn't care less what the age of a political leader is. If they engage young voters and give them a voice in what's supposed to be a democracy, then they get my full respect.

You say he's fast losing Labour voters, despite already winning a by-election and doing better than expected in the local elections. Face it, you're desperate for the man to fail and aren't willing to give him a proper chance to set out his vision.

As I say, you'll be desperately disappointed when Labour succeed under Jeremy Corbyn with his highly popular policies that the media have done their best to steer the narrative away from.

[Pretty Boy]

Oh dear, you're not taking this well.

I'm sure you'll be oh so disappointed when he continues to surprise people who are desperate for him to fail.

How is he suprising people? He is failing, miserably.

[High-On-Hibs]

How is he suprising people? He is failing, miserably.

Labour has been performing much better than expected since he was elected. Despite all the nonsense behind the scenes, Labour are actually doing quite well at a local level. There's absolutely no reason why his support can't grow beyond the membership. As long as he keeps the focus on real issues that effect ordinary working people, then I can see him having a much bigger appeal to the electorate than some people expect.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Aye fair enough but it certainly doesn't help that there could be a large amount of labour members that in reality are nothing of the sort.

I don't really get the Corbyn love in to be honest, to me it's pretty clear he doesn't have the tools for the job. And although I've not followed it too closely I'm not sure I fully understand his 'new politics' stuff either. Anyway not getting into too deep a discussion about the man as he clearly has his backers and good on them for supporting someone the believe in...just don't be surprised if the voters don't.


I do admire his conviction, and i do feel for the guy because on a human level, he must feel it.

It gets to the very heart of what politics is though - is it about ideology or pragmatism?

Corbyn may be a proper lefty, but he will never, ever win a general election.

I do think they should just split now and be done with it - the blairite wing should just leave and create a new party.

[hibsbollah]

Aye fair enough but it certainly doesn't help that there could be a large amount of labour members that in reality are nothing of the sort.

I don't really get the Corbyn love in to be honest, to me it's pretty clear he doesn't have the tools for the job. And although I've not followed it too closely I'm not sure I fully understand his 'new politics' stuff either. Anyway not getting into too deep a discussion about the man as he clearly has his backers and good on them for supporting someone the believe in...just don't be surprised if the voters don't.

A Corbyn 'love in'!! :faf: wow I haven't seen or heard of one of them ever. Maybe you read more left wing stuff than me on the internet Simar :greengrin
.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Labour has been performing much better than expected since he was elected. Despite all the nonsense behind the scenes, Labour are actually doing quite well at a local level. There's absolutely no reason why his support can't grow beyond the membership. As long as he keeps the focus on real issues that effect ordinary working people, then I can see him having a much bigger appeal to the electorate than some people expect.

There is no evidence for this whatsoever.

On the orher thread, you attacked blair for being too lefty in a number of policies.

Which of corbyns policies dp you support?

[Pretty Boy]

Labour has been performing much better than expected since he was elected. Despite all the nonsense behind the scenes, Labour are actually doing quite well at a local level. There's absolutely no reason why his support can't grow beyond the membership. As long as he keeps the focus on real issues that effect ordinary working people, then I can see him having a much bigger appeal to the electorate than some people expect.

Opposition parties traditionally outperform an incumbent government at local level, it's how that translates to national level that matters and thus far nothing suggests he is making any progress at all.

The problem with Corbyn is he is a career politician (I understand this accusation is usually thrown out at other by Corbyn supporters but Union Rep to Councillor to MP is a Labour career politician by any standards) who has spent his entire life in opposition. Even whilst on the side of the government he was in perpetual opposition, not a bad thing in the sense it brings a balance. However the issue I often find with people who spend much of their life in opposition is that they are very good at finding problems and theorising but when put in a position in which they have to find workable solutions and compromises they are quite often found wanting. That's exactly where Corbyn is now.

[hibsbollah]

How is he suprising people? He is failing, miserably.

I think a lot of people question that analysis, and of course it all depends on your definition of 'success' and 'failure'.

Massive increase in membership, performed well in local, mayoral and by election tests since coming to power less than twelve months ago. Voting intentions opinion polling has ebbed and flowed between 2% and 9% behind Tories, which is broadly where Labour were before he came in. So he's holding firm in the polls, with the very obvious context that every single newspaper and almost every major media outlet has been battering him with everything since day one. He's not bowing in front of the cenotaph even when he demonstrably was, was my personal favourite.

Of course, there are different interpretations. Which will all be democratically tested (hopefully) over time.

[ronaldo7]

Totally...farcical that they didn't have clear rules in the first place.

But will be very interesting now, I suspect he will be returned by the £3 membership as leader which will leave a huge portion of the current MP's with no where to go but out. A huge split looks increasingly likely...the could always call their party New Labour of course :-)

May must be laughing and rubbing her hands at the prospect of Labour splitting after all the talk of Brexit being the end of the Tory party as well!

