Jeremy Corbyn

[CaptainSlow]

technodup said:

ff the top of my head...

They got their AV referendum.
They prevented boundary reform.
They got their raise in personal allowance.
They had Nick Clegg lording it as DPM for a few years.

That's plenty for a minor partner to be fair.

They also gave Cameron the excuse to renege on his EU Referendum pledge.

[RYH64E]

Johnnytheboy said:

RYH64E said:

I'm a die hard Conservative so have no real interest in the Labour Party, but I do accept the right of party members to have a party that truly reflects their views and aspirations, even if that party would be currently unelectable.

Assuming for a moment the Tory leadership rules were as batcrap crazy as Labour's...

How would you feel if every far-right BNP/EDL/NF maniac in the UK joined the Tory Party (which currently has a tiny membership, don't forget), elected whoever the most hang-em, flog-em current Tory MP was, then started trying to remake the Tory Party in their image?

Would the incumbent MPs have any right to feel that 'their' party had been hijacked?

Or would lots of little anti-JawKnees be right in saying that said proto-fascist MP had won the leadership by an overwhelming majority, and the MPs should rally behind him, as the party sailed off into electoral oblivion?

Don't forget that without the support of a significant number of MPs Corbyn wouldn't have been on the ballot paper in the first place.

The Labour Party is funded by the unions and it's members, batst crazy is par for the course imo.

[SplatSpeed]

JawKnee said:

Wow. Thousands turn out in the pouring rain to support Corbyn. Can't think of any other political figure in the country who could elicit the same response.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news...

they needed a wash!

[hidetheelephants]

RYH64E said:

hidetheelephants said:

This narrative that it's all the doing of blairites is bullst; if he can't even persuade the likes of Alexander, Murray, Nandy or even Benn to sit in his cabinet he's about as useful as a party leader as a one-legged man in an arsekicking contest.

Who does the Labour Party represent, it's MPs or the members? Ultimately MPs are just paid employees of the party, if they don't agree with the majority views of the party members then they're in the wrong party.

If the members want a true left wing party then they need some new MPs, I can see a lot of deselections coming once JC is confirmed as leader. Similarly, if the MPs want to represent a centre ground party with any hope of forming a government then they need to defect to the Conservatives. It's very rare that an MP is elected on his or her own merits, it's almost always the case that voters tick the Labour or Conservative box on the ballot paper. I voted for Tim Yeo year after year despite detesting the man, he got my vote because he was the Conservative candidate and for no other reason, it's the same in Labour constituencies. If MPs resign the Labour whip and continue as independants they'll have a few years of glory, but come the next election the official Labour candidate will elected in almost evry case.

I'm a die hard Conservative so have no real interest in the Labour Party, but I do accept the right of party members to have a party that truly reflects their views and aspirations, even if that party would be currently unelectable.

The MPs represent the views of their electorate, represent the party manifesto, and a distance after that the party; but they do all these things conditionally otherwise it's not really parliamentary democracy. Naturally being human beings they'd like to be re-elected in 2020 so they want a leader who isn't the electoral equivalent of leprosy and doesn't harbour nonsense ideas like wanting parliament to debate convert operations by special forces. If the party members don't like the manifesto then they need to get on and change it, although Dear Leader seems unclear about what to replace it with.

Edited by hidetheelephants on Tuesday 2nd August 20:05

[Kermit power]

silent ninja said:

I think the attack on Corbyn is an attack on democracy. Senior MPs are even tabling their own leadership within the party, like a splinter group. Then they want to apply to the courts to take over the party or possibly launch a sub party. So if democracy doesn't work, a coup and dodgy legal loopholes are the answer?

Labour MPs are fundamentally making a mockery of the system. There is a rather sinister force against Corbyn. The MPs attacking him are essentially Blairites who are conservative in reality. What we had with Blair was no different to what the conservatives offer, just repackaged with left leaning slogans. Corbyn genuinely represents a shift back to the roots. Owen Smith - look at his history, he's a lobbyist for corporations and has no soul. There's nothing Labour about him, but he's clearly going to get the backing of the money men. It stinks

Whetherypu agree with corbyn politics or not, he won the right to lead. This whole thing makes a mockery of democracy and it's our so called elected leaders that are leading this.

The big unknown in all of this is what proportion of the people who voted for Corbyn did so because they believe in Corbyn's policies and want to see him governing the country, and what proportion did so because they reckon he's the best bet for keeping the Conservatives in power for a generation.

If Corbyn is still in power at the next General Election and the Labour vote collapses (as we have to fervently hope and believe it will), then I think you'd have to accept that it was the Labour party electoral system which made a mockery of democracy, not the Labour MPs who are currently trying to fix the problem.

If, on the other hand, disaster strikes and Corbyn actually wins, then yes, you'll be right, it's the current Labour MPs trying to distort democracy.

[Andy Zarse]

Kermit power said:

silent ninja said:

I think the attack on Corbyn is an attack on democracy. Senior MPs are even tabling their own leadership within the party, like a splinter group. Then they want to apply to the courts to take over the party or possibly launch a sub party. So if democracy doesn't work, a coup and dodgy legal loopholes are the answer?

Labour MPs are fundamentally making a mockery of the system. There is a rather sinister force against Corbyn. The MPs attacking him are essentially Blairites who are conservative in reality. What we had with Blair was no different to what the conservatives offer, just repackaged with left leaning slogans. Corbyn genuinely represents a shift back to the roots. Owen Smith - look at his history, he's a lobbyist for corporations and has no soul. There's nothing Labour about him, but he's clearly going to get the backing of the money men. It stinks

Whetherypu agree with corbyn politics or not, he won the right to lead. This whole thing makes a mockery of democracy and it's our so called elected leaders that are leading this.

The big unknown in all of this is what proportion of the people who voted for Corbyn did so because they believe in Corbyn's policies and want to see him governing the country, and what proportion did so because they reckon he's the best bet for keeping the Conservatives in power for a generation.

If Corbyn is still in power at the next General Election and the Labour vote collapses (as we have to fervently hope and believe it will), then I think you'd have to accept that it was the Labour party electoral system which made a mockery of democracy, not the Labour MPs who are currently trying to fix the problem.

If, on the other hand, disaster strikes and Corbyn actually wins, then yes, you'll be right, it's the current Labour MPs trying to distort democracy.

Added to which, Corbyn has promised mandatory reselection of all Labour parliamentary candidates (once he has managed to inflitrate his hard left supporters into the necessary positions within every constituency). Why on earth should these MPs be loyal to a leader who has effectively told them they are sacked and their career in politics is over? It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas, which if you think about it is currently a good metaphor for the entire party.

[JawKnee]

silent ninja said:

I think the attack on Corbyn is an attack on democracy. Senior MPs are even tabling their own leadership within the party, like a splinter group. Then they want to apply to the courts to take over the party or possibly launch a sub party. So if democracy doesn't work, a coup and dodgy legal loopholes are the answer?

Labour MPs are fundamentally making a mockery of the system. There is a rather sinister force against Corbyn. The MPs attacking him are essentially Blairites who are conservative in reality. What we had with Blair was no different to what the conservatives offer, just repackaged with left leaning slogans. Corbyn genuinely represents a shift back to the roots. Owen Smith - look at his history, he's a lobbyist for corporations and has no soul. There's nothing Labour about him, but he's clearly going to get the backing of the money men. It stinks

Whetherypu agree with corbyn politics or not, he won the right to lead. This whole thing makes a mockery of democracy and it's our so called elected leaders that are leading this.

Edited by silent ninja on Tuesday 2nd August 07:26

Underrated post.

[iphonedyou]

JawKnee said:

Underrated post.

I actually agree with you. I particularly liked the bit where he said our elected leaders are leading this. I thought that was very deservedly underrated, given it's a total misunderstanding of what's actually happening.

So, yes. An underrated post.

[RYH64E]

Andy Zarse said:

Added to which, Corbyn has promised mandatory reselection of all Labour parliamentary candidates (once he has managed to inflitrate his hard left supporters into the necessary positions within every constituency). Why on earth should these MPs be loyal to a leader who has effectively told them they are sacked and their career in politics is over? It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas, which if you think about it is currently a good metaphor for the entire party.

It could be argued that these particular turkeys voted for Christmas when they nominated JC for the leadership election, without the support of 35 Labour MPs he wouldn't even have been on the ballot.

[Andy Zarse]

RYH64E said:

Andy Zarse said:

Added to which, Corbyn has promised mandatory reselection of all Labour parliamentary candidates (once he has managed to inflitrate his hard left supporters into the necessary positions within every constituency). Why on earth should these MPs be loyal to a leader who has effectively told them they are sacked and their career in politics is over? It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas, which if you think about it is currently a good metaphor for the entire party.

It could be argued that these particular turkeys voted for Christmas when they nominated JC for the leadership election, without the support of 35 Labour MPs he wouldn't even have been on the ballot.

Their arguement was, AFAIUI, that they wanted "to broaden the debate". Well they have certainly succeeded in this regard. Never has a debate been broader. Nor more poisonous, nor threatening, nor violent.

To be fair, these foolish MPs probably didn't think nominating Comrade Corbyn would lead to death threats against Labour MPs from their own members, or institutionalised verbal abuse of the most disgusting kind as an approved method of politics. No question Labour is at war and the prize is acceptable politics.

[technodup]

silent ninja said:

I think the attack on Corbyn is an attack on democracy. Senior MPs are even tabling their own leadership within the party, like a splinter group. Then they want to apply to the courts to take over the party or possibly launch a sub party. So if democracy doesn't work, a coup and dodgy legal loopholes are the answer?

Labour MPs are fundamentally making a mockery of the system. There is a rather sinister force against Corbyn. The MPs attacking him are essentially Blairites who are conservative in reality.

If anything it's the complete opposite. Those MPs were voted for by the public, on a moderate Ed Miliband manifesto.

Now, thanks to a handful of idiotic MPs who didn't approve of Corbyn but voted him on the original ballot to 'broaden the debate' we have the party being dragged by the shadowy and unelected Momentum, miles away from the PLP and even further away from the electorate.

Democracy?

[turbobloke]

technodup said:

silent ninja said:

I think the attack on Corbyn is an attack on democracy. Senior MPs are even tabling their own leadership within the party, like a splinter group. Then they want to apply to the courts to take over the party or possibly launch a sub party. So if democracy doesn't work, a coup and dodgy legal loopholes are the answer?

Labour MPs are fundamentally making a mockery of the system. There is a rather sinister force against Corbyn. The MPs attacking him are essentially Blairites who are conservative in reality.

If anything it's the complete opposite. Those MPs were voted for by the public, on a moderate Ed Miliband manifesto.

Now, thanks to a handful of idiotic MPs who didn't approve of Corbyn but voted him on the original ballot to 'broaden the debate' we have the party being dragged by the shadowy and unelected Momentum, miles away from the PLP and even further away from the electorate.

Democracy?

Corbynism: democracy by the yard, and the cost of a yard of it is a Pony.

[Johnnytheboy]

technodup said:

f anything it's the complete opposite. Those MPs were voted for by the public, on a moderate Ed Miliband manifesto.

Now, thanks to a handful of idiotic MPs who didn't approve of Corbyn but voted him on the original ballot to 'broaden the debate' we have the party being dragged by the shadowy and unelected Momentum, miles away from the PLP and even further away from the electorate.

Democracy?

Exactly this.

Labour voters are being disenfranchised by a bunch of people who probably didn't vote Labour (possibly even anything) previously.

Still, keep it up; all good for the Tory Party.

[RYH64E]

technodup said:

f anything it's the complete opposite. Those MPs were voted for by the public, on a moderate Ed Miliband manifesto.

Now, thanks to a handful of idiotic MPs who didn't approve of Corbyn but voted him on the original ballot to 'broaden the debate' we have the party being dragged by the shadowy and unelected Momentum, miles away from the PLP and even further away from the electorate.

Democracy?

Labour aren't in power and democracy should ensure that a Corbyn led party never will be. The Labour MPs will still be MPs even if they resign from the Labour party and stay on as independants.

I've got no problem with a Corbyn led, left wing Labour party putting their policies forward for the electorate to consider. It would be different if Miliband had stood down after winning the last election and gifted the premiership to his successor, but that's not what happened. Corbyn has nearly 5 years from election as party leader to persuade the electorate of his suitability to form a government, they can (and will) always say no if they're not convinced.

Edited by RYH64E on Tuesday 2nd August 12:42

[technodup]

RYH64E said:

I've got no problem with a Corbyn led, left wing Labour party putting their policies forward for the electorate to consider.

Neither do I per se, let them shaft themselves if they want.

But we shouldn't be taking any lessons on democracy from them.

[turbobloke]

technodup said:

RYH64E said:

I've got no problem with a Corbyn led, left wing Labour party putting their policies forward for the electorate to consider.

Neither do I per se, let them shaft themselves if they want.

But we shouldn't be taking any lessons on democracy from them.

Spot on.

[anonymous-user]

What could be more democratic than allowing people to become party members and vote for a leader of their choosing?

What you might consider to be 'your' Labour Party is subjective; your view may be shared by the majority of other members, or it may not. Either way, that majority have opportunity to shape the party and policy to reflect the views of the majority.

It could be that, if your views are sufficiently different from the majority, the Labour Party no longer closely enough represents your views, at which point, you need to find another group to support.

[turbobloke]

janesmith1950 said:

What could be more democratic than allowing people to become party members and vote for a leader of their choosing?

Apart from charging a Pony for the privilege? Exclusivity from the inclusive Party.

Clearly democracy free at the point of delivery isn't available anywhere these days.

[Andy Zarse]

janesmith1950 said:

What could be more democratic than allowing people to become party members and vote for a leader of their choosing?

Including people who are members of rival parties and actively campaigned against Labour at the last election? And what about unions/union members who have had a hand in leadership decisions for a century who are now suddenly disenfranchised?

[Johnnytheboy]

Andy Zarse said:

janesmith1950 said:

What could be more democratic than allowing people to become party members and vote for a leader of their choosing?

Including people who are members of rival parties and actively campaigned against Labour at the last election? And what about unions/union members who have had a hand in leadership decisions for a century who are now suddenly disenfranchised?

The thing I like (as I erroneously posted in the BBC thread for some reason) is the way many of the rent-a-protesters who come out on the street in support of Corbyn are waving banners featuring the logo of the newspaper an entirely separate party (the SWP).

That this doesn't strike them as odd speaks volumes.