Discussion
Halb said:
Corbyn didn't need the £3-ers.
"However, Corbyn was elected Labour Party Leader in a landslide victory on 12 September 2015, having received 59.5% of first-preference votes thereby winning the first round of voting; it has been calculated that Corbyn would still have won in the first round with 51% of votes, even without "£3 registered supporters", having gained the support of 49.6% of full members and 57.6% of affiliated (Trade Union) supporters."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn#Leader...
That's the beauty of the whole thing."However, Corbyn was elected Labour Party Leader in a landslide victory on 12 September 2015, having received 59.5% of first-preference votes thereby winning the first round of voting; it has been calculated that Corbyn would still have won in the first round with 51% of votes, even without "£3 registered supporters", having gained the support of 49.6% of full members and 57.6% of affiliated (Trade Union) supporters."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn#Leader...
Labour would have fundamentally delivered itself a sickening punch in the nuts by electing Corbyn even without the likes of us £3 #ToriesForCorbyn gits.
The margin would have been smaller though, and his mandate less pronounced.
With our help, however, Corbyn and his chums have convinced themselves they have a mandate to keep punching themselves in the nuts for the foreseeable future.
Sweet. In fact, Cartman Sweeeet.
KTF said:
XCP said:
What does it mean?
It shows how the voters who have voted (left side) would vote now. For example the people who voted Conservative have mainly stayed Conservative but a few have switched to Labour, some to UKIP, some Dont Know, etc.This line from that Guardian article really highlights how on even a run of the mill policy debate JC is so out of step with the public.
More than three-quarters (76%) of all respondents believe there should be an upper limit on the amount of welfare a household can claim. Here Corbyn’s avowed opposition to a benefits cap puts him at odds not only with broader public opinion but also with Labour supporters and recent converts to the party.
Now having principles about Nuclear War, The monarchy and Foreign conflicts, might win you admirers if you take a stand as a Democrat, pacifist etc. Then it could be noble or admirable.
But on a managerial policy such as Benefits, you CANNOT be so out of step with your electorate, he is leaving no room for debate or compromise, and as such can never win a wider election.
I actually think Labour will even lose a 14000 seat majority at the upcoming by election.
KTF said:
XCP said:
What does it mean?
It shows how the voters who have voted (left side) would vote now. For example the people who voted Conservative have mainly stayed Conservative but a few have switched to Labour, some to UKIP, some Dont Know, etc.turbobloke said:
Breadvan72 said:
As others have noted, the real idiot here is Miliband, who as well as being hopeless as leader did the stupid three quid thing.
Who can forget the smug grin on his face after his last minute switch of sides, and at having humiliated guileless Dave. My view is Milli thought he'd fired the first salvo in the battle for the 2015 election. In fact it turns out his Labour-propelled ineptitude-seeking missile has turned round and is now heading back to base at a very high velocity.
I wonder if Ed has taken the Saddam Hussein tactic of vanishing down a hole to grow a beard?
Anyway, there's a deliciousness to the fact that later today, Jezbollah's Stop The War rent-a-thugs are holding a demonstration outside the offices of Labour HQ. Yes I know! I'd like to think Jez will be there too, railing against the evil Tory warmongers inside, AKA his own shadow cabinet.
Straight talking honest politics...
Stickyfinger said:
Lets hope they don't loose, I have £3.00 and some popcorn invested in this show
Tory voter then eh? I wish I had invested too it's a classic case of buying-in to a nutcase to achieve the greater objective. A great investment and it's better than a sitcom. I hope it all carries on as its the best political entertainment for years, the Conservatives seem to be silent on the Corbyn ineptitude and for good reason as they can just watch him destroy Labour from within.In the interests of giving balance to this thread, I'd say that whilst I could never vote for Jezzer I do respect him as a principled politician who is a tricky position now as opposion leader and unsuited to the work.
