Saturday 16th & Sunday 17th July 2016

[utopiandreams]

That's me told. I simply ain't good enough not being from Northern, working class stock.

[yahyah]

Last night's ICM poll is not good news for either of the Labour factions:

Tories 39%
Labour 29%
Ukip 14%
Lib Dem 9%
Green 4%

When May & Corbyn are named to the respondents it gets worse:
Tories 43%
Labour 28%

When May & Owen Smith are named:
Tories 42%
Labour 27%

When May & Eagle are named:
Tories 43%
Labour 26%

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[utopiandreams]

Oh... I ain't a woman either.

[danesclose]

Danesclose

No.

You should follow the lead of Ed Miliband.

I strongly agree with him.

*Swims up. Sniffs bait. Swims away*

[SpinningHugo]

Last night's ICM poll is not good news for either of the Labour factions:

Tories 39%
Labour 29%
Ukip 14%
Lib Dem 9%
Green 4%

When May & Corbyn are named to the respondents it gets worse:
Tories 43%
Labour 28%

When May & Owen Smith are named:
Tories 42%
Labour 27%

When May & Eagle are named:
Tories 43%
Labour 26%

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd be surprised if more than 1 in 4 know who Smith is.

Those figures also tell you what would happen in an election campaign with Corbin as leader. Guess what people would be reminded of daily.

[utopiandreams]

No matter, I'm not standing for party leadership although I almost wish I were. My opponents would be buried without trace once they'd delved into my cupboard.

[AnatolyKasparov]

No, the poll shows us that the Tories are doing well in the initial honeymoon for a new PM. As widely predicted and in line with past precedent.

(before you say anything, I don't think Labour are likely to do well in a GE with Corbyn as leader - but, as I have said several times before, I don't think he will be)

[PorFavor]

No, the poll shows us that the Tories are doing well in the initial honeymoon for a new PM. As widely predicted and in line with past precedent.

(before you say anything, I don't think Labour are likely to do well in a GE with Corbyn as leader - but, as I have said several times before, I don't think he will be)

But he's (Jeremy Corbyn's) spending the lead-up time (however long or short that might be) to his successor, solely engaged in what I can only describe as extra-curricula activities. Both sides are guilty of this, of course, but Jeremy Corbyn should be showing a bit of, um, leadership. At the moment he is too busy protecting his own position. If he were to come out with something more substantive then we could at least be not trying to grapple with mist. At the moment, he seems to me to be being everything he claims to be against.




Edit - typo

[fedup59]

Morning all

Just thought I'd double check where we are with the Labour party leadership contest to make sure I understand how party democracy works.

There's a leadership challenge, although that didn't really need to happen if the leader, elected by the majority of the party membership had just listened to the Oracle that is the PLP and accepted that he could never be elected by real people. He was only elected by party members because they were the wrong kind of people to be in the party in the first place.

So to fix this there will now be a proper election but only party members who had the foresight to join before February, because that's a month, will be able to vote. Although people who have 25 quid and want to spend it now can buy a vote if they like because that's a better amount than paying membership in March, which is not a good month and as everybody knows has "ides" which is bad for governing.

To make this election better there really should be one challenger, because there is after all only one person challenged, and that means that only people called Smith should be allowed to challenge, because that's a really common name so would obviously appeal to real people.

So if party members want to show that they are real people and not evil commies or anything, they should vote for someone called Smith and that will show everyone in the country that Labour should be in charge, especially since the government is being run by someone called May and we all know that's a month that comes after February.

So I should vote for Smith

Do I have that right now?

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

[pala]

Last night's ICM poll is not good news for either of the Labour factions:

Tories 39%
Labour 29%
Ukip 14%
Lib Dem 9%
Green 4%

When May & Corbyn are named to the respondents it gets worse:
Tories 43%
Labour 28%

When May & Owen Smith are named:
Tories 42%
Labour 27%

When May & Eagle are named:
Tories 43%
Labour 26%

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd be surprised if more than 1 in 4 know who Smith is.

Those figures also tell you what would happen in an election campaign with Corbin as leader. Guess what people would be reminded of daily.

Yes and if the BS "coup" (and all the sniping prior) had not occurred Labour would not be in this position.

The difference is on policy. Corbyn, with his policies made explicit, won the leadership election. Here is what you should have done next: Support his policies (or keep quiet), don't snipe or smear, don't mount coups which degenerate a fiasco. Leave it for a year or two. Then if there is good reason to do so choose someone to stand against him and have a contest.

It's not really that you think he's unelectable (though by your actions and of those of your kind he may have been made unelectable), you don't want those policies to be realised. Stubborn, dishonest and wrong.