They do, the wording in the rule book was changed in 2011, it might have taken some of the Blairites some time to read them though.

"When there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of party conference".

With there being no vacancy, I don't know what Eagle and all the eegits are going on about. If this coup is the way that Labour go about planning then we're stuck with the Tories for a number of years.

Bring on Indyref2.

[Hibbyradge]

Opposition parties traditionally outperform an incumbent government at local level, it's how that translates to national level that matters and thus far nothing suggests he is making any progress at all.

The problem with Corbyn is he is a career politician (I understand this accusation is usually thrown out at other by Corbyn supporters but Union Rep to Councillor to MP is a Labour career politician by any standards) who has spent his entire life in opposition. Even whilst on the side of the government he was in perpetual opposition, not a bad thing in the sense it brings a balance. However the issue I often find with people who spend much of their life in opposition is that they are very good at finding problems and theorising but when put in a position in which they have to find workable solutions and compromises they are quite often found wanting. That's exactly where Corbyn is now.

Exactly.

Ano it's not just his incompetence.

When the election comes, can you imagine what the press are going to do with some of the statements he's made and the list of causes and people he has supported over the years?

All those ex-labour voters who went to the Tories or UKIP need to be won back, but that's not happening while Jezza's at the helm.

[High-On-Hibs]

There is no evidence for this whatsoever.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35003152
http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/labour-win-stapenhill-election/story-29327566-detail/story.html
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/labour-win-coventrys-lower-stoke-10879972
http://bournvillevillage.com/politics/labour-win-bournville-local-elections/
http://www.cityam.com/240553/london-mayoral-election-2016-labours-sadiq-khan-takes-early-lead-with-conservative-zac-goldsmith-trailing-behind
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/labour-s-marvin-rees-wins-mayoral-election/story-29232720-detail/story.html

Just because you want Labour to fail under Corbyn's leadership, doesn't mean they will.


On the orher thread, you attacked blair for being too lefty in a number of policies.

What left wing policies did I "attack"? I replied to Hibbyradge on the policies that were introduced by New Labour and was merely pointing out the weaknesses in those policies, whether people consider them to be left or right.


Which of corbyns policies dp you support?

I quite like the idea of a nationalized railway service. Something that the last UK poll showed a majority were in support of. In my opinion, one of the biggest economic mistakes that New Labour made was surrendering complete control of the banking sector. I would like to see the government taking back some control and holding them to account. They also need to reverse the damage caused by their disastrous PFI policy within the public health service, which has seen government costs sky rocket. I would like to see them clamp down on the multi national corporations and work internationally with other countries to close tax loopholes which are creating an unfair playing field for small local businesses. I would also like to see some proper investment in social housing, something new labour completely abandoned in their 13 years of power.

[hibsbollah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35003152
http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/labour-win-stapenhill-election/story-29327566-detail/story.html
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/labour-win-coventrys-lower-stoke-10879972
http://bournvillevillage.com/politics/labour-win-bournville-local-elections/
http://www.cityam.com/240553/london-mayoral-election-2016-labours-sadiq-khan-takes-early-lead-with-conservative-zac-goldsmith-trailing-behind
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/labour-s-marvin-rees-wins-mayoral-election/story-29232720-detail/story.html

Just because you want Labour to fail under Corbyn's leadership, doesn't mean they will.



What left wing policies did I "attack"? I replied to Hibbyradge on the policies that were introduced by New Labour and was merely pointing out the weaknesses in those policies, whether people consider them to be left or right.



I quite like the idea of a nationalized railway service. Something that the last UK poll showed a majority were in support of. In my opinion, one of the biggest economic mistakes that New Labour made was surrendering complete control of the banking sector. I would like to see the government taking back some control and holding them to account. They also need to reverse the damage caused by their disastrous PFI policy within the public health service, which has seen government costs sky rocket. I would like to see them clamp down on the multi national corporations and work internationally with other countries to close tax loopholes which are creating an unfair playing field for small local businesses. I would also like to see some proper investment in social housing, something new labour completely abandoned in their 13 years of power.

None of those policies sound particularly 'hard left'. But that's what we are being told they are in 2016.

[High-On-Hibs]

None of those policies sound particularly 'hard left'. But that's what we are being told they are in 2016.

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35003152
http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/labour-win-stapenhill-election/story-29327566-detail/story.html
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/labour-win-coventrys-lower-stoke-10879972
http://bournvillevillage.com/politics/labour-win-bournville-local-elections/
http://www.cityam.com/240553/london-mayoral-election-2016-labours-sadiq-khan-takes-early-lead-with-conservative-zac-goldsmith-trailing-behind
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/labour-s-marvin-rees-wins-mayoral-election/story-29232720-detail/story.html

Just because you want Labour to fail under Corbyn's leadership, doesn't mean they will.



