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

Sweet Square said:
:lol:

There hardly positive numbers John.
Click to expand...
Trouble is, if they still think he's doing a good job and have a clear majority, little hope of ousting him any time soon. Will even a mauling in local elections and Scotland change their minds? Are they led by evidence? Doesn't help to be fair that people like me left the party after he was elected.

And once again, the heart of this issue:


Harrisamo said:
Classic. We actually get a mainstream representative at the forefront of politics who isn't a slick talking twat from Eton and people claim he lacks charisma. I don't want our leader to be anything like Boris Johnson. The less like him the better. We should be trying to move away from that kind of sham politician, not complain when someone different comes along. He's a well-spoken, well educated and experienced man. Give him a chance ffs. Everyone banging on about how useless he's been are perpetuating this society where instant gratification is the norm and nothing else is acceptable. It doesn't make sense and clearly isn't working.
Click to expand...
I don't think he's any of those things.
 
Sweet Square said:
:lol:

There hardly positive numbers John.
Click to expand...





The gap between the PLP and the membership needs to be bridged. Compromise on both sides is required. But the PLP is not getting rid of him, so certain MPs should really reevaluate their behaviour.
 
Untied said:




The gap between the PLP and the membership needs to be bridged. Compromise on both sides is required. But the PLP is not getting rid of him, so certain MPs should really reevaluate their behaviour.
Click to expand...

Are you not alarmed at the gap between the membership and the public?
 
Ubik said:
And once again, the heart of this issue:
Click to expand...


On the economy, it's too late to convince the public that Labour is more trustworthy than the Conservatives on the economy/implementing austerity. A change in policy course (eg Kendall) would still have been insufficient. Corbyn and McDonnell are gambling that the economy goes tits-up/public services are so ravaged, in particular the NHS, by 2020 that the public will be drawn to their message.

It's not working at the moment. At all. But it's a long game, and a 5 year gamble.
 
Harrisamo said:
Classic. We actually get a mainstream representative at the forefront of politics who isn't a slick talking twat from Eton and people claim he lacks charisma. I don't want our leader to be anything like Boris Johnson. The less like him the better. We should be trying to move away from that kind of sham politician, not complain when someone different comes along. He's a well-spoken, well educated and experienced man. Give him a chance ffs. Everyone banging on about how useless he's been are perpetuating this society where instant gratification is the norm and nothing else is acceptable. It doesn't make sense and clearly isn't working.
Click to expand...

There has to be someone in between the extremes though. It can't be public school or a senior citizen Wolfie Smith.
 
Untied said:
On the economy, it's too late to convince the public that Labour is more trustworthy than the Conservatives on the economy/implementing austerity. A change in policy course (eg Kendall) would still have been insufficient. Corbyn and McDonnell are gambling that the economy goes tits-up/public services are so ravaged, in particular the NHS, by 2020 that the public will be drawn to their message.

It's not working at the moment. At all. But it's a long game, and a 5 year gamble.
Click to expand...
Does this strategy not fill you with unremitting dread?
 
If only 29% of the public oppose the govt, perhaps the correct conclusion is that the public itself is economically right-wing? Thatcher getting 3 terms, Blair being the longest-serving Labour PM, both seem to back that up historically as well. Winning 1 out of 4 elections on average would probably be the equilibrium number for a left-wing party.
 
Ubik said:
Are you not alarmed at the gap between the membership and the public?
Click to expand...

Yes. The polling at the moment is really bad, and after a summer of hope I really struggle to imagine the British electorate choosing a Corbyn Labour.

Ubik said:
Does this strategy not fill you with unremitting dread?
Click to expand...

Not so much. We've gone over this a lot but Labour has become caught in a real bind with the collective forces of the SNP, UKIP, a growing Green Party, and the success of the Conservative blame the crash on Labour strategy. I think a centrist candidate would also be relying on the economy failing under Tory control. As for the deconstruction of the state and public services, that absolutely fills me with dread. But I felt that in May.
 
Harrisamo said:
Classic. We actually get a mainstream representative at the forefront of politics who isn't a slick talking twat from Eton and people claim he lacks charisma. I don't want our leader to be anything like Boris Johnson. The less like him the better. We should be trying to move away from that kind of sham politician, not complain when someone different comes along. He's a well-spoken, well educated and experienced man. Give him a chance ffs. Everyone banging on about how useless he's been are perpetuating this society where instant gratification is the norm and nothing else is acceptable. It doesn't make sense and clearly isn't working.
Click to expand...

Boris is far from slick presentation. He plays the bumbling fool and is generally a big and amusing character, regardless of what you think of his politics.

Corbyn is meek, naive and more content to posture than do what is necessary to progress the Labour party. 'I don't believe generally in a shoot to kill policy'. We don't generally have shoot to kill policy, the UK police don't even carry guns generally. Thanks for showing us your hard left badge again though Jez.
 
Untied said:
On the economy, it's too late to convince the public that Labour is more trustworthy than the Conservatives on the economy/implementing austerity. A change in policy course (eg Kendall) would still have been insufficient. Corbyn and McDonnell are gambling that the economy goes tits-up/public services are so ravaged, in particular the NHS, by 2020 that the public will be drawn to their message.

It's not working at the moment. At all. But it's a long game, and a 5 year gamble.
Click to expand...

The figures that only 54% of Labour voters think there needs to be a change in economic policy is quite an eye opener but shows how poorly Labour have previously argued it's case.

I'm not sure a recession will aid Labour as the Tories will no doubt still be seen as the safer hands. I think its a more likely route that the economy stagnates and Labour can build a case of investment to boost the economy.

Tough on security will see the tories poll high for a while anyway.
 
Ubik said:
Kamikaze politics in numbers

Click to expand...

I think Peter Hitchens is spot when he describes the move/phenomenon around Corbyn(Starts around 1.20). Although as someone who voted for Corbyn in the leadership race I wouldn't put myself in the 71%. Cus you know that's a bit mad like.
 
Sweet Square said:
I think Peter Hitchens is spot when he describes the move/phenomenon around Corbyn(Starts around 1.20). Although as someone who voted for Corbyn in the leadership race I wouldn't put myself in the 71%. Cus you know that's a bit mad like.
Click to expand...
Got a link?
 
Sweet Square said:
:lol: Oh right sorry completely forgot to put it in.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the same anti-establishment sentiment that's seen the rise of Trump and Carson in the US I think.

Peter Hitchens is always funny, the odd flash of Christopher here and there ("it's like feeling passion against a blancmange"). Wrong, but funny.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Boris is far from slick presentation. He plays the bumbling fool and is generally a big and amusing character, regardless of what you think of his politics.
Click to expand...
He portrays the persona very well, so much so that I think a lot of people underestimate him, he's a very smart cookie behind that facade.
 
Phurry said:
He portrays the persona very well, so much so that I think a lot of people underestimate him, he's a very smart cookie behind that facade.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I think Boris knows exactly what he's doing.
 
Doesn't Boris have children he doesn't look after, though? "Boris Johnson doesn't look after his own children, do you trust him to look after yours?" should be enough to feck his chances, surely?


Please don't let Boris become PM.
 
He
Silva said:
Doesn't Boris have children he doesn't look after, though? "Boris Johnson doesn't look after his own children, do you trust him to look after yours?" should be enough to feck his chances, surely?


Please don't let Boris become PM.
Click to expand...
He has five kids from two marriages
And allegedly one from an affair though I don't think that was ever officially confirmed by Boris, the mother, or indeed the mothers husband who thought he was the father for the first year or so...
Not sure if he sees the kid or if he pays money (though my understanding of the mother is she is not short of cash but obviousley that's not the point)
 
Boris is far cleverer than he puts out and he's a very shrewd politician, but I'd sincerely hope that in modern Britain his record for racism and homophobia (amongst other general bastardry) would put a lot of people off.
 
On another note, I got a ticket to one of those 'meet Jeremy Corbyn' things tomorrow night. Interested to see what the crowd's like, what issues he raises in his speech (I assume he'll make one) etc. Will report back.
 
Ubik said:
Kamikaze politics in numbers

Click to expand...


What's highlighted and not highlighted there is telling. Imagine people leaning towards preferring a party that puts out policies they really believe in than ones they don't. It's a poor survey as those statements are far too leading.

I don't think the opinion of his followers reflects Corbyn anyway. He'll definetely end up compromising on quite a few issues, you can't be a complete idealist either in goverment or as a head of a party.
 


:lol: Kuenssberg. Make up the opinions of Labour MPs to bash Corbyn for asking questions on the most important issue facing our country ahead of the UN climate change conference in Paris.

As if Cameron would have answered on either the Spending Review or Syria statement: "Wait until tomorrow/later"



This is important
 
Smores said:
What's highlighted and not highlighted there is telling. Imagine people leaning towards preferring a party that puts out policies they really believe in than ones they don't. It's a poor survey as those statements are far too leading.

I don't think the opinion of his followers reflects Corbyn anyway. He'll definetely end up compromising on quite a few issues, you can't be a complete idealist either in goverment or as a head of a party.
Click to expand...
How are they leading?
 
Ubik said:
How are they leading?
Click to expand...

They just aren't equal statements, statement B is worded in such a way that it implies Statement A is saying that politicians don't really believe in the policy but they're willing to say what they need to say to get into power.

Which isn't the intention of Statement A but that's what will be inferred. They're written as independent statements without considering the comparison, unless it's an independent body I'd suggest purposefully.
 
The War On Corbyn has never been about him but about the desire to keep the gravy train running.
 
Although I don't like him at all and I'm not a labour voter I do respect his adherence to his principles. When those principles are so incompatible with running a country however its only going to end one way.
 
sun_tzu said:
As Blairite seems to be a catch all term for anybody who thinks Corbyn is out of his depth and completely unelectable I suspect you think 90% of the country are Blairites?
Click to expand...
Nope, but those two are Blairites in the proper sense of the word.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Nope, but those two are Blairites in the proper sense of the word.
Click to expand...
What is the propper sense of the word though?
Is it the tribalistic Blairites vs Brownites when in truth both were fairly centrist and Blairite is now seemingly more associated with being an adherist to blairism i.e. a centrist policy rather than its original tribal connotations
Interestingly somebody has taken the time to list 50+ blairite UK MP's and neither of these two were mentioned in the list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blairism

I have seen people like Cooper described as a blairite when she was of course one of the more prominent brownites (her husband probably being the most prominent)
 
At one time it was Blairites and Brownites of course. How come those incapable of moving on accuse everyone of being Blairite, but never Brownite, or indeed neither?
If Corbyn is ever to gain power his supporters should be trying to gain wider support in and out of the party, yet they seem intent on cementing division.
 
sun_tzu said:
What is the propper sense of the word though?
Is it the tribalistic Blairites vs Brownites when in truth both were fairly centrist and Blairite is now seemingly more associated with being an adherist to blairism i.e. a centrist policy rather than its original tribal connotations
Interestingly somebody has taken the time to list 50+ blairite UK MP's and neither of these two were mentioned in the list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blairism

I have seen people like Cooper described as a blairite when she was of course one of the more prominent brownites (her husband probably being the most prominent)
Click to expand...
MacTaggart was one of those "Blair Babes". Spellar was given a prominent position under Blair's government -- that's what I'd class as Blairite.

It is a bit of a catch all term, but one that applies here imo.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.