It is a totally disgraceful situation that an elected leader of the party is having to fight not only the media (and see the report I posted yesterday on how they've singled him out for "special" treatment) but these fools who thought they were being so clever.

You are not only doing the right wing media's job for them. You are their fool, their dupe.

[AnatolyKasparov]

No, the poll shows us that the Tories are doing well in the initial honeymoon for a new PM. As widely predicted and in line with past precedent.

(before you say anything, I don't think Labour are likely to do well in a GE with Corbyn as leader - but, as I have said several times before, I don't think he will be)

But he's (Jeremy Corbyn's) spending the lead-up time (however long or short that might be) to his successor, solely engaged in what I can only describe as extra-curricula activities. Both sides are guilty of this, of course, but Jeremy Corbyn should be showing a bit of, um, leadership. At the moment he is too busy protecting his own position. If he were to come out with something more substantive then we could at least be not trying to grapple with mist. At the moment, he seems to me to be being everything he claims to be against.

Well, one good thing about the coming leadership campaign will hopefully be that JC will have to come out with some actual political positions.

As now seems to be the case with Smith, approve of his candidacy or not.

[PorFavor]

I vaguely liked Owen Smith - without knowing much about him - but was cheered by his willingness to call a liar a liar without pussyfooting around. However, since taking the trouble to investigate his back-story, I've gone right off him.

Now what, I wonder?

[AnatolyKasparov]

I'm not so bothered about his back story, tbh - that was then and this is now.

Tony Blair was once a leftie, Tony Benn was once on the right of the party. Smith may be a bit of an opportunist, but in moderation that quality is not always bad. If it shows he "gets" where much of the party now is and that he has to work with that rather than constantly fight against it, that is actually a good thing IMO.

[PorFavor]

No, the poll shows us that the Tories are doing well in the initial honeymoon for a new PM. As widely predicted and in line with past precedent.

(before you say anything, I don't think Labour are likely to do well in a GE with Corbyn as leader - but, as I have said several times before, I don't think he will be)

But he's (Jeremy Corbyn's) spending the lead-up time (however long or short that might be) to his successor, solely engaged in what I can only describe as extra-curricula activities. Both sides are guilty of this, of course, but Jeremy Corbyn should be showing a bit of, um, leadership. At the moment he is too busy protecting his own position. If he were to come out with something more substantive then we couldat least be not trying to grapple with mist. At the moment, he seems to me to be being everything he claims to be against.

What do you call his calls for Labour not to let the Tories run away with Brexit negotiations unchallenged?

Well, vague waffle, I'm afraid.

[Willow904]

I vaguely liked Owen Smith - without knowing much about him - but was cheered by his willingness to call a liar a liar without pussyfooting around. However, since taking the trouble to investigate his back-story, I've gone right off him.

Now what, I wonder?

Justin Welby once worked in the oil industry. His background doesn't really suggest much early interest in churchiness, but having decided to take the cloth later in life I don't think anyone would question his committment. Perhaps some insight into powerful vested interests can make someone more determined to represent those who have little power?
His voting record, rather than past career is probably the better way to judge him:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24797 ... pontypridd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24797 ... ridd/votes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ephemerid]

Morning all

Just thought I'd double check where we are with the Labour party leadership contest to make sure I understand how party democracy works.

There's a leadership challenge, although that didn't really need to happen if the leader, elected by the majority of the party membership had just listened to the Oracle that is the PLP and accepted that he could never be elected by real people. He was only elected by party members because they were the wrong kind of people to be in the party in the first place.

So to fix this there will now be a proper election but only party members who had the foresight to join before February, because that's a month, will be able to vote. Although people who have 25 quid and want to spend it now can buy a vote if they like because that's a better amount than paying membership in March, which is not a good month and as everybody knows has "ides" which is bad for governing.

To make this election better there really should be one challenger, because there is after all only one person challenged, and that means that only people called Smith should be allowed to challenge, because that's a really common name so would obviously appeal to real people.

So if party members want to show that they are real people and not evil commies or anything, they should vote for someone called Smith and that will show everyone in the country that Labour should be in charge, especially since the government is being run by someone called May and we all know that's a month that comes after February.

So I should vote for Smith

Do I have that right now?

Well, nearly, fedup.

Close, but no cigarillo.

February is now, by edict, 12th.January. Whilst that is not May and has no Ides 'cos it isn't March, (March, fedup, not February), you still can't vote without paying £25 if you joined in February. Or after 12th, January, and the whole of March, April, May, June, or July.

