Discussion
Cobnapint said:
The definition of Masochism...
Corbyn discussing his leadership on this mornings Marr "I'm not going anywhere, I'm enjoying every moment of it."
Mrs TB managed to sit through some of that and said he described The Observer aka The Guardian On Sunday as offering a balanced view Corbyn discussing his leadership on this mornings Marr "I'm not going anywhere, I'm enjoying every moment of it."
while attacking other newspapers for dissing his shiny red Party. A lot has been said of Corbyn and here's some more...he's basically a pillock floundering way out if his depth. Sticking to the wrong principles excuses nothing.Cobnapint said:
Corbyn discussing his leadership on this mornings Marr "I'm not going anywhere, I'm enjoying every moment of it."
The first part is a fact but he hasn't seen the irony, the second has to be a self delusion .... doesn't it?I mean is he really enjoying the mess his party is in, the friction, the destruction, and his 'leadership' being viewed as piss poor? To use the term 'enjoying it' a enjoying what exactly??
Is he some sort of anarchist Commie sleeper planted in the '70's and now activated to fulfil a task he hasn't realised is redundant???
Edited by V6Pushfit on Sunday 29th November 10:47
Robert Harris:
"After more than 75 years of active internationalism and willingness to use force, it is Corbyn who is the aberration. As the historian Glen O’Hara pointed out recently in the New Statesman: “Labour has never before been led by a politician so far from its historic centre of gravity.”
...
By his disastrous widening of the franchise for electing the party leader, Ed Miliband has handed control of it to what a previous leader, Hugh Gaitskell, memorably denounced as “pacifists, unilateralists and fellow travellers” — people not only antipathetic to ordinary voters but anathema even to most ordinary Labour MPs. It will be hard, it may even be impossible, to get the institution back.
The Corbynites may not be very good at the traditional business of politics, but they are superb at taking control of a party apparatus. Their poll numbers are plunging; on Thursday they may even lose Oldham, one of their safest seats. They don’t seem to care.
If you have been on the hard left all your political life and are used to being part of fringe socialist sects that attract 1% or 2% of the vote, a rating of 28% must feel like the crest of a wave..."
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/...
"After more than 75 years of active internationalism and willingness to use force, it is Corbyn who is the aberration. As the historian Glen O’Hara pointed out recently in the New Statesman: “Labour has never before been led by a politician so far from its historic centre of gravity.”
...
By his disastrous widening of the franchise for electing the party leader, Ed Miliband has handed control of it to what a previous leader, Hugh Gaitskell, memorably denounced as “pacifists, unilateralists and fellow travellers” — people not only antipathetic to ordinary voters but anathema even to most ordinary Labour MPs. It will be hard, it may even be impossible, to get the institution back.
The Corbynites may not be very good at the traditional business of politics, but they are superb at taking control of a party apparatus. Their poll numbers are plunging; on Thursday they may even lose Oldham, one of their safest seats. They don’t seem to care.
If you have been on the hard left all your political life and are used to being part of fringe socialist sects that attract 1% or 2% of the vote, a rating of 28% must feel like the crest of a wave..."
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/...
I've just seen the pictures of Jeremy out in his shell suit....
With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
To many of those on the left there's no point in being in power if they have to compromise their principles to win votes, they're not the most pragmatic or practical bunch, and the fact that this likely means a Conservative government in perpetuity doesn't seem to register as a problem.
It all works out well in practice, Corbyn et al get to sit on the sidelines and protest about pretty much everything, which they love doing, and the Conservatives get on with running the country, which they do much better than Labour, win win.
It all works out well in practice, Corbyn et al get to sit on the sidelines and protest about pretty much everything, which they love doing, and the Conservatives get on with running the country, which they do much better than Labour, win win.
The Hypno-Toad said:
I've just seen the pictures of Jeremy out in his shell suit....
With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
(from Twitter) Want to feel old? This is Brian Harvey from East 17 today.With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
RYH64E said:
To many of those on the left there's no point in being in power if they have to compromise their principles to win votes, they're not the most pragmatic or practical bunch, and the fact that this likely means a Conservative government in perpetuity doesn't seem to register as a problem.
I would much rather have a man of principles than one who sells out for votes.However, I don't like Corbyn's principles and the Tories are sellouts.
If I had to vote today I don't think I'd bother
V6Pushfit said:
Is he some sort of anarchist Commie sleeper planted in the '70's and now activated to fulfil a task he hasn't realised is redundant???
He's a bit obvious. Although I'm pretty sure that come the Soviet invasion, the likes of Corbyn, Livingstone and Scargill would have been puppet leaders.The Hypno-Toad said:
I've just seen the pictures of Jeremy out in his shell suit....
With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
And in recent vox pop series of interviews with the folks of the Peoples' Republic of Islington, some Muslims stated that they would definitely vote Labour.With that and his desperate determination to make sure that the decision the party comes to about bombing Syria is the one that HE wants, the image that it sends out to our enemies is very worrying. It will hopefully never happen but they must be praying that he somehow comes to power in the UK.
Still think the word Traitor comes to mind.
Edited by Langweilig on Sunday 29th November 12:48
Breadvan72 said:
Well written and complies with my memory of the post 50s labour era. But the political history referenced, whilst being fascinating and endlessly arguable, is not the relevant bit here I think, over and above Corbyn being more or less unprecedented in that time, and probably before. The critical thing is what happens next.I reckon there must be a next. A leader who is so out of step with his mps is virtually unique. Even Thatcher, at the time she was most unpopular, had conditional support of the tories in power. The right were a wee bit anti, but that was in her favour for most of the others. There was talk at the time of her being ousted but circumstances dictated otherwise.
Oldham might well be the key. If the party does poorly, or if, unlikely though it is, it is a possibility, they lose the seat, then that's when 'next' might be generated.
Outing Corbyn is a pointless exercise without the voting system being changed. Milliband might well have generated the end of the labour party by that rather thoughtless move.
A new party is a possibility, although the success of the gang of four is unlikely this time due to the transparency of most labour politicians. Milliband senior might have enough public image but I can't see him returning to the stage without some assurance of being elected.
It is the middle ground that any new party will need to target, and there's already the lib/dems in that slot.
Whatever they do, it needs to be done soon enough for the party to shuffle off the disaster of Corbyn, either by getting rid of him or by moving away. Leaving Corbyn in place would suit any new/rejuvinated lib/dems party.
The referendum result will be critical I think. If it is very close, with just a little in favour, then there will be tory infighting. If there is a significant majority against staying then the lib/dems will have to come up with a new policy.
If the financial situation deteriorates significantly in the run up to the next election, or there are major public order issues - perhaps both - then voters could well look for an alternative.
We might well be living in interesting times politically, at least in the UK. If it wasn't so serious it would be tremendous fun.
voyds9 said:
I would much rather have a man of principles than one who sells out for votes.
However, I don't like Corbyn's principles and the Tories are sellouts.
If I had to vote today I don't think I'd bother
The only person less popular than Margaret Thatcher with the Labour Party faithful is the man who won three consecutive general elections, Tony Blair. Can't say I disagree with them.However, I don't like Corbyn's principles and the Tories are sellouts.
If I had to vote today I don't think I'd bother
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I still find it funny and slightly alarming that Labour MPs want to overthrow Corbyn whilst Labour Party members absolutely overwhelmingly gave him a mandate.
Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
More like how staggering the tiny biased window of voting allowed a nutter in in the first place. Many 'members' were new and paid up to vote, therefore skewing the system in favour of someone unable to actually lead. Spongebob Squarepants could have won with that kind of system. Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I still find it funny and slightly alarming that Labour MPs want to overthrow Corbyn whilst Labour Party members absolutely overwhelmingly gave him a mandate.
Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
They are not necessarily out of touch with "the electorate". They are out of touch with that ultra left wing element of the electorate that was motivated enough to join the party to ensure a similarly left wing individual was elected leader.Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
Not quite the same thing.
I think Oldham will give a good idea as to where "the electorate" has moved politically.
V6Pushfit said:
More like how staggering the tiny biased window of voting allowed a nutter in in the first place. Many 'members' were new and paid up to vote, therefore skewing the system in favour of someone unable to actually lead. Spongebob Squarepants could have won with that kind of system.
How did it? How was it biased?That's a genuine question btw.
I get that the people who pay up to join a political party of any leaning are probably more passionate than the average voter who just turns up at election time, but I still struggle with how Corbyn can have anything other than a clear mandate?
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: How did it? How was it biased?
That's a genuine question btw.
I get that the people who pay up to join a political party of any leaning are probably more passionate than the average voter who just turns up at election time, but I still struggle with how Corbyn can have anything other than a clear mandate?
Only based on the rules that his party have adopted when it comes to leadership elections - which were only recently changed. He most certainly hasn't got any sort of mandate from the nation.That's a genuine question btw.
I get that the people who pay up to join a political party of any leaning are probably more passionate than the average voter who just turns up at election time, but I still struggle with how Corbyn can have anything other than a clear mandate?
Eric Mc said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I still find it funny and slightly alarming that Labour MPs want to overthrow Corbyn whilst Labour Party members absolutely overwhelmingly gave him a mandate.
Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
They are not necessarily out of touch with "the electorate". They are out of touch with that ultra left wing element of the electorate that was motivated enough to join the party to ensure a similarly left wing individual was elected leader.Staggering just how far out of touch MPs seem to be with the electorate.
Not quite the same thing.
I think Oldham will give a good idea as to where "the electorate" has moved politically.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff