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

Sweet Square said:
God I hope there isn't someone in the Labour Party who is require to respond to Daily Mail articles, poor fecker would be on some insane amount of work hours.
Click to expand...

Well, that's again very hand-wavy of you, but as you yourself said, he was "former tory director of communications" so was a senior government official not some random bloke. He was tasked by the PM to negotiate with Labour, and he's gone on the record about the negotiations. So yeah, I'd hope the Labour party would deny it if it wasn't true. It's crucially important how much Labour can be trusted to act in good faith in any attempt to form a cross party alliance to kill no deal... isn't it?
 
nickm said:
Well, that's again very hand-wavy of you, but as you yourself said, he was "former tory director of communications" so was a senior government official not some random bloke. He was tasked by the PM to negotiate with Labour, and he's gone on the record about the negotiations. So yeah, I'd hope the Labour party would deny it if it wasn't true.
Click to expand...

And if they had you'd respond 'ah well they denied it so there must be some truth to it then'.

Wherever we fall on these issues the least we can ask of each other is to engage our critical brains and not accept verbatim supposed quotes from such a clearly partisan source as gospel.
 
Cheesy said:
Because Corbyn leads a party with over 200 MP's that's ten times the size of the Lib Dems in parliament. He holds all the cards here. The Lib Dems have marketed themselves as a party who now want to stop Brexit - and at the very least a No Deal Brexit - above all else. If they're unwilling to back Corbyn then that undermines that supposed purpose. From a POV of playing politics there's really no reason, or need, for him to back down on this one: the unity government calls all still seem a bit silly and in the realm of fantasy politics.
Click to expand...
I agree. But I'm still none the wiser as to why it's totally okay for JC to do the same when Tories inevitably don't do the same for him. Or Ian Austin and John Woodcock, do we think they're really gonna vote for him when they don't even have to worry about reselection? I'm interested in what might work and not much else. People using it to further their own party's agenda right now is irritating.
 
NinjaFletch said:
And if they had you'd respond 'ah well they denied it so there must be some truth to it then'.
Click to expand...

Er, no, that's not how I work thanks.

NinjaFletch said:
Wherever we fall on these issues the least we can ask of each other is to engage our critical brains and not accept verbatim supposed quotes from such a clearly partisan source as gospel.
Click to expand...

Actually, you need to hear from both sides before you can begin to make an informed decision about who to believe, unless you are already biased. The source may be partisan but he is a high government official on the record. So... what does the Labour side have to say?

What if Labour doesn't explicitly deny it but uses a form of words that suggests there might be some truth in it? What would you say then?

That's why wanting Labour's response is worthwhile.
 
nickm said:
Well, that's again very hand-wavy of you, but as you yourself said, he was "former tory director of communications" so was a senior government official not some random bloke. He was tasked by the PM to negotiate with Labour, and he's gone on the record about the negotiations. So yeah, I'd hope the Labour party would deny it if it wasn't true. It's crucially important how much Labour can be trusted to act in good faith in any attempt to form a cross party alliance to kill no deal... isn't it?
Click to expand...
I'll post this again.



Former tories even think that Gibb is a joke and hardly worth listening to. Christ the summer transfer window must be a nightmare for you. 'Well the sun says United are getting Messi and Ole never denied it, so it must be ON!'

esmufc07 said:
I'm not the one forcing Jewish MPs and Jewish Labour members to leave the party
Click to expand...
So what about other non Jewish Labour MPs who have faced re selection contest ? Or if your going to use individual cases, then why is Jon Lansman still in the party ? Or Ed Miliband ?

Serious question do you actually think Hodge is getting trigger for re selection because she is jewish ? Personally I think its down to her being a right wing MP who has in the past ran racists campaigns and continues to attack the left leader of her party. Also re selection is literally democracy. So I'm guessing you think Margaret Hodge has a job for life as a Labour MP ? Its just disgusting that the Britain public every 4-5 years can force out a standing prime minster. Oh the horror Oh the true horror !

But anyway carry on posting your 'ironic' anti semitic posts.
 
Sweet Square said:
I'll post this again.



Former tories even think Gibbs is a joke and hardly worth listening to. Christ the summer transfer window must be a nightmare for you.


So what about other non Jewish Labour MPs who have faced re selection contest ? Or if your going to use individual cases, then why is Jon Lansman still in the party ? Or Ed Miliband ?

Serious question do you actually think Hodge is getting trigger for re selection because she is jewish ? Personally I think its down to her being a right wing MP who has in the past ran racists campaigns and continues to attack the left leader of her party. Also re selection is literally democracy. So I'm guessing your think Margaret Hodge has a job for life as a Labour MP. Its just disgusting that the Britain public every 4-5 years can force out a standing prime minster. Oh the horror !

But anyway carry on posting your 'ironic' anti semitic posts.
Click to expand...


She is facing reselection because she is a critic of Corbyn and has complained about the party's handling of antisemtisim. Reselection rules were changed to make it far easier to remove anyone who dare criticise the Corbyn project.

Ironic considering how often he himself voted against the party for 30+ years.
 
nickm said:
Er, no, that's not how I work thanks.



Actually, you need to hear from both sides before you can begin to make an informed decision about who to believe, unless you are already biased. The source may be partisan but he is a high government official on the record. So... what does the Labour side have to say?

What if Labour doesn't explicitly deny it but uses a form of words that suggests there might be some truth in it? What would you say then?

That's why wanting Labour's response is worthwhile.
Click to expand...


I'd say 'hmm, despite the questionable original source there does seem to be something here'. You'd see I have done that before in the various Corbyn threads over the years.

But my contention here is that you aren't interested in this because it challenges your view or breaks you out of an echo chamber, but because it perfectly encapsulates what you want to be true of Corbyn and Labour over Brexit (i.e that they're incompetent) to the point you're posting sources (or a chain of sources) you'd dismiss out of hand in other circumstances.
 
esmufc07 said:
She is facing reselection because she is a critic of Corbyn and has complained about the party's handling of antisemtisim. Reselection rules were changed to make it far easier to remove anyone who dare criticise the Corbyn project.
Click to expand...
Are you local member of that Labour CLP ?

Again re selection rules were changed(And it didn't go far enough sadly)because there was a push by members for more party democracy. Also most MPs who have faced re selection have won.

esmufc07 said:
Also 6 party branches voted in favour of her, 5 against. But 'democracy'.
Click to expand...
Hold on so if Labour is full of jew hating members who want to get rid of anyone who criticises Corbyn then why did 6 party branches voted in favour of Hodge ?
 
Sweet Square said:
Are you local member of that Labour CLP ?

Again re selection rules were changed(And it didn't go far enough sadly)because there was a push by members for more party democracy. Also most MP who have faced re selection is won.
Click to expand...

No I am not, though I don't see what that has to do with anything. I cancelled my Labour membership around 12 months ago.
 
esmufc07 said:
Also 6 party branches voted in favour of her, 5 against. But 'democracy'.
Click to expand...
Hold on, so if Labour is full of jew hating members who want to get rid of anyone who criticises Corbyn then why did 6 party branches voted in favour of Hodge ?

esmufc07 said:
No I am not, though I don't see what that has to do with anything.
Click to expand...
Well then you don't know the reasons why Hodge is up for re selection.
 
Red Dreams said:
I agree.

So Swinson needs to support Corbyn who is the leader of the biggest Opposition party.
Click to expand...

Even with Lib Dem support Corbyn still can't get a majority.

Will come down to the Tory rebels who lost the whip, and they've explicitly stated they will not put Corbyn into No. 10.
 
esmufc07 said:
Even with Lib Dem support Corbyn still can't get a majority.

Will come down to the Tory rebels who lost the whip, and they've explicitly stated they will not put Corbyn into No. 10.
Click to expand...
Corbyn will get first crack (if he wants it knowing that getting less votes than Johnson might look very bad) then a compromise candidate... I'd guess Clarke ?

Even if the libs agreed to back Corbyn the best he will get from chuka and Berger is to abstain... As you say without the ex conservatives corbyns not getting the votes (dup certainly won't back him for example)
 
Red Dreams said:
Their action will simply say they care more about getting Corbyn out than preventing Brexit.

I highly doubt their sincerity.
Click to expand...

That would be true but as far as standing on your principles go risking getting kicked out of your own party seems pretty sincere.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
That would be true but as far as standing on your principles go risking getting kicked out of your own party seems pretty sincere.
Click to expand...

If those who oppose a no deal Brexit do not put aside their differences and stand together, we will get the result Johnson wants.
How does that help the country.

There should not be any pre-conditions and political gamesmanship.

I'm not holding my breath.
 
esmufc07 said:
We will have to wait for their manifesto. I didn't really follow their conference so I don't know if they announced any major policies (other than Revoking A50 if they get a majority)
Click to expand...

I listened to Corbyn's speech at the TUC and Labour Conference.
If the Lib/Dems don't have most of those policies I honestly don't see how they can help people.

There really is no time left.
 
Red Dreams said:
If those who oppose a no deal Brexit do not put aside their differences and stand together, we will get the result Johnson wants.
How does that help the country.

There should not be any pre-conditions and political gamesmanship.

I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...

Neither am I but I don't doubt that the homeless Tories sincerely don't want to leave Europe. It's just I'm equally convinced they sincerely loathe and mistrust Corbyn - perhaps even more.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Neither am I but I don't doubt that the homeless Tories sincerely don't want to leave Europe. It's just I'm equally convinced they sincerely loathe and mistrust Corbyn - perhaps even more.
Click to expand...

The hard Brexiters are anti immigrants first and foremost.
If they bothered to listen to Corbyn, all he is for is policies that help working class families.
 
Red Dreams said:
The hard Brexiters are anti immigrants first and foremost.
If they bothered to listen to Corbyn, all he is for is policies that help working class families.
Click to expand...

You won't hear any disagreement from me, but that's saying very little. The ex-tories think he's going to destroy the nation via smash and grabs on private property, self-defeating methods of taxation and create new cavernous black holes in public finance via renationalisation. Giving him the legitimacy of becoming the PM of a government of national unity gives him a level of credibility that makes such a 'disaster' more likely in their eyes.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
You won't hear any disagreement from me, but that's saying very little. The ex-tories think he's going to destroy the nation via smash and grabs on private property, self-defeating methods of taxation and create new cavernous black holes in public finance via renationalisation. Giving him the legitimacy of becoming the PM of a government of national unity gives him a level of credibility that makes such a 'disaster' more likely in their eyes.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you either.

That's the Mantra they have been selling...and people have been buying.
By the time they wake up it will be too late.

My point has always been that if you are going to oppose, you have to be For something.
This is where Lib/Dems fail.

But you have to hand it to the Tories.

Brilliant con men.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I'd say 'hmm, despite the questionable original source there does seem to be something here'. You'd see I have done that before in the various Corbyn threads over the years.

But my contention here is that you aren't interested in this because it challenges your view or breaks you out of an echo chamber, but because it perfectly encapsulates what you want to be true of Corbyn and Labour over Brexit (i.e that they're incompetent) to the point you're posting sources (or a chain of sources) you'd dismiss out of hand in other circumstances.
Click to expand...
I posted it because it was an interesting allegation, was via someone on twitter - Daniel Finkelstein - I respect and who is pretty rational, and talked to the trustworthiness of labours desire to find consensus in Brexit, which is coming sharply into view again. So given that, I would like to know whether it is true. But you go ahead and talk nonsense about echo chambers (even though you are the one dismissing it on the basis of who said it rather than what was said).
 
nickm said:
I posted it because it was an interesting allegation, was via someone on twitter - Daniel Finkelstein - I respect and who is pretty rational, and talked to the trustworthiness of labours desire to find consensus in Brexit, which is coming sharply into view again. So given that, I would like to know whether it is true. But you go ahead and talk nonsense about echo chambers (even though you are the one dismissing it on the basis of who said it rather than what was said).
Click to expand...

Eugh, fine. Yes, you're right, you shouldn't question any sources, nor think about what biases the people telling you information might hold, and suggesting that people apply absolutely basic critical thinking skills to what they read – let alone what they read from a former Tory comms head writing about the Labour leader in the Daily Mail – is obviously nonsense.
 
nickm said:
I posted it because it was an interesting allegation, was via someone on twitter - Daniel Finkelstein - I respect and who is pretty rational, and talked to the trustworthiness of labours desire to find consensus in Brexit, which is coming sharply into view again. So given that, I would like to know whether it is true. But you go ahead and talk nonsense about echo chambers (even though you are the one dismissing it on the basis of who said it rather than what was said).
Click to expand...

So just to be clear, you think that it is more likely that Labour was wrecking the discussions than that the government came forward with proposals that were genuinely totally inadequate?

Also, I currently have a bridge listed on eBay, would you be interested?
 
The Sunday Times understands that internal union polling shows that the party is on course to lose more than 100 seats. The poll also suggests that up to a third of those who voted Labour at the last election could desert the party and support the Liberal Democrats. A further 10% are expected to switch to the Brexit Party, according to the data.
Click to expand...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...fears-loss-of-100-seats-in-election-0psf2q9w6

Pidcock and Long Bailey the favourites to replace him apparently. Christ knows when Labour will next be an electoral force.
 
Red Dreams said:
I'm not disagreeing with you either.

That's the Mantra they have been selling...and people have been buying.
By the time they wake up it will be too late.

My point has always been that if you are going to oppose, you have to be For something.
This is where Lib/Dems fail.

But you have to hand it to the Tories.

Brilliant con men.
Click to expand...
Very true.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.