You cannot vote for Ms.Eagle because she is called Angela and looks just like her twin Maria, who is also right northern, her; also, she didn't have the foresight to buy a web domain entitled "vote for me" several weeks before she wanted people to "vote for me", thus proving that she has always supported Mr.Corbyn but is now so distressed at his inability to campaign for Remain, despite having the energy of a 25 year-old and making 120-plus appearances on the campaign trail, that she's, like, in tears. She also has an office in an area where there are 4,000 acts of anti-social behaviour annually so it's no wonder that her office didn't have a window broken. Plus her campaign poster are pink which is a bit Barbara Cartland and probably designed by Mrs.Dromey who likes pink. On a bus, anyway.

You can vote for Owen Smith because - a) Owen is a nice name and despite not being spelt in the Welsh way, he is in fact Welsh and we all know what lefties the Welsh are on account of their new AMs coming from UKIP and their vote for Brexit; b) Smith is, as you say, a very common name and that means that Owen is dead ordinary, and the £200,000 he got from big pharma to plug their stuff and advise more private input into the NHS is just a normal remuneration like wot ordinary people like him get; and c) he will have as many referenda as it takes to get the correct result which is what democracy is all about. He is the unifying candidate because he does not approve of Corbyn and does not approve of Eagle and is called Smith which is really really unifying 'cos so are lots of other people.

You can only vote for Mr.Smith if you are made of money. If you have joined after January 12th. you will already have paid £27.51p in monthly fees, but you can't vote because the rules that applied on 12th. January, 12th.February, 12th.March, 12th.April, 12th.May, and 12th.June were changed on 12th.July. Yah sucks boo to you, that'll be £25 please. And if some nice generous person from justgiving wants to help you out, tough luck because they're not allowed to and the organisers are likely to be barred. So they can't vote either.

If at any point you decide to roll your eyes/tut/point a finger/etc./plus new offences not yet identified, and/or attend a meeting to discuss all this which is not allowed any more, you'll be barred too. So you won't even be able to vote for that nice Mr.Smith.

In fact, you can't really vote for anyone at all. That's because John McTernan says nobody cares about the members or the grassroots.

I hope that clarifies things for you. If in any doubt, please contact the Politburo at 105 Victoria Street SW1. Your call is important to us...

[HindleA]

Gavin Barwell Minister of State for Housing&Planning and Minister For London

[JonnyT1234]

The problem with weathervanes is that they aren't actually any good at telling you the weather.

[danesclose]

I'm not so bothered about his back story, tbh - that was then and this is now.

Tony Blair was once a leftie, Tony Benn was once on the right of the party. Smith may be a bit of an opportunist, but in moderation that quality is not always bad. If it shows he "gets" where much of the party now is and that he has to work with that rather than constantly fight against it, that is actually a good thing IMO.

If he were to win the leadership election, do you think the Right of the party will quit the sniping & let him lead?

[danesclose]

The problem with weathervanes is that they aren't actually any good at telling you the weather.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

[fedup59]

Thanks for explaining all that Ephie. Politics is dead complicated though so maybe I shouldn't get to vote ever. Is there a test for people like me? it's terrible if people like me can have an equal say to real people who understand how things should work

[AnatolyKasparov]

I'm not so bothered about his back story, tbh - that was then and this is now.

Tony Blair was once a leftie, Tony Benn was once on the right of the party. Smith may be a bit of an opportunist, but in moderation that quality is not always bad. If it shows he "gets" where much of the party now is and that he has to work with that rather than constantly fight against it, that is actually a good thing IMO.

If he were to win the leadership election, do you think the Right of the party will quit the sniping & let him lead?

Some of them might actually, simply out of relief that he is not Corbyn.

(these types might have also have given more support to Ed had they known what the consequences of their actions would be)

Of course, there will still be some diehards who refuse to be reconciled. Well, there is always the deselection option for them

[PorFavor]

I'm almost reaching the point where I'll settle for anyone who is defined by what they want to happen - as distinct from what they don't want.

[SpinningHugo]

[

The difference is on policy. Corbyn, with his policies made explicit, won the leadership election.

This is VERY important.

Think back. What was Jeremy Corbyn's signature domestic policy in the last leadership election?

End austerity right?

How did he say he would do this in a way differently from that being proposed by Miliband and Balls?

He had two proposals.

First, "People's Quaantitative Easing." This is what economists call helicopter money. It isn't an insane idea, but it is a hard political sell. Basically it involves just giving money to people (ie printing it).

As an economic policy it makes some sense where interest rates are at the zero lower bound (as they are now) so that further monetary easing is impossible (using fiscal policy, ie borrowing more, is better but that was Miliband/Balls). Corbyn did not qualify his proposals in this way however and just suggested it as a nice way of paying for stuff. That is truly dumb, as Cooper belatedly pointed out at the time.

