Who Will replace Jeremy Corbyn as Labour Leader

[foliedouce]

Crackie said:

markyb_lcy said:

Sway said:

Yet the Conservatives just smashed an election by getting "never voted Tory" to vote for them in droves...

I never said that couldn’t or never did win an election, I just said that for Labour it’s not required to win an election. Not quite the same thing.

One other thing to consider .... (putting CV crisis aside for a moment) ... if the Tories spend 4 years pandering to this “new base”, will they retain their original base? Will traditional Tories be happy with 4 years widening the state? Will the upper middle classes continue to get their preferential tax policies? It’s going to be interesting for sure, the whole political map has been turned on its head.

Pandering to the 'new base' can also be expressed as redressing decades of neglect and spending imbalance; the original base were aware of that imbalance but were happy because many benefited from it. There may well be a widening of the state during the next 4 years but the widening is a relative measure; it's only likely to address some of the contraction of the state seen during the coalition and Cameron years.

The left wanted, and needed, extreme right policies from Johnson to justify & reinforce Lansman's 'Nasty Tory' Momentum rhetoric; they need a demon to mock and vilify. BJ & Cummings are to bright to play that game. There may be a small number of the extreme traditional base who aren't happy........negligible numbers from a political point of view though. Where would they go instead?? imo of course.

I agree with this, I'm a lifelong Tory so you could say "original base" and as a business owner whose business has fallen off a cliff since the lockdown, I have been very grateful and impressed with what the Tories have done to support businesses and employment

I never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I would happily pay slightly more income tax in the future to help repay the debt that's being accrued right now. I'm already a 45% tax payer with a K tax code so saying that has shifted me significantly from my believe in a low tax environment.

I would never have voted Labour under Corbyn as I believe his polices would have been a disaster for this country and he would have depleted funds on ideological projects leaving less to deal with emergencies like this.

I suspect Starmer will be a lot more appealing to the Tories 'new' base but time will tell, there's a lot more water under the bridge before we'll find out.

[loafer123]

Starmer’s problem is that he is the anti-Boris, by which I mean that he comes across as untrustworthy no matter what he does.

Whilst Boris has charm and generates goodwill, Starmer appears to desperately shift position according to what he thinks people want to hear.

A good example is how he says everyone should work together on the virus, and then in the next breath accuses the government of failing to have an exit route.

He is right, but it is pure political opportunism because no one in any country has an exit route and that sort of cheap political point-scoring is what did for JC and will do for Starmer.

[Crackie]

foliedouce said:

Crackie said:

markyb_lcy said:

Sway said:

Yet the Conservatives just smashed an election by getting "never voted Tory" to vote for them in droves...

I never said that couldn’t or never did win an election, I just said that for Labour it’s not required to win an election. Not quite the same thing.

One other thing to consider .... (putting CV crisis aside for a moment) ... if the Tories spend 4 years pandering to this “new base”, will they retain their original base? Will traditional Tories be happy with 4 years widening the state? Will the upper middle classes continue to get their preferential tax policies? It’s going to be interesting for sure, the whole political map has been turned on its head.

Pandering to the 'new base' can also be expressed as redressing decades of neglect and spending imbalance; the original base were aware of that imbalance but were happy because many benefited from it. There may well be a widening of the state during the next 4 years but the widening is a relative measure; it's only likely to address some of the contraction of the state seen during the coalition and Cameron years.

The left wanted, and needed, extreme right policies from Johnson to justify & reinforce Lansman's 'Nasty Tory' Momentum rhetoric; they need a demon to mock and vilify. BJ & Cummings are too bright to play that game. There may be a small number of the extreme traditional base who aren't happy........negligible numbers from a political point of view though. Where would they go instead?? imo of course.

I agree with this, I'm a lifelong Tory so you could say "original base" and as a business owner whose business has fallen off a cliff since the lockdown, I have been very grateful and impressed with what the Tories have done to support businesses and employment

I never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I would happily pay slightly more income tax in the future to help repay the debt that's being accrued right now. I'm already a 45% tax payer with a K tax code so saying that has shifted me significantly from my believe in a low tax environment.

I would never have voted Labour under Corbyn as I believe his polices would have been a disaster for this country and he would have depleted funds on ideological projects leaving less to deal with emergencies like this.

I suspect Starmer will be a lot more appealing to the Tories 'new' base but time will tell, there's a lot more water under the bridge before we'll find out.

It will be interesting to see how Starmer plays things over the coming months..........Momentum has been seen to be the tail wagging the dog for years and the consequences of that were the rout at the last GE. Whether or not Starmer has the nous, or motivation, to purge them remains to be seen.

[Vanden Saab]

Sir K carrying on where Corbyn left off by demanding that they are told how long Boris is going to be out of action... Does he not understand illness at all....And then he goes on to ask for the Gov. for their plans on how they are going to end the lockdown as if they will know that now. If i was the Gov. i would reply saying we are going to undo the measures we put in place to lockdown the country.
He really has nothing to offer at the moment.

[Dont like rolls]

Shows his "quality", it is weak and without depth.
Remember this man thought Corbyn should be PM...that should tell you everything you need to know about the prick.

[jakesmith]

Dont like rolls said:

Shows his "quality", it is weak and without depth.
Remember this man thought Corbyn should be PM...that should tell you everything you need to know about the prick.

I don't rate him so far for the reasons given above but I respect he is likely to be substantially more intelligent than Cobyn and has actually had a real job too
Anyway- not rocking the boat when it won't produce a result (see Owen Smith) and biding your time to make a move, doesn't mean he thought Corbyn should be PM, not even close.
Success in politics involves gaining support & careful timing
In fact, his strategy was the right one as he is now party leader replacing Corbyn

[Dont like rolls]

jakesmith said:

Dont like rolls said:

Shows his "quality", it is weak and without depth.
Remember this man thought Corbyn should be PM...that should tell you everything you need to know about the prick.

I don't rate him so far for the reasons given above but I respect he is likely to be substantially more intelligent than Cobyn and has actually had a real job too
Anyway- not rocking the boat when it won't produce a result (see Owen Smith) and biding your time to make a move, doesn't mean he thought Corbyn should be PM, not even close.
Success in politics involves gaining support & careful timing
In fact, his strategy was the right one as he is now party leader replacing Corbyn

Then he is basically dishonest....very.

[jakesmith]

Dont like rolls said:

Then he is basically dishonest....very.

No don’t be ridiculous. If there is no prospect of changing something you don’t burn all your bridges on principle that’s not how politics works. You make a go of it and wait for circumstances to change which is usually sooner than expected

The person who would have done what you suggest was a Jeremy Corbyn and like many men of principles he is, I’m sure you’ll agree, an arrogant narrow minded imbecile who’s intransigence prevented him achieving anything of note in his tenure other than trashing his party.

[Dont like rolls]

jakesmith said:

No don’t be ridiculous. If there is no prospect of changing something you don’t burn all your bridges on principle that’s not how politics works. You make a go of it and wait for circumstances to change which is usually sooner than expected

The person who would have done what you suggest was a Jeremy Corbyn and like many men of principles he is, I’m sure you’ll agree, an arrogant narrow minded imbecile who’s intransigence prevented him achieving anything of note in his tenure other than trashing his party.

Ah, nice excuse.
Maybe he should not of stood on platform after platform with him or served in Corbyns cabinet and Election campaign ?
There are LOTS of Labour MP's who resigned, refused to serve Corbyn, why did he not do that ?...because he worked for Corbyn as a leader. Dishonest in the Core.

[markyb_lcy]

Dont like rolls said:

jakesmith said:

No don’t be ridiculous. If there is no prospect of changing something you don’t burn all your bridges on principle that’s not how politics works. You make a go of it and wait for circumstances to change which is usually sooner than expected

The person who would have done what you suggest was a Jeremy Corbyn and like many men of principles he is, I’m sure you’ll agree, an arrogant narrow minded imbecile who’s intransigence prevented him achieving anything of note in his tenure other than trashing his party.

Ah, nice excuse.
Maybe he should not of stood on platform after platform with him. There are LOTS of Labour MP's who resigned, refused to serve Corbyn, why did he not do that ?...because he worked for Corbyn as a leader. Dishonest in the Core.

Dishonesty is pretty much a defining characteristic of a politician these days.

Will do well

[Dont like rolls]

markyb_lcy said:

Dishonesty is pretty much a defining characteristic of a politician these days.

Will do well

Wiki
After qualifying for the bar, he acted exclusively as a defence lawyer specialising in human rights issues


Go figure

[markyb_lcy]

Dont like rolls said:

markyb_lcy said:

Dishonesty is pretty much a defining characteristic of a politician these days.

Will do well

Wiki
After qualifying for the bar, he acted exclusively as a defence lawyer specialising in human rights issues


Go figure

I don’t actually think he’s dishonest, but if he was, let’s face it, on current form, it’s not exactly a showstopper.

[jakesmith]

Dont like rolls said:

Ah, nice excuse.
Maybe he should not of stood on platform after platform with him or served in Corbyns cabinet and Election campaign ?
There are LOTS of Labour MP's who resigned, refused to serve Corbyn, why did he not do that ?...because he worked for Corbyn as a leader. Dishonest in the Core.

Don’t talk to me about inputs, talk to me about outputs

[grantone]

Sway said:

I would suggest we're looking at century bonds and tacit acknowledgement everyone will merely inflate them away over the next decades.

Everyone is in the st with this. No one will want to implement the measures necessary to pay this off in a short time frame.

Easy to go a bit further; BoE is the only buyer, ring fence them as 'Corona bonds' and set them close to or at zero coupon. Highly inflationary, but 1) we are in a highly deflationary situation and 2) every other country with their own currency will basically do this too. It means we/everyone can probably get away with it.

[Cold]

Did anyone else quite like the small period of time between the election and just recently when Labour were quiet? It was refreshing not to have to endure all this type of nonsense.

[williamp]

Dont like rolls said:

Ah, nice excuse.
Maybe he should not of stood on platform after platform with him or served in Corbyns cabinet and Election campaign ?
There are LOTS of Labour MP's who resigned, refused to serve Corbyn, why did he not do that ?...because he worked for Corbyn as a leader. Dishonest in the Core.

Sir kier won the leadership with a greater % then Corbyn did. So maybe, had he decided to stage a coup he had the support to win, and he fought the last GE, and maybe he would be in Number 10??

But no, he wanted to feather his nest by being pro Corbyn. Which makes him, now dishonest. A liar etc etc. But hey, he's labour so he'll get a free pass in all the press and social media

[jakesmith]

williamp said:

Sir kier won the leadership with a greater % then Corbyn did. So maybe, had he decided to stage a coup he had the support to win, and he fought the last GE, and maybe he would be in Number 10??

But no, he wanted to feather his nest by being pro Corbyn. Which makes him, now dishonest. A liar etc etc. But hey, he's labour so he'll get a free pass in all the press and social media

People wouldn’t necessarily have given him the same vote share in a challenge against the incumbent as they would if the incumbent stood down.

As for feather his nest. He was supporting the leader and waiting for the appropriate time to cone up to stand himself. It would be dishonest if he’d said he supported Corbyn but then mounted a challenge but that’s far from what happened.

[Dont like rolls]

jakesmith said:

People wouldn’t necessarily have given him the same vote share in a challenge against the incumbent as they would if the incumbent stood down.

As for feather his nest. He was supporting the leader and waiting for the appropriate time to cone up to stand himself. It would be dishonest if he’d said he supported Corbyn but then mounted a challenge but that’s far from what happened.

You are really tied up in the knitting of those excuses for his dishonesty now ...Knit one slip one pearl one....

[jakesmith]

Sure, as my points are easy to follow and logical, why not avoid actually responding to them or accepting you’re talking nonsense as usual

[Dont like rolls]

jakesmith said:

Sure, as my points are easy to follow and logical, why not avoid actually responding to them or accepting you’re talking nonsense as usual

How can I follow them, they are vapour. All we know is he stood shoulder to shoulder with Corbyn supporting everything he stood for and was recommending all of us to do the same.

The man is dishonest or and opportunist with no moral backbone or principles....most likely all four, that is quite a record of horrifying proportions even for a modern politician.