What left wing policies did I "attack"? I replied to Hibbyradge on the policies that were introduced by New Labour and was merely pointing out the weaknesses in those policies, whether people consider them to be left or right.



I quite like the idea of a nationalized railway service. Something that the last UK poll showed a majority were in support of. In my opinion, one of the biggest economic mistakes that New Labour made was surrendering complete control of the banking sector. I would like to see the government taking back some control and holding them to account. They also need to reverse the damage caused by their disastrous PFI policy within the public health service, which has seen government costs sky rocket. I would like to see them clamp down on the multi national corporations and work internationally with other countries to close tax loopholes which are creating an unfair playing field for small local businesses. I would also like to see some proper investment in social housing, something new labour completely abandoned in their 13 years of power.

I know you are very young so maybe you dont understand how the electoral cycle works, but a supposedly popular opposition holding a rock solid seat is not successful. In the run-up to 97, labour were routing an unpopular tory govt in all sorts of marginal and tory seats.

And being behind a government in thos stage in rhe cycle is catastrophic - a popular opposition would expect to be surging ahead of a government taking us through such austere times.

You attacked several of blairs policy from the right on the other thread.

I dont particuarly care if corbyn succeeds or fails - id be worried with him as pm, bit that wont ever happen.

His continuation or otherwise as labour leader is fpr you labour guys tp worry about, i have no party affiliation.

What i do know is that i wouldnt vote labour at the moment, and im prob the type of voter you need to attract to win a GE. Corbyn won't ever do that.

[ronaldo7]

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?


Their eyes are Blaired:wink:

[RyeSloan]

A Corbyn 'love in'!! :faf: wow I haven't seen or heard of one of them ever. Maybe you read more left wing stuff than me on the internet Simar :greengrin .

Argh aye too much High on Hibs!

Let's just say he does seem to engender some passionate defence when I'm slightly confused as to why considering my (admittedly rather superficial) analysis of his performance to date.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?

I agree some of that sounds reasonable, but the nationalised railways seem to be thought of more fondly every year that passes. I agree that is a policy worrh looking at though


A lot of the rest of what you say is airy fairy aspirational stuff, not policies.

And unfortunately for labour, as many working class people care as much (if not more) about keeping out foreigners than about the independence of the bank of England and fin svces regulation.

Ive realised who you remind me of...

Rick (or rwick!) from the young ones!

[Pretty Boy]

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?

So you butchered a policy of statutory paternity leave - from a business perspective - on one thread, a policy that must appeal to almost all working fathers, yet think a policy of renationalising railways is something that is of real appeal and/or priority to 'working class' people?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?



Also, to your last point. Maybe it is you that's wrong?

[RyeSloan]

I know you are very young so maybe you dont understand how the electoral cycle works, but a supposedly popular opposition holding a rock solid seat is not successful. In the run-up to 97, labour were routing an unpopular tory govt in all sorts of marginal and tory seats. And being behind a government in thos stage in rhe cycle is catastrophic - a popular opposition would expect to be surging ahead of a government taking us through such austere times. You attacked several of blairs policy from the right on the other thread. I dont particuarly care if corbyn succeeds or fails - id be worried with him as pm, bit that wont ever happen. His continuation or otherwise as labour leader is fpr you labour guys tp worry about, i have no party affiliation. What i do know is that i wouldnt vote labour at the moment, and im prob the type of voter you need to attract to win a GE. Corbyn won't ever do that.

Can't remember exactly but the Labour performance in the local elections was something like the second worst in terms of gain on the newly elected government in modern times...if I can be ersed I might try and dig out the article that I read on it.

Let's be honest the Tory's have been sitting ducks for a while now and to me at least it looks like Labour haven't landed a glove on them yet...if they can't make hay while they were is such disarray I'm not sure when they can.

Chuck in that they are now quite likely to rally around May then the game just got a hell of a lot harder.

[Hibbyradge]

Exactly. These are real policies that appeal to real working class people. But the media are doing their best to ensure that these policies aren't heard by the millions of people that Labour need to reach out to. Instead you have infighting stirred up by Blairism within the Labour Party, giving the media all the distraction they need to ignore the actual policies.

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?

Who has been criticising Labour's policies?

[ronaldo7]

Those who joined during the £3 charade now have to pay £25 for the right to vote. Those others who've joined in the last 6 months won't get a vote.

Labour money making machine goes into overdrive.

The people's party of the working class just left them at the bus stop.

[hibsbollah]

The centre ground of British politics has taken a clear shift to the right over these last few decades. Making sensible policies seem "hard left", when they're actually policies worth real consideration.

Why can't more people see it for what it is?

There's a fundamental disconnect going on. Let's go back to Ed Milibands manifesto. 2015, Red Ed, Looney Left is back etc etc. Pilloried mercilessly by the press in a style familiar to us all by now. If you look at it dispassionately it was a do nothing, conservative (small c) let's not offend Murdoch manifesto.

-No renationalisation. None. All Industry is a private sector monopoly.
-Minimium wage raised to £8 an hour. LOWER than the Tories proposals and actually BEHIND inflation.
-Tuition fees STAY. But cut from 9k to 6k. Wow.
-NHS private sector encroachment continues. But some fund created to give it 'extra' money from a mansion tax for £2million+ homes.
-and of course, continued austerity. No growth, no risk.

It beggars belief that I am still told by some on the 'scaredy' wing of the party that the public already had an opportunity to vote for a Left wing alternative and rejected it. They didn't. It's a Lie. I suppose at least those people are at least TALKING about policy instead of Corbyns suit being crumpled or how McConnell is a terrorist sympathizer or something.

[steakbake]

Those who joined during the £3 charade now have to pay £25 for the right to vote. Those others who've joined in the last 6 months won't get a vote.

Labour money making machine goes into overdrive.

The people's party of the working class just left them at the bus stop.

They may need to bankroll an election...

[Vault Boy]

There's a fundamental disconnect going on. Let's go back to Ed Milibands manifesto. 2015, Red Ed, Looney Left is back etc etc. Pilloried mercilessly by the press in a style familiar to us all by now. If you look at it dispassionately it was a do nothing, conservative (small c) let's not offend Murdoch manifesto.

-No renationalisation. None. All Industry is a private sector monopoly.
-Minimium wage raised to £8 an hour. LOWER than the Tories proposals and actually BEHIND inflation.
-Tuition fees STAY. But cut from 9k to 6k. Wow.
-NHS private sector encroachment continues. But some fund created to give it 'extra' money from a mansion tax for £2million+ homes.
-and of course, continued austerity. No growth, no risk.

It beggars belief that I am still told by some on the 'scaredy' wing of the party that the public already had an opportunity to vote for a Left wing alternative and rejected it. They didn't. It's a Lie. I suppose at least those people are at least TALKING about policy instead of Corbyns suit being crumpled or how McConnell is a terrorist sympathizer or something.

Excellent post.

[High-On-Hibs]

There's a fundamental disconnect going on. Let's go back to Ed Milibands manifesto. 2015, Red Ed, Looney Left is back etc etc. Pilloried mercilessly by the press in a style familiar to us all by now. If you look at it dispassionately it was a do nothing, conservative (small c) let's not offend Murdoch manifesto.

-No renationalisation. None. All Industry is a private sector monopoly.
-Minimium wage raised to £8 an hour. LOWER than the Tories proposals and actually BEHIND inflation.
-Tuition fees STAY. But cut from 9k to 6k. Wow.
-NHS private sector encroachment continues. But some fund created to give it 'extra' money from a mansion tax for £2million+ homes.
-and of course, continued austerity. No growth, no risk.

It beggars belief that I am still told by some on the 'scaredy' wing of the party that the public already had an opportunity to vote for a Left wing alternative and rejected it. They didn't. It's a Lie. I suppose at least those people are at least TALKING about policy instead of Corbyns suit being crumpled or how McConnell is a terrorist sympathizer or something.

It's the most frustrating thing when it's blatantly obvious that people have been watching the BBC, Sky News and reading Murdochs rags. But one thing they didn't do was bother to look at the parties manifestos.

The vast majority of people go to the polling booth having no idea what it is they are actually voting for. They just remember those 'controversial' sound-bites that have been fed to them through their TV sets thinking they're making an intelligent well informed decision.

[High-On-Hibs]

I know you are very young so maybe you dont understand how the electoral cycle works, but a supposedly popular opposition holding a rock solid seat is not successful. In the run-up to 97, labour were routing an unpopular tory govt in all sorts of marginal and tory seats.

And being behind a government in thos stage in rhe cycle is catastrophic - a popular opposition would expect to be surging ahead of a government taking us through such austere times.

You attacked several of blairs policy from the right on the other thread.

I dont particuarly care if corbyn succeeds or fails - id be worried with him as pm, bit that wont ever happen.

His continuation or otherwise as labour leader is fpr you labour guys tp worry about, i have no party affiliation.

What i do know is that i wouldnt vote labour at the moment, and im prob the type of voter you need to attract to win a GE. Corbyn won't ever do that.

The manifesto being laid out under Corbyn is the most anti-austerity manifesto that has been laid out by Labour in decades. If people are really concerned about the austerity being implemented by a Conservative government, then they will join the Labour Party to rise up against it. The fact that you won't would suggest that a Tory government implementing ideological austerity really doesn't bother you that much. You say the leader is unelectable, then refuse to support him. Well he's certainly going to be unelectable if you convince yourself that he's unelectable and don't bother turning up to vote for him.

[Vault Boy]

Incredibly annoyed at Labour, as I'm sure many others are right now. Completely and utterly unjustifiable and absolutely negates what the party is supposed to stand for. Then again, concentrating on real issues, ideologically and practically opposing Tory austerity and focusing on social solutions clearly isn't the party's priority anymore.

[High-On-Hibs]

So you butchered a policy of statutory paternity leave - from a business perspective - on one thread, a policy that must appeal to almost all working fathers, yet think a policy of renationalising railways is something that is of real appeal and/or priority to 'working class' people?

That's right. I did butcher one of Labours policies from a business perspective. But then again, that probably confuses somebody like you who buys into the mainstream media mantra that anybody on the left is somehow "anti-business". I believe in supporting and promoting small local businesses, I just don't like seeing monopolization by multi nationals who appear to have their own set of rules. But again, you'll go on believing that I should be anti business and anti-competitive, just because I don't believe in a totally unregulated free market, which allows monopolies to form in the first place.

[High-On-Hibs]

Who has been criticising Labour's policies?

if policies aren't the issue, then what is the issue? A weak leader? Despite standing firm against a coup of backstabber's which very few leaders would ever manage to succeed in doing?

[lord bunberry]

There's a fundamental disconnect going on. Let's go back to Ed Milibands manifesto. 2015, Red Ed, Looney Left is back etc etc. Pilloried mercilessly by the press in a style familiar to us all by now. If you look at it dispassionately it was a do nothing, conservative (small c) let's not offend Murdoch manifesto.

-No renationalisation. None. All Industry is a private sector monopoly.
-Minimium wage raised to £8 an hour. LOWER than the Tories proposals and actually BEHIND inflation.
-Tuition fees STAY. But cut from 9k to 6k. Wow.
-NHS private sector encroachment continues. But some fund created to give it 'extra' money from a mansion tax for £2million+ homes.
-and of course, continued austerity. No growth, no risk.

It beggars belief that I am still told by some on the 'scaredy' wing of the party that the public already had an opportunity to vote for a Left wing alternative and rejected it. They didn't. It's a Lie. I suppose at least those people are at least TALKING about policy instead of Corbyns suit being crumpled or how McConnell is a terrorist sympathizer or something.

Well said. Socialism and the trade union movement have become dirty words in British politics. This thread is full of posts saying Corbyn is unelectable! No he isn't, he's only unelectable if the rest of his party don't have the balls to stand up for what the Labour Party stands for.
This country needs an alternative to what's currently on offer and it needs to bypass the main stream media to get that message across.
For us in this country I feel it won't matter as the union is doomed imo.

[cabbageandribs1875]

i'l donate a hefty £7 note to the Labour party if Corbyn ever becomes PM of the UK....











my money is safe

[Glory Lurker]

Today's utter farce sees Labour arrive at the terminus that first appeared on the timetable when Kinnock took over. The "modernisers " need to split, if only to at last show some respect to the "traditional" votes that they have been happy to suck up while pursuing their establishment ambitions. And, really, thank God there isn't a flailing Tory party to finish off, or anything.

[High-On-Hibs]

Well said. Socialism and the trade union movement have become dirty words in British politics. This thread is full of posts saying Corbyn is unelectable! No he isn't, he's only unelectable if the rest of his party don't have the balls to stand up for what the Labour Party stands for.
This country needs an alternative to what's currently on offer and it needs to bypass the main stream media to get that message across.
For us in this country I feel it won't matter as the union is doomed imo.

This exactly.

People are saying Theresa May will be s******ing behind the scenes. More like Rupert Murdoch and his brand of cronies who control the narrative in this country. The people who say Corbyn is unelectable are the same people who were fooled by the mainstream coverage of the Iraq War and other avoidable atrocities. They will always believe the big white writing over the red bar, never daring to question those who claim to have power over them.

[RyeSloan]

This exactly. People are saying Theresa May will be s******ing behind the scenes. More like Rupert Murdoch and his brand of cronies who control the narrative in this country. The people who say Corbyn is unelectable are the same people who were fooled by the mainstream coverage of the Iraq War and other avoidable atrocities. They will always believe the big white writing over the red bar, never daring to question those who claim to have power over them.

You seem quite clear on what others think and why...do you ever stop to examine your own thought processes and wonder that people might actually have the ability to think for themselves AND come to a different conclusion to you?

[Pretty Boy]

That's right. I did butcher one of Labours policies from a business perspective. But then again, that probably confuses somebody like you who buys into the mainstream media mantra that anybody on the left is somehow "anti-business". I believe in supporting and promoting small local businesses, I just don't like seeing monopolization by multi nationals who appear to have their own set of rules. But again, you'll go on believing that I should be anti business and anti-competitive, just because I don't believe in a totally unregulated free market, which allows monopolies to form in the first place.
You seem to have quite a high opinion of yourself, so much so that you have dictated to me what I believe, completely incorrectly for the record.