Second 'ending corporate welfare': basically clamping down on tax evasion and avoidance. This was always nonsense of the worst kind. The idea that there were billions in taxes left uncollect by Gordon Brown is just a joke that no credible tax experts accept (and Murphy is a lone voice, and not very credible).

What happened to these suggestions?

Well, McDonnell gathered together a group of credible left-ish economists, and togetehr they came up with a plan.

Guess what?

Corbyn's crackpot suggestions (which enabled him to say that ending austerity would be easy and he represented a break from the past) have been (rightly) abandoned.

What is Labour's economic policy now?

It ivolves using fiscal policy for investment while interest rates are at the zlb, with a long term plan for fiscal stability.

ie *exacly* the policy that Balls and Miliband campaigned on.

It is a perfectly sensible policy. It is the one I support. it is what Hammond is moving towards. it is what Smith is now arguing for.

What it isn't is what Corbyn suggested.

Corbyn was elected on a false prospectus. He offered easy solutions, and abandoned them once elected.

I wasn't the dupe.

[SpinningHugo]

I don't think Labour are likely to do well in a GE with Corbyn as leader - but, as I have said several times before, I don't think he will be)

And how do you think the happy situation of Corbyn not leading Labour into an election will come about?

Will he quit (as you repeatedly claimed)?

Possible, of course, but seems very unlikely to me.

or will he be pushed? (ie he *needs* to be challenged and complaining about 'coups' is dumb if you want that objective to be achieved)

[danesclose]

2016-07-17_120053.jpg (185.81 KiB) Viewed 8520 times

[AnatolyKasparov]

Yes, I could see Corbyn being re-elected this year but voluntarily stepping down in 2017/18 - having "made his point".

One thing to bear in mind here - various rule changes are being proposed at this year's conference and there is a good chance of many of them passing. These include a big cut in the number of MPs needed to nominate a leadership candidate, and moves to make it easier to start the process of deselection.

He could then take the view that everything won't be easily reversed once he goes.

[ohsocynical]

Do we want a Labour party that is right leaning, that we were all unhappy with a couple of years ago, that plotted against another decent clever politician, that helped lose the GE, but there was nothing better on offer?

If we vote for Smith or Eagle or any one of the other 172 MPs we might as well vote Tory. If anyone thinks these machinations are for the love of us, or for the Labour party, for the sick, disabled, hungry, homeless, then you're wearing a very efficient pair of blinkers.

They're liars, shit stirrers, disloyal and couldn't give a tuppeny damn for the 'grassroots'. They've betrayed us, and by choosing to do their infighting now, have betrayed the country.

I'm not surprised they've dropped so low in the polls. They are a disgrace.

[SpinningHugo]

Yes, I could see Corbyn being re-elected this year but voluntarily stepping down in 2017/18 - having "made his point".

One thing to bear in mind here - various rule changes are being proposed at this year's conference and there is a good chance of many of them passing. These include a big cut in the number of MPs needed to nominate a leadership candidate, and moves to make it easier to start the process of deselection.

He could then take the view that everything won't be easily reversed once he goes.

I think the first proposition is far-fetched in the extreme. The Campaign Group have spent decades in the wilderness. The idea that he'll now quit having 'made his point' is just silly. If he wasn't going to quit after 81% of MPs gave him a vote of no confidence and the shadow cabinet resigning en masse, he'll never quit.

As for the rule changes, yes. There will be more to come. That is the game/race that the PLP is in with Corbyn and McDonnell.

There is no route for even the most optimistic where this ends well.

[TobyLatimer]

Agree with that sentiment ohso, also it would have been much better to let Corbyn hold the position for a few years and at least give him a chance. Then if he desired not to lead into a general election let him resign the post and hold a new dignified leadership election.

Instead of right from the outset we have had the likes of Unumma , Johnson, Cooper , Reeves and countless others walk away from front bench posts and refuse to to work with him.

[PorFavor]

I'm almost reaching the point where I'll settle for anyone who is defined by what they want to happen - as distinct from what they don't want.

That's a government, not an opposition.

I disagree. Making things happen - that's government, I grant you.

Edited to add -

Or, if not actual government, very effective and organised opposition.

[fedup59]

Seems to me the Labour party has moved from representative democracy and flirted with participatory democracy. This is now being used to undermine MP accountability to members by arguing that their only accountability is to their constituents as though they rose Venus like from the brain of the God democracy. What you might term bubble democracy that free floats above any party structures and is there to be crowd sourced by vaguely politically interested people.

