Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

Penna said:
I was watching Shirley Williams on TV last night (she wasn't talking about all this, she was on the Somme commemorations programme), and I thought exactly the same, remembering the SDP.
Click to expand...

When the SDP mob split off several friends tried to persuade me to join SDP, but my feeling then was that Labour centrists could beat militant tendency and the like, and still be an electable left of centre party.
This time round I don't think that's the case, I'll be supporting a breakaway. A new party might be small but at least it would be eligible for coalition. I doubt anyone would co-operate with a Corbynysta rump Labour, it would be doomed to perpetual opposition.
 
It's funny how he got applauded for that line. And when the question was asked about people comparing you can hear people audibly being shocked at the question even being asked.

But by the time it gets to national media, they've got a chief Rabbi who will criticise it and use that to validate it as a way of undermining everything Corbyn was trying to do with this review.

It's not just a shame because it's unfair on Corbyn but it's also undermined a great piece of work done for the party by a great woman.
 
sun_tzu said:
I'd expect the re-ationalising of the railways to go... I'd also expect a pro trident stance (in line with the manifesto they were elected on) and perhaps most tellingly Id expect Europe to be considered as more than a 7/10
Click to expand...

That's not exactly much change as he's already committed to the trident line of the party and Labour was pro-remain. So basically drop any nationalisation?

It really isn't policy is it? The objection is his background as far as I can tell, it's a case of the policies appearing more lefty by the fact he's in charge.

The thing is I'm convinced a majority of the association to Corbyn is done by the PLP themselves. Sky did some interviews of people who were Labour and now UKIP, thy were asked why they disliked Corbyn and each one said not strong enough. That's not an actual thought that's just parroting
 
Aye if the MPs had rallied round him at the start then the perception of his competence would be completely different.

They didn't care enough about their party to do so.
 
Shamwow said:
Aye if the MPs had rallied round him at the start then the perception of his competence would be completely different.

They didn't care enough about their party to do so.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I don't really understand how they can be so bloody thick as to not realise they had to support him until he lost an election, or split the party.
 
Shamwow said:
Aye if the MPs had rallied round him at the start then the perception of his competence would be completely different.

They didn't care enough about their party to do so.
Click to expand...

They talk about Corbyn not being a leader, when in reality they simply refused to be led by him, to respect the wishes of the party members who rejected them in favour of him.
 
https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...our-mp-jeremy-corbyn-coup-let-government-hook
Barry Gardiner complained that Labour had left an “empty despatch box” at a critical point in Britain's history amid the “crisis” brought about by David Cameron's “needless” referendum.

He intervened amid a vicious civil war in the Labour party, with former shadow business secretary Angela Eagle poised to launch a leadership challenge against Mr Corbyn today.

Half of Mr Corbyn's shadow ministerial team have resigned, while the under-fire left winger faced an 80% vote of no confidence from MPs and calls to stand down from senior figures.

The meltdown in the party was triggered by MPs' anger at Mr Corbyn, who they feel didn't do enough to fight against the the vote for Brexit.

But Mr Gardiner, who was first elected in Tony Blair's landslide 1997 victory, argued a coup plot had been in the works for months and was “rushed out” when MPs saw the Brexit vote as a good opportunity.

“That was a mistake because it meant that at a critical time in our country's history the Government was let off the hook,” he told Radio 4's Today programme.

The Brent North MP said it was “inconceivable” that Labour MPs turned on Mr Corbyn at a time when the Prime Minister had resigned and Britain's finances appeared to teeter on the edge.

“It was incredible that my colleagues in the Labour party thought it more important to turn in on themselves and have a dispute about who should be leading the party than to actually stand at the despatch box and attack the Government for the crisis that they had precipitated,” he said.

He added: "I did not support Jeremy as leader I did not vote for him as leader and I did not nominate him as leader.

“But I will not see the Government let off the hook. And the logical consequences of everyone resigning was that there would be an empty despatch box across the table from ministers.

“You cannot allow the government to have no proper opposition."
Click to expand...
 
decorativeed said:
They talk about Corbyn not being a leader, when in reality they simply refused to be led by him, to respect the wishes of the party members who rejected them in favour of him.
Click to expand...

As an MP is their first responsibility to their constituents (who in general the MPs, Councillors, and MEP's have said are rejecting Corbyn and he is electoral suicide) or is it to under half a million labour party members (many of who only joined under the £3 scheme)
 
sun_tzu said:
As an MP is their first responsibility to their constituents (who in general the MPs, Councillors, and MEP's have said are rejecting Corbyn and he is electoral suicide) or is it to under half a million labour party members (many of who only joined under the £3 scheme)
Click to expand...

It's not a simple either/or.

A few points you've made that I disagree with.

1) MPs are responsible for their constituents, but they do so as representatives of the Labour party which gives the support to actually get to MP in the first place. Many of these MPs aren't voted in because of their amazing personal qualities but because it says Labour under their name. They can represent their constituents as an independent if they don't agree with the direction of the party.
2) People keep blaming Corbyn on £3 members but he won among full members and the majority of full members say they will still vote for him in a leadership election.
3) As far as I can tell most councillors still support Corbyn, however we don't actually know. The letter from the 500 has already been called out as including the names of councillors that actually still support him.
4) The party is a democratic party. They should settle this matter democratically and settle it soon. All this stuff going on now is helping nobody.
 
Shamwow said:
It's not a simple either/or.

A few points you've made that I disagree with.

1) MPs are responsible for their constituents, but they do so as representatives of the Labour party which gives the support to actually get to MP in the first place. Many of these MPs aren't voted in because of their amazing personal qualities but because it says Labour under their name. They can represent their constituents as an independent if they don't agree with the direction of the party.
Click to expand...

I think you will see circa 150 of them quit the labour party and become independent / forming a new new labour / liberal coalition if Corbyn clings on... which by my calcs would also make them the official opposition as well
 
sun_tzu said:
I think you will see circa 150 of them quit the labour party and become independent / forming a new new labour / liberal coalition if Corbyn clings on... which by my calcs would also make them the official opposition as well
Click to expand...

Okay
 
Corbyn is not agreesive. Thus he looks weak.

There is nothing wrong with his aims.

And all those against 'hard left' as they call it, without fully explaining how they see the poor and reducing middle class rise up, are really only talking about a horse race. Winning the GE, which is meaningless

The fact is all these people including those who came here, looking for a better life need to be helped to have a living wage. That is the priority. What serious alternatives do the Blairites offer.

They should have backed Corbyn and in unity attacked the Tories with venom for what they have done. No mercy.

Instead they turn on the properly elected leader. And we are supposed to trust these scum?
 
Michael Foot was a decent man and the Sun destroyed him much the same way that Corbyn is getting it today. But the behaviour of his own MPs is something else entirely.
 
Ubik said:
A Momentum activist laid into a jewish Labour MP attending as well, saying she was a member of a media conspiracy. Just needed Ken arriving to talk about Hitler's Zionism and it would've had the hattrick.
Click to expand...

I didn't really get the issue with that, I mean, it's clear that there is a media conspiracy?! You only need to read the front pages of every newspaper for the last couple of weeks to see that he is only reported in a bad light, whilst and successes don't get any airtime at all - for example, none of The Times, Guardian, Independent or BBC had prominent articles about the rally of supporters that gathered in London (most made no reference to it at all as far as I could see) - and that list includes the apparently more left leaning papers. No doubt The Mail, Sun, Telegraph had no mention of it either.
 
skidmark said:
I didn't really get the issue with that, I mean, it's clear that there is a media conspiracy?! You only need to read the front pages of every newspaper for the last couple of weeks to see that he is only reported in a bad light, whilst and successes don't get any airtime at all - for example, none of The Times, Guardian, Independent or BBC had prominent articles about the rally of supporters that gathered in London (most made no reference to it at all as far as I could see) - and that list includes the apparently more left leaning papers. No doubt The Mail, Sun, Telegraph had no mention of it either.
Click to expand...
Jewish media conspiracy, it's a widespread anti-semitic trope. Whether the guy meant it that way I don't know, he seemed more intent on advocating deselection of MPs than anything else. Corbyn apologised to him later on though, so all was well.
 
Ubik said:
Jewish media conspiracy, it's a widespread anti-semitic trope. Whether the guy meant it that way I don't know, he seemed more intent on advocating deselection of MPs than anything else. Corbyn apologised to him later on though, so all was well.
Click to expand...

I didn't see it happen, so probably shouldn't comment, but when I read it I thought it sounded more like someone trying to twist and cover up what seems to me to be a fairly accurate observation about how Corbyn is being treated by the British press, rather than about some conspiracy story. Seriously, hopefully not the latter.
 
skidmark said:
I didn't really get the issue with that, I mean, it's clear that there is a media conspiracy?! You only need to read the front pages of every newspaper for the last couple of weeks to see that he is only reported in a bad light, whilst and successes don't get any airtime at all - for example, none of The Times, Guardian, Independent or BBC had prominent articles about the rally of supporters that gathered in London (most made no reference to it at all as far as I could see) - and that list includes the apparently more left leaning papers. No doubt The Mail, Sun, Telegraph had no mention of it either.
Click to expand...
:lol: How thick does someone have to be to turn up at an antisemitism event and talk about 'media conspiracies'. I have no sympathy for them whether they were being antisemitic or just plain stupid.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
:lol: How thick does someone have to be to turn up at an antisemitism event and talk about 'media conspiracies'. I have no sympathy for them whether they were being antisemitic or just plain stupid.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have known to be fair :nervous: but neither would I have turned up at that event, nor opened my mouth if I was there.
 
Poll of Unite members has been done as well (details about half way through the article) - http://www.theguardian.com/politics...s-on-labour-mps-to-prevent-leadership-contest

Main figures - 49% say he should step down, and if there was another contest 44% would be against him, compared to 43% for him. 61% say he's doing a bad job, and 20% think he'll become PM. For comparison, he won 57% of the union vote in the first round last year.

So with that and the membership poll, I think there's been a definite shift against him amongst people that were previously supportive. Registered supporters also showed this in yesterday's YouGov, possibly reflecting that many of them signed up for full membership after he was elected. If the unions were to back the challenger candidate, those numbers could possibly increase. So it seems a bit of a coin flip at the moment, everything depends on which of the two camps can sign up the most members/supporters.
 
I'm almost certain that when the time is right, Dan Jarvis will be able to connect with the public as Labour leader. He probably couldn't win a leadership election in the near future, and he does need a bit more parliamentary experience, but he ticks most of the boxes: good background, clear speaker, good storyteller, likeable.

Surround him with the right team to help flesh out ideology and policy, and I'm sure he could make a good go of it in a few years time.
 
Drifter said:
Labour leadership: Shadow cabinet bid to ease Corbyn out

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36692256

So what happened to Angela Eagle. This seems like a desperate bluff .Hang in there Corbyn.
Click to expand...

They've realised they won't win under her, I reckon she was encouraged and now she'll be left without backing. Heck even Angela Eagles own CLP voted against the challenge, she'll be lucky if they don't deselect her in the coming general election.
 
Smores said:
They've realised they won't win under her, I reckon she was encouraged and now she'll be left without backing. Heck even Angela Eagles own CLP voted against the challenge, she'll be lucky if they don't deselect her in the coming general election.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if eagle and another 150 sitting labour MP's are not part of a new party by then... The Clp can put up whatever corbynista they want at that point (suspect a few deposits will be lost though)
 
sun_tzu said:
I'd be shocked if eagle and another 150 sitting labour MP's are not part of a new party by then... The Clp can put up whatever corbynista they want at that point (suspect a few deposits will be lost though)
Click to expand...

The new era of politics where the politicians don't claim to represent anyone but just want their ideas to prevail.

Perhaps that's not so new actually
 
sun_tzu said:
I'd be shocked if eagle and another 150 sitting labour MP's are not part of a new party by then... The Clp can put up whatever corbynista they want at that point (suspect a few deposits will be lost though)
Click to expand...
And Richard Burgon is still Shadow Lord Chancellor.
 
Smores said:
They've realised they won't win under her, I reckon she was encouraged and now she'll be left without backing. Heck even Angela Eagles own CLP voted against the challenge, she'll be lucky if they don't deselect her in the coming general election.
Click to expand...

The PLP's so called coup as been a disaster .Take them out of their comfort zone and they're lost. Trying to buy him of with promises of keeping some of his policies will be brushed aside.
 
I want Corbyn to stay, if just to put a dent in the ridiculous powermongering and games that is current politics. Also the bloke tends to be straight talking and unlike most other politicians, which for me is very much a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.