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

1. Have successful centrist leader step down after 3 election victories.

2. Elect leader that's to the left of him.

3. Lose general election.

4. Replace leader with someone to the left of him.

5. Lose general election.

6. Replace leader with someone to the left of him.

7. ?

8. Win election, abandon Trident subs in north Atlantic and give Falklands to Argentina for a pack of sugar-free gum.


Easy this lark is when you only look at it from one viewpoint.
 
Ubik said:
1. Have successful centrist leader step down after 3 election victories.

2. Elect leader that's to the left of him.

3. Lose general election.

4. Replace leader with someone to the left of him.

5. Lose general election.

6. Replace leader with someone to the left of him.

7. ?

8. Win election, abandon Trident subs in north Atlantic and give Falklands to Argentina for a pack of sugar-free gum.


Easy this lark is when you only look at it from one viewpoint.
Click to expand...

Combine the two then. We both know that we're both right!

Good to see that you still have no interest in not twisting his words by the way.
 
Took the liberty of combining mine and Ubik's paths to success although I had to change a few details on Ubik's for accuracy and I changed some of mine to keep Ubik happy. I think this should be considered a work in progress and not the finished article.

Ubik said:
1. Have successful, charismatic centrist leader who runs on a strong platform against relatively weak opposition step down after 3 election victories (possibly due to his consistently falling popularity among pretty much everyone in the country.)

2. Allow the preplanned and highly controversial succession of an uncharismatic leader that's to the left of him.

3. Experience a devastating financial crash

4. Lose general election.

5. Replace leader with someone to the left of him in controversial leadership election - someone who is really bad at eating bacon sandwiches.

6. Lose general election.

7. Change leadership election process to give membership a larger say

8. Have no backbone when it comes to defending your previous record

9. Take Scotland for granted

10. Try and look as similar to the Tories as possible in key areas by doing things like abstaining from important welfare votes

11. Take core vote for granted (aka lefties)

12. Run a leadership election with 3 shit bland centrists and one really shit lefty (make sure you nominate the lefty to “provide a wider debate” but be completely against the prospect of him actually winning)

13. Run a really negative campaign against the lefty, whose support already largely comes from being anti-establishment. Make sure to get plenty of establishment figures to chime in on this negative campaign.

14. Shit yourselves when it looks like the lefty is going to win, bring up all sorts of shit about infiltration votes etc (and other bitching about your own membership)

15. Offer the lefty with no experience of leading as little support as possible. In fact, get a few resignations on there the day he wins the election, make sure to say to the press how you never wanted him in the first place (despite nominating him in some cases) brief against him constantly, ask the prime minister questions that undermine him in PMQ’s, when the media twists his words make sure to back the media up.

16. Don’t forget to carry on demonising the part of your membership that supports your new leader in the press

17. Watch as new leader makes multiple mistakes while under unusually high pressure from the press (which you have helped to create)

18. Wait until he has to step down

19. Put a bunch of bland centrists that no one cares about up for next leadership election

20???

21. Win general election and give everyone in the Falklands 2 packs of free chewing gum!
Click to expand...
 
Two packs for all might be a bit pricey. I say we just go back to forgetting they exist and maybe air-drop some more penguins (they've got wings, right?).
 
Ubik said:
Two packs for all might be a bit pricey. I say we just go back to forgetting they exist and maybe air-drop some more penguins (they've got wings, right?).
Click to expand...

There's only about 3000 of the feckers, scrapping Trident will pay for a lot of Trident.
 
Another Labour MP coming out to criticise Corbyn for not focusing on holding the government to account while she's focused on not holding the government to account because undermining Corbyn is more important.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...-infighting-says-rachel-reeves_n_9067976.html

Reeves, who quit the shadow cabinet following Corbyn's election as leader, accused him of a "dereliction duty" by failing to focus on issues such as healthcare, education and living standards. "Our duty an opposition party is holding the government to account," she said.
Click to expand...

What an absolute feckwit.
 
Shamwow said:
Another Labour MP coming out to criticise Corbyn for not focusing on holding the government to account while she's focused on not holding the government to account because undermining Corbyn is more important.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...-infighting-says-rachel-reeves_n_9067976.html



What an absolute feckwit.
Click to expand...
“We are focusing inwardly on issues that don’t really resonate with the public, about Trident for example, and we should be focusing on issues that really matter to people," she said on Monday.

"The leadership of the party have to take responsibility for that. They have opened up this issue of Trident. There wasn't an issue in the country."
Click to expand...

That sounds like a pretty fair criticism - he didn't have to go on sunday morning telly to talk about making subs without missiles and if he does not have even the most basic skills to deflect the question to talk about the health service / education etc then again he needs to take some responsibility for either being an idiot and talking about it or simply useless by being "forced" to talk about it
 
sun_tzu said:
That sounds like a pretty fair criticism - he didn't have to go on sunday morning telly to talk about making subs without missiles and if he does not have even the most basic skills to deflect the question to talk about the health service / education etc then again he needs to take some responsibility for either being an idiot and talking about it or simply useless by being "forced" to talk about it
Click to expand...

Maybe a fair criticism behind closed doors. She doesn't need to undermine him publicly and try to bring all this stuff back to the forefront just as it's dying down though does she? How exactly does this help the Labour party?
 
Shamwow said:
Maybe a fair criticism behind closed doors. She doesn't need to undermine him publicly and try to bring all this stuff back to the forefront just as it's dying down though does she? How exactly does this help the Labour party?
Click to expand...
By helping us get rid of the numpty in charge asap so we can get somebody credible in before too much damage is done and he destroys the party?
 
sun_tzu said:
By helping us get rid of the numpty in charge asap so we can get somebody credible in before too much damage is done and he destroys the party?
Click to expand...

Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving. With his scattergun attacks and wacky comments I'm seriously begining to think he has some mental issues.
 
sun_tzu said:
By helping us get rid of the numpty in charge asap so we can get somebody credible in before too much damage is done and he destroys the party?
Click to expand...

I'm sure the extra minute or so that this shaves off Corbyn's reign will be well worth it. We might as well ignore the fact that it could just as easily have the opposite effect.

Meanwhile there will be absolutely no negative effects in terms of making Labour look even more divided and once again making sure everyone is talking about Corbyn's failings rather than the Tories'. And it definitely won't do anything to cement the belief of Corbyn supporters (aka a massive chunk of the party membership) that he's being fecked over by his own MPs, rather than thinking about how Corbyn himself is failing.

Shenanigans.
 
Some speculation that Osborne will go for a general election straight away if he's the next Tory leader, potentially as soon as 2017/2018. Getting around the fixed term parliament act is very doable as a supermajority in the Commons can call an election, which could put Labour into an odd position of deciding between voting to be beaten to a pulp straight away, or be seen to be prolonging a Tory government for a couple more years. Osborne would have a good argument for doing it as well, "want to be given the mandate by the people" etc.
 
The fixed-term parliament act is almost meaningless, it was a complete waste of parliamentary time. That might even have been the point of it, just to fill parliament's calendar for a bit, to reduce the amount of legislation that might actually change anything.
 
Pretty much, just a way of getting through the difficult coalition. Probably be repealed when the Tories get their big majority next time out.
 
Ubik said:
Some speculation that Osborne will go for a general election straight away if he's the next Tory leader, potentially as soon as 2017/2018. Getting around the fixed term parliament act is very doable as a supermajority in the Commons can call an election, which could put Labour into an odd position of deciding between voting to be beaten to a pulp straight away, or be seen to be prolonging a Tory government for a couple more years. Osborne would have a good argument for doing it as well, "want to be given the mandate by the people" etc.
Click to expand...
There are many things that might prevent that happening not least Boris winning a leadership election (or Cameron actually seeing out the full term as he says he will)
Labour may have come to their senses and have a credible leader by then as well.
I image there is truth in the fact that they forsee an election campaign against comrade corbyn as an open goal though and a chance to get a big majority and they don't want to loose the opportunity before he gets kicked out by his own party
 
I suppose any new tory leader would like to win an election, but it might be more important to Osborne to plan for a full five years. He seems to have more real political conviction (albeit of a nasty manner) than Cameron or Boris.
 
The question I suppose is getting the timing right, when the optimum time is in terms of utilising both the 5 years that Miliband gave them and making the most of Corbyn's unpopularity. Get a 100-seat majority, then put through boundary reforms and limits on trade-union funding, making it far harder for Labour to get back on terms.

So you could say it's a fairly urgent matter to cast out Corbyn.
 
More of a peasant's revolt in my case, alas!



I can actually see this rebounding a little bit, for one thing London is Corbyn's strongest area and two, Khan's still likely to win and Goldsmith would look like even more of a knob given "Corbyn's man" beat him.

You'll probably largely agree with this one shamwow (I do as well, incidentally):


I'd agree with this prescription, too (though I'm not sure I can think of anything for 3...):
 
If the centre get a convincing candidate and platform to stand on rather than being bland, presentable and obsessed with focus groups and what-not I'll be all for it. It's the lack of conviction that I and many others can't stand (and the pandering to the press but I might have to put that dream to one side as the rest of the population seems quite happy being bullshitted every day). I said before the leadership election that I thought they were all crap including Corbyn. I just thought Corbyn would be more interesting. And he is.
 
Only if you're eating each other. You're not eating Liz Kendall, are you?
 
That is a very good question.
 
Ubik said:
Some speculation that Osborne will go for a general election straight away if he's the next Tory leader, potentially as soon as 2017/2018. Getting around the fixed term parliament act is very doable as a supermajority in the Commons can call an election, which could put Labour into an odd position of deciding between voting to be beaten to a pulp straight away, or be seen to be prolonging a Tory government for a couple more years. Osborne would have a good argument for doing it as well, "want to be given the mandate by the people" etc.
Click to expand...
And hopefully not a single person will vote tory
 
Shamwow said:
I just thought Corbyn would be more interesting. And he is.
Click to expand...

He is meek and uninteresting if you ask me. The wider general public see it that way to plus you can add inept and a danger to national security to that.

A slight change in political discourse is not worth guaranteeing Tory rule for the next 10 - 15 years IMO.
 
I think people are confusing the humane like Corbyn with a politician

Do people really want another lying, avoiding, out of touch with reality suit that doesn't care about normal people? Then vote anything but corbyn

Aren't people tired of hearing how great the economy is, how great healthcare is, how many people are back to work and how great the nhs is? When its all bollox
 
As the so called centrists on here attacked any Tory policy or as Corbyn become the punch bag for their frustrations.
 
Stanley Road said:
I think people are confusing the humane like Corbyn with a politician

Do people really want another lying, avoiding, out of touch with reality suit that doesn't care about normal people? Then vote anything but corbyn

Aren't people tired of hearing how great the economy is, how great healthcare is, how many people are back to work and how great the nhs is? When its all bollox
Click to expand...

Are you seriously suggesting that Corbyn is in touch with reality?
 
Stanley Road said:
name 1. Just 1 mate
Click to expand...

Out of touch with his own cabinet Stan never mind the country and the way the world is now. He's a politician from an age left well behind us and country couldn't afford him to be PM. I think the fact that in 30 years no Labour leader has ever given him a job, any job, speaks volumes. Maybe that's the reason he's voted against his own party over 500 times!

Each to their own Stan but he's not for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.