He should have never had the chance at this, Labour have really messed up with letting three quid party member elect the leader, they're going to have to change that st to PLP only. As something of a centrist I could just about entertain the idea of voting for a David Millipede/Liz Kendall type blairite, but this hard left experiment is dead end, minority politics and going nowhere.
He should have never had the chance at this, Labour have really messed up with letting three quid party member elect the leader, they're going to have to change that st to PLP only. As something of a centrist I could just about entertain the idea of voting for a David Millipede/Liz Kendall type blairite, but this hard left experiment is dead end, minority politics and going nowhere.
XJ40 said:
In the interests of giving balance to this thread, I'd say that whilst I could never vote for Jezzer I do respect him as a principled politician who is a tricky position now as opposion leader and unsuited to the work.
ISWYM but his principles of self-awareness and the principle of supporting the greater good of the greater number (live long and prosper) ought to have led him to step down or not put his name forward in the first place. Also the fact that his principles are largely or wholly untenable does have some part to play in all this. turbobloke said:
ISWYM but his principles of self-awareness and the principle of supporting the greater good of the greater number (live long and prosper) ought to have led him to step down or not put his name forward in the first place. Also the fact that his principles are largely or wholly untenable does have some part to play in all this.
what a shame he didn't reveal these opinions before the Labour leader election......oh hang on he did didn't he.With him Abbott and Livingston now on the TV daily its a bit like back to the 80's and that didn't go well for Labour then either.
johnxjsc1985 said:
turbobloke said:
ISWYM but his principles of self-awareness and the principle of supporting the greater good of the greater number (live long and prosper) ought to have led him to step down or not put his name forward in the first place. Also the fact that his principles are largely or wholly untenable does have some part to play in all this.
what a shame he didn't reveal these opinions before the Labour leader election......oh hang on he did didn't he.With him Abbott and Livingston now on the TV daily its a bit like back to the 80's and that didn't go well for Labour then either.
XJ40 said:
In the interests of giving balance to this thread, I'd say that whilst I could never vote for Jezzer I do respect him as a principled politician who is a tricky position now as opposion leader and unsuited to the work.
He should have never had the chance at this, Labour have really messed up with letting three quid party member elect the leader, they're going to have to change that st to PLP only. As something of a centrist I could just about entertain the idea of voting for a David Millipede/Liz Kendall type blairite, but this hard left experiment is dead end, minority politics and going nowhere.
He is not principled, unless taking the attitude that the West is always wrong is a principle. He is an ignorant old man with no ability to think hard enough to adapt his ideas to fit a changed world.He should have never had the chance at this, Labour have really messed up with letting three quid party member elect the leader, they're going to have to change that st to PLP only. As something of a centrist I could just about entertain the idea of voting for a David Millipede/Liz Kendall type blairite, but this hard left experiment is dead end, minority politics and going nowhere.
Zod said:
He is an ignorant old man with no ability to think hard enough to adapt his ideas to fit a changed world.
At the same time, there's not much wrong with the statement below. I have almost no time for Corbyn (and I speak as a Labour voter who's now seriously out of step with his party), but I'm inclined to his view on this issue, at least in respect of whether the Government should be supported on the issue as it's been presented to the HoC.Where I'm out of step with him is that I don't think there's any circumstance in which he'd commit to a military campaign.
I simply don't believe that there's any circumstance in which this will be successful without Allied ground troops getting involved, and despite best efforts, some will die. So let's be really clear what it is we're committing to, what the dependencies are, and what we actually hope to achieve. Because people are going to die - not just the nasty IS types, unfortunately - and we have to be prepared for that.
Corbyn said:
I’m saying to every MP, you make up your own mind, there’s no hiding place behind a whipping arrangement or not, it’s your decision on behalf of your constituents on whether or not we should commit British troops into yet another war in the Middle East with no end game in sight, no proper plan in sight, a mythical 75,000-strong apparently unknown Free Syrian Army, the operation which is also infiltrated by a lot of Jihadist elements and I think we are going in to a very dangerous situation altogether.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff