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

ThierryHenry said:
A "strop" from the PLP is pretty significant. It's not something they've done out of the blue because they don't think Jez dresses well.
Click to expand...

I understand it's their job and they need a decent working relationship and I even understand their selfish concerns for their jobs.

I can't forgive them going against the members and CLPs. That's not representation that's elitist rule.

They had a very easy route to go down, explain their concerns to the member base, set out their own merits/policy and then let them decide. That's not the route they've taken.
 
ThierryHenry said:
A "strop" from the PLP is pretty significant. It's not something they've done out of the blue because they don't think Jez dresses well.
Click to expand...
It's a middle finger to the membership though, regardless of how well founded their concerns are. I'd be willing to support a new leader, if it's put to the members and a new leader can make a solid case. Corbyn simply has to be on that ballot, though. Otherwise this is just illegitimate.
 
Ubik said:
Worth noting that even if they do rule that he has to seek nominations (and it's still a coin flip as to whether they do), there will be a lot of pressure on some MPs to do nominate him. Nominations are public, after all. And that would rebound badly on the rebels, as one of their key lines is that he doesn't have enough support left to carry on.


Yep. One of the biggest fallacies in politics these days is that every vote not for the Tories (or even UKIP) is pro-lefty.
Click to expand...

TBH it's tough to see THAT many voters from the 48% or so who voted centre/left in the last election defecting to the right at the time of Brexit; you'd think that any drift by Labour leave voters to UKIP/Cons would me matched by a Conservative (remain) -> Lib Dem/Lab switch.
 
Was going to vote Labour at the next GE pending any major changes (funny saying that after this past few weeks) but only if Corbyn is there, or at the very least they can put forward a very good candidate to challenge him. If they force him out my vote goes with him, like many of you.

Back to the Greens most likely. Unlike Reddit, I'm not a fan of Farron.
 
Corbyn or no Corbyn, Labour is in the shite.
Don't think people not voting Labour cause Corbyn has been ousted makes any difference.
 
Ubik said:
"Presumably" is a stretch there, makes it slightly likelier but nothing stopping people on Corbyn's side agreeing with need for a secret ballot.
Click to expand...

If it's 16-16 is it a coin toss?
 
berbatrick said:
TBH it's tough to see THAT many voters from the 48% or so who voted centre/left in the last election defecting to the right at the time of Brexit; you'd think that any drift by Labour leave voters to UKIP/Cons would me matched by a Conservative (remain) -> Lib Dem/Lab switch.
Click to expand...
Don't see that argument at all - the Tory leader was a remainer. There's a huge risk of losing the Labour leave voters, no matter whether it's Corbyn or a different Labour Leader.
 
ThierryHenry said:
Don't see that argument at all - the Tory leader was a remainer. There's a huge risk of losing the Labour leave voters, no matter whether it's Corbyn or a different Labour Leader.
Click to expand...

Unless tthe election miraculously revlves around the NHS/benefits, those voters are gone. At the same time, there should be huge UKIP-Conservative cannibalism too, since the majority of Con voters voted leave. Of course Farage disappearing may prevent that :/
 
Untied said:
If it's 16-16 is it a coin toss?
Click to expand...
God only knows! By the looks of it there's something in the rulebook about lots being drawn if the tie can't be resolved...
 
Adebesi said:
Listened to Angela Eagle talking to Andrew Neill, what struck me is how unbelievably shrill she is.
Click to expand...
Her voting record, her voice, her lack of message, her public perception - her.

I get the need for a challenge if the PLP have lost confidence, but fecking hell, they've picked a terrible candidate.
 
Ubik said:
If that were the case, there wouldn't be multiple bits of legal advice saying conflicting things.

And it's not the same thing at all, he's not being forcibly kept off the ballot. He's being asked to show he has support from a HUGE 20% of the people he's supposed to lead, or 15% if he resigned and ran again. Seriously, not even a majority, not even a third, not even a quarter. 1 in 5.

For what it's worth, I think he needs to be automatically on the ballot, it's just too much of a shitshow otherwise. But I also think that someone that can't muster 15% of his colleagues' signatures to demonstrate support within the party is laughable.
Click to expand...
The Labour Party Civil War: a highly resistable force meets an eminently movable object.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Her voting record, her voice, her lack of message, her public perception - her.

I get the need for a challenge if the PLP have lost confidence, but fecking hell, they've picked a terrible candidate.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It lends credibility to the theory that she's a patsy, to destabilise Corbyn without tarnishing the reputation for the real leader who will be revealed later.
 
ThierryHenry said:
No doubt that that's the case.
Click to expand...

I hope she refuses to stand down when this happens.

I don't think that's the case at all though. I just think that's wishful thinking on behalf of those who wanted Corbyn gone.

If it's to happen it'll happen very shortly after this to move the story on quickly
 
Adebesi said:
Yeah. It lends credibility to the theory that she's a patsy, to destabilise Corbyn without tarnishing the reputation for the real leader who will be revealed later.
Click to expand...
Yeah, looks likely. Stupid and smart at the same time. Stupid, because it's so transparent and won't sit well with anyone. Smart, because whoever ousts Corbyn will be poison to the Labour membership, but whoever ousts Eagle (presumably through an internal PLP move where she just resigns) will be seen as a Napoleon figure by virtue of comparison to Eagle.
 
Smores said:
Doubt it, progress didn't want him last time because he's a 'moderniser' and wanted rid of the New Labour/Old Labour stuff.

It'll be their candidate this time.
Click to expand...
Progress weren't keen because he used to be Compass and voted for Ed.
 
Paul Mason just posted this up on twitter(He was one of the writers)

It's worth a watch, also very funny.
 
Just dissolve the Labour party and start again.

It's inevitable going to happen regardless of the outcome anyway, so get it over and done with and save everyone the bother.
 
I'm not married to Jeremy Corbyn by any means but if that waste of space is the best opposition to him then it's Corbyn or bust for me.

What a waste of human skin. 'I am a loyal Labour member' you voted for a war that killed or displaced millions, and has lead to ISIS out of loyalty and doing your bit for your party?

How can you even dream of being the Prime Minister if you are so fecking spineless.

It would be fitting for such a snivelling wanker to be elected without opposition following a secret ballot to have a secret ballot to keep someone with courage in his convictions off the actual ballot
 
Who do we actually think will put themselves forward if he isnt included automatically?

Owen Smith seems certain and as an outside bet im going to say the Progress candidate will be Bradshaw.
 
Slightly tangential but it took BBC 6 months to apologise for one of their many lies used against Corbyn and his supporters. Also shows the shockingly low standard of journalism nowadays where a single Facebook post can be taken as fact by so many "reputable" news outlets.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/comp-reports/ecu/today03122015
Complaint
Two listeners complained that the programme had inaccurately reported that a peaceful vigil in Walthamstow, in protest against the decision to bomb targets in Syria, had targeted the home of the local MP, Stella Creasy, and had been part of a pattern of intimidation towards Labour MPs who had supported the decision.

Outcome
The claim that the demonstration had targeted Ms Creasy’s home, and the implication that it was intimidatory in nature, originated from a single Facebook posting which later proved to be misleading (the demonstration’s destination was Ms Creasy’s constituency office, which was unoccupied at the time, not her home, and it was peaceful). Nevertheless, it had been taken up by a number of commentators on social media and by reputable news outlets, including The Independent and The Guardian. The first reference to the story in the 3 December edition of Today was in a review of the morning’s papers. Later in the programme, a report by Ross Hawkins included an audio clip from the demonstration, stated that it had taken place outside the constituency office, and carried an interview with one of the organisers who described it as “very peaceful”. Shortly after this, Nick Robinson interviewed John McDonnell about divisions in the Labour Party in relation to the vote on bombing Syria in terms which reflected the belief that the demonstration had taken place outside Ms Creasy’s home and had been an instance of bullying and intimidation (a belief which Mr McDonnell did not contest). The 7 December edition of Today included a correction which made the venue of the demonstration clear but did not address the question of intimidation. The ECU found that the 3 December programme had been duly accurate in its review of the papers, but inaccurate in the references to the matter during the interview with Mr McDonnell, and that the 7 December correction had left a significant element of inaccuracy to stand.
Partly upheld
Click to expand...
 
That is a seriously sloppily drafted clause to be in such an important part of the Labour rule book. I can easily read it either way.
 
Voting now, Corbyn's been allowed to vote!
 


He's on! The party's destruction now delayed for a month or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.