Anyway I'm out because as soon as people start using phrases like 'you are probably one of these' or 'you probably think that' any chance of sensible debate evaporates.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The manifesto being laid out under Corbyn is the most anti-austerity manifesto that has been laid out by Labour in decades. If people are really concerned about the austerity being implemented by a Conservative government, then they will join the Labour Party to rise up against it. The fact that you won't would suggest that a Tory government implementing ideological austerity really doesn't bother you that much. You say the leader is unelectable, then refuse to support him. Well he's certainly going to be unelectable if you convince yourself that he's unelectable and don't bother turning up to vote for him.

Does ideological austerity mean that they dont have mamy ideas?

Ok, so the fact that i wont vote for him is my fault, amd actually i need to move closer to him, to make him successful.

And here is me plodding along umder the misconception that parties need to chase my vote, i didnt realiae i had a moral duty to support corbyn.

And your railing against the media, which i agree will have some effect. So how come the snp have manahed to sweep away the established party despite the media? And who were that established parry again? Oh yeah, the one we all need to move towards to make them successful.

You are like a little ball of anger spitting invective because you are arrogant in your belief that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

The uk is a conservarive country. Labout, to win need to give people reason to vote for it, and rhey need to effectively borrow votes. A leader on the left of the spectrum will struggle to do that.

[Hibbyradge]

if policies aren't the issue, then what is the issue? A weak leader? Despite standing firm against a coup of backstabber's which very few leaders would ever manage to succeed in doing?

One reason is that he's ineffectual, as evidenced by his pathetic contribution to the Remain campaign and his inability to even mention the resignation of IDS from the cabinet at PQMs.

His "Lucy from Tunbridge Wells" routine was curious for a while, but only served to make him look ridiculous and, yes, weak.

And another huge reason, is that his personal politics and history will frighten off all the ex-Labour voters who he needs to win back, if he's going to stand any chance at all. He's an unbelievable 8 points behind the Tories at this stage of the electoral cycle, and the media haven't even started on him.

You obviously agree that the media will play a significant part in the election given your hugely patronising comments that, "It's the most frustrating thing when it's blatantly obvious that people have been watching the BBC, Sky News and reading Murdochs rags. But one thing they didn't do was bother to look at the parties manifestos.

The vast majority of people go to the polling booth having no idea what it is they are actually voting for. They just remember those 'controversial' sound-bites that have been fed to them through their TV sets thinking they're making an intelligent well informed decision."

and,

"They will always believe the big white writing over the red bar, never daring to question those who claim to have power over them".

[High-On-Hibs]

One reason is that he's ineffectual, as evidenced by his pathetic contribution to the Remain campaign and his inability to even mention the resignation of IDS from the cabinet at PQMs.

His "Lucy from Tunbridge Wells" routine was curious for a while, but only served to make him look ridiculous and, yes, weak.

And another huge reason, is that his personal politics and history will frighten off all the ex-Labour voters who he needs to win back, if he's going to stand any chance at all. He's an unbelievable 8 points behind the Tories at this stage of the electoral cycle, and the media haven't even started on him.

You obviously agree that the media will play a significant part in the election given your hugely patronising comments that, "It's the most frustrating thing when it's blatantly obvious that people have been watching the BBC, Sky News and reading Murdochs rags. But one thing they didn't do was bother to look at the parties manifestos.

The vast majority of people go to the polling booth having no idea what it is they are actually voting for. They just remember those 'controversial' sound-bites that have been fed to them through their TV sets thinking they're making an intelligent well informed decision."

and,

"They will always believe the big white writing over the red bar, never daring to question those who claim to have power over them".

People have a go at Corbyn for not trying hard enough in the EU referendum. Where were all of these MPs that have been stabbing him in the back? They weren't out on the door steps trying to convince people to remain. They knew that brexit would be the perfect opportunity to stick the knives in. They put dirty politics before the country.

I said what I genuinely believe. I couldn't care less if it came across as patronising. I've see how easily the mainstream sways peoples views, without them ever bothering to question things. These people are the first to complain about the way things are and the last to do anything about it.

[Hibbyradge]

There's a fundamental disconnect going on. Let's go back to Ed Milibands manifesto. 2015, Red Ed, Looney Left is back etc etc. Pilloried mercilessly by the press in a style familiar to us all by now. If you look at it dispassionately it was a do nothing, conservative (small c) let's not offend Murdoch manifesto.

-No renationalisation. None. All Industry is a private sector monopoly.
-Minimium wage raised to £8 an hour. LOWER than the Tories proposals and actually BEHIND inflation.
-Tuition fees STAY. But cut from 9k to 6k. Wow.
-NHS private sector encroachment continues. But some fund created to give it 'extra' money from a mansion tax for £2million+ homes.
-and of course, continued austerity. No growth, no risk.

It beggars belief that I am still told by some on the 'scaredy' wing of the party that the public already had an opportunity to vote for a Left wing alternative and rejected it. They didn't. It's a Lie. I suppose at least those people are at least TALKING about policy instead of Corbyns suit being crumpled or how McConnell is a terrorist sympathizer or something.

What beggars belief is that people think that, in the face of the electorate rejecting "red Ed's policies", the way to get people to vote for Labour is to offer someone on the Party's extreme left wing. :crazy:

The turnout at the 2015 GE was the highest since 1997. Who did all the people who wanted a real left alternative vote for? No one, because there wasn't a "real left alternative"?

Let's have a look at what history tells us, just for comparison purposes. The last time we had a "real left alternative" candidate for PM, was in 1979 and 1983, when Michael Foot was the Labour Party leader.

He won 42.2% of the vote against inexperienced Margaret Thatcher in 1979. Thatcher hammered him by polling 53.4%. The liberals got less than 2%.

By 1983, Thatcher was hated by the left so great things were expected of our man of the people leader. Foot managed to poll 32% to Thatcher's 61%.

By 1987, Thatcher were utterly despised by everyone I knew. People openly talked about their fantasy of getting a kitty together and paying someone to kill her. She had decimated the mining industry, crushed the TU movement, sold off all the council houses, and privatisation was full steam ahead.

Thatcher still won. 58% to 35%.

Even Major won in 92 by 51% to 41%!

Then Blair came in and won 3 on the bounce.

[Pretty Boy]

People have a go at Corbyn for not trying hard enough in the EU referendum. Where were all of these MPs that have been stabbing him in the back? They weren't out on the door steps trying to convince people to remain. They knew that brexit would be the perfect opportunity to stick the knives in. They put dirty politics before the country.

I said what I genuinely believe. I couldn't care less if it came across as patronising. I've see how easily the mainstream sways peoples views, without them ever bothering to question things. These people are the first to complain about the way things are and the last to do anything about it.

Are media sources that aren't mainstream somehow immune from carrying an agenda and attempting to sway people. Does one who gets much of their info from say Bella Caledonia have a more objective view of the world than someone who reads The Guardian?

[Geo_1875]

One reason is that he's ineffectual, as evidenced by his pathetic contribution to the Remain campaign and his inability to even mention the resignation of IDS from the cabinet at PQMs.

His "Lucy from Tunbridge Wells" routine was curious for a while, but only served to make him look ridiculous and, yes, weak.

And another huge reason, is that his personal politics and history will frighten off all the ex-Labour voters who he needs to win back, if he's going to stand any chance at all. He's an unbelievable 8 points behind the Tories at this stage of the electoral cycle, and the media haven't even started on him.

You obviously agree that the media will play a significant part in the election given your hugely patronising comments that, "It's the most frustrating thing when it's blatantly obvious that people have been watching the BBC, Sky News and reading Murdochs rags. But one thing they didn't do was bother to look at the parties manifestos.

The vast majority of people go to the polling booth having no idea what it is they are actually voting for. They just remember those 'controversial' sound-bites that have been fed to them through their TV sets thinking they're making an intelligent well informed decision."

and,

"They will always believe the big white writing over the red bar, never daring to question those who claim to have power over them".

Have you been in a coma recently?

[Hibbyradge]

Have you been in a coma recently?

It's a figure of speech.

Wait till you see what they unleash on him in the run up to a GE.

[pacoluna]

I see Ian Murray doesn't want a snap general election :hmmm: wonder why...

[Hibbyradge]

People have a go at Corbyn for not trying hard enough in the EU referendum. Where were all of these MPs that have been stabbing him in the back? They weren't out on the door steps trying to convince people to remain. They knew that brexit would be the perfect opportunity to stick the knives in. They put dirty politics before the country.

I said what I genuinely believe. I couldn't care less if it came across as patronising. I've see how easily the mainstream sways peoples views, without them ever bothering to question things. These people are the first to complain about the way things are and the last to do anything about it.

Stop making things up! Your first paragraph is nonsense. Of course the PLP were out campaigning. However, the media generally went to Corbyn for the Labour Party’s views on the referendum. He was clearly lukewarm.

Plus, when Tom Watson made some conciliatory remarks to woo voters with concerns about immigration, Corbyn moved quickly, the only time in the campaign he did so, to deliberately contradict hom.

Your second paragraph only serves to back up my assertion that the power of the media will ensure that Labour won't win with Corbyn as leader.

[Hibbyradge]

I seen Ian Murray doesn't want a snap general election :hmmm: wonder why...

Feart that Corbyn might win? :dunno:

[pacoluna]

Feart that Corbyn might win? :dunno:

I think its more to do with labour probably having 0 scottish MPs instead of 1 with HIMSELF being the obvious casualty..

[marinello59]

I see Ian Murray doesn't want a snap general election :hmmm: wonder why...

Let's hope we don't have a snap general election. The UK As a whole needs stability now, not more uncertainty. May will only call it if she is certain she will strengthen her hand anyway.
If we are to have IndyRef2 then the last thing we want is yet another election in Scotland getting in the way. A high turnout will be vital if Yes is to win and voter fatigue could prove fatal.

[Hibbyradge]

I think its more to do with labour probably having 0 scottish MPs instead of 1 with HIMSELF being the obvious casualty..

I was kidding, sorry.

[JeMeSouviens]

What beggars belief is that people think that, in the face of the electorate rejecting "red Ed's policies", the way to get people to vote for Labour is to offer someone on the Party's extreme left wing. :crazy:

The turnout at the 2015 GE was the highest since 1997. Who did all the people who wanted a real left alternative vote for? No one, because there wasn't a "real left alternative"?

Let's have a look at what history tells us, just for comparison purposes. The last time we had a "real left alternative" candidate for PM, was in 1979 and 1983, when Michael Foot was the Labour Party leader.

He won 42.2% of the vote against inexperienced Margaret Thatcher in 1979. Thatcher hammered him by polling 53.4%. The liberals got less than 2%.

By 1983, Thatcher was hated by the left so great things were expected of our man of the people leader. Foot managed to poll 32% to Thatcher's 61%.

By 1987, Thatcher were utterly despised by everyone I knew. People openly talked about their fantasy of getting a kitty together and paying someone to kill her. She had decimated the mining industry, crushed the TU movement, sold off all the council houses, and privatisation was full steam ahead.

Thatcher still won. 58% to 35%.

Even Major won in 92 by 51% to 41%!

Then Blair came in and won 3 on the bounce.


No, 79 was the incumbent moderate Jim Callaghan. Foot stood in 83 and Kinnock in 87 and 92. The Kinnock of 87 was still regarded as something of a left winger (Foot's protege), still supported unilateral disarmement etc but had just fought an internal battle to expel Militant.

Also, your numbers are way off.

79 - Tory 43.9%, Lab 36.9%, Lib 13.8%

83 - Tory 42.4%, Lab 27.6%, SDP/Lib Alliance 25.4%

87 - Tory 42.2%, Lab 30.8%, SDP/Lib Alliance 22.6%

92 - Tory 41.9%, Lab 34.4%, Lib Dem 17.8%


I think polling shows people actually quite liked Ed Milliband's policies, they just didn't like him or at least didn't regard him as leadership material. For Corbyn you could probably ramp up that "leadership deficit" by about x100 and the thought of what the tabloids would do with his past links to Irish republicanism, radical Palestine, radical Islamism etc. should make anyone in Labour shudder.

[hibsbollah]

Are media sources that aren't mainstream somehow immune from carrying an agenda and attempting to sway people. Does one who gets much of their info from say Bella Caledonia have a more objective view of the world than someone who reads The Guardian?

Well each individual needs to make an objective assessment of what makes more sense, dont they? But in terms of mainstream media, its not a battle of equals. it's about which source represents power in society, who has the loudest voices. Clearly that isn't Bella Caledonia. A lot of their recent articles are refreshing because when I objectively analyse what I'm being told by the MSM it doesn't make any sense. And BC is eye opening quite often.

For example, the mainstream orthodoxy you will hear repeated ad infinitum is 'Britons will never vote for a Left wing manifesto because they tried that in 1983 with Michael Foot and he lost'.

This makes no sense to me for a number of reasons. Objectively, Labour lost that election because the three most senior figures at the top of the party Shirley Williams David Owen and Roy Jenkins walked out overnight and started up the SDP. Total chaos and pandemonium. Nobody knew who was in power, SDP were overnight Top of the opinion polls overnight, I remember it well. NOBODY could have won that election for Labour. But that's not the story that's told by the MSM, instead we see footage of Foot stumbling on the cenotaph steps again and again.

And of course even if you dont accept that analysis, you just have to use logic. Are we really saying because one set of events happened over 30 years ago they will continue to happen forever? Will Hibs never win the scottish cup because they havent done for 114 years? It just makes no sense. But that's the orthodoxy we keep hearing.

So when Kuennsberg et al remind me of Michael Foot ad nauseam, as if this is the major political lesson of the 20th century (when in fact it's Dont Have a Major Frontbench Split Immediately Before An Election), I switch off. Because I think I've seen through the crap I'm being fed. And that's just one policy example. If Bella Caledonia ever become the voice of power I might feel that way about them too.

Chomsky said something about 'the most effective way to ensure compliance is to ensure lively political debate within a very narrow spectrum of beliefs'. I feel that's becoming more and more true with every day that passes.

Edit: I wouldn't patronize any individual by accusing them of being brainwashed by orthodoxy because they don't agree with my politics. But when you look at society there is a dripdrip effect. People are influenced by The Express running daily headlines about immigrants stealing Christmas or raping chickens or whatever for years and years. Even if you don't read those papers we see them in the corner shop and the garage forecourt and they become the norm. Psychologically it's impossible to ignore. And I honestly believe it's the most powerful tool a state has at its disposal.