Seems a sad end for a party built by people who fought for political, social and economic rights to underpin a socially just society. Is the best we can/should expect a party that promises to tinker with some of the consequences of the current system?

[ohsocynical]

Agree with that sentiment ohso, also it would have been much better to let Corbyn hold the position for a few years and at least give him a chance. Then if he desired not to lead into a general election let him resign the post and hold a new dignified leadership election.

Instead of right from the outset we have had the likes of Unumma , Johnson, Cooper , Reeves and countless others walk away from front bench posts and refuse to to work with him.

They are mealy mouthed sycophants.
Tweeting about supporting the leader when Corbyn first got elected and now they're pushing the knives in as hard as they can.

I despise them and what they stand for. Not that they stand for anything much, except their own advancement.

[Temulkar]

Yes, I could see Corbyn being re-elected this year but voluntarily stepping down in 2017/18 - having "made his point".

One thing to bear in mind here - various rule changes are being proposed at this year's conference and there is a good chance of many of them passing. These include a big cut in the number of MPs needed to nominate a leadership candidate, and moves to make it easier to start the process of deselection.

He could then take the view that everything won't be easily reversed once he goes.

I think the first proposition is far-fetched in the extreme. The Campaign Group have spent decades in the wilderness. The idea that he'll now quit having 'made his point' is just silly. If he wasn't going to quit after 81% of MPs gave him a vote of no confidence and the shadow cabinet resigning en masse, he'll never quit.

As for the rule changes, yes. There will be more to come. That is the game/race that the PLP is in with Corbyn and McDonnell.

There is no route for even the most optimistic where this ends well.

The only route out for Labour is for the whiggish entryists to leave or be expelled. For Progress to be treated as a party within the party - which is what it has become - and to be expelled. Progress has become the new militant, it has undermined and brought down the last two Labour leaders and is now doing its damndest to bring down a third, it has lost Labour two elections, a brexit vote, all of scotland, and is on the verge of losing Wales and the North.

The only way for labour to survive and succeed is for it to become a mass movement of the people again, the only leader capable of doing that is Corbyn. The british people do not want anymore weathervane politicians in Labour and the Progress Whigs havent got a single signpost among them, they have spent the last thirty years as vaacuous chameleons benefitting mainly themselves. They are defined by their social cowardice and electoral failure in times very different from 1997. They are dinosaurss stuck in the past and soon to fossilise in irrelevancy.

Labour can be a movement again, and the finish of the spadocracy is the only way to achive it.

[ohsocynical]

Corbyn said from the start he wanted a different sort of politics. With good reason too many were disenchanted with Westminster and our political elite. He wanted, for want of a better expression, 'the man on the street', to have more of a say in how the country was run. He wanted to give a bit of power back to the powerless ... Encourage the disenfranchised back into the fold.

That was his main message, and he's done it in spades. Much to the disgust of those who don't want the status quo changed.

[ephemerid]

Thanks for explaining all that Ephie. Politics is dead complicated though so maybe I shouldn't get to vote ever. Is there a test for people like me? it's terrible if people like me can have an equal say to real people who understand how things should work

Well, my dear, you should be guided by what you are told by people who know better than you. I certainly am. Oh yes.

If the meeja tell me a thing, I know it definitely must be true because the LSE knows nothing and is communist.
If a post on this forum tells me that I should do this or that, I absolutely totally completely know it must be right.
If a bunch of people secretly vote to stop other people voting, then they are being very democratic indeed.

Unfortunately, thickos like me with LeftieTrotRabbleDog tendencies fail to heed all the above, the fools.
This is why grown adults must never be given the opportunity to vote for anything. Unless they pay, obviously.

(This advice was brought to you by PeopleWhoCareMuchMoreThanYouDo Inc. To donate, send £25 or much much more on 2 specified days only or your donation will not be processed and you will have proved how unworthy you are)

[ohsocynical]

Have recently learned that the PLP decided Andy Burnham could be a threat and they didn't want him as leader.

Where does that leave all those who voted for Burnham as a less left candidate than Corbyn?

That should say it all about the power play we're seeing now.

[ohsocynical]

If the PLP are supporting Smith [Eagle was/is the red herring] then that will tell you how far to the right they want to take us.

Anything that comes out of his mouth can't be trusted.

[ephemerid]

I'm almost reaching the point where I'll settle for anyone who is defined by what they want to happen - as distinct from what they don't want.

That's a government, not an opposition.

Anyone remember how much fuss was made about Ed not having any policies? Right up to the GE campaign?

Moaning galore in the MSM that he didn't know what he was doing etc. The fact that he took his time to consult widely and formulate his ideas, while attempting to get the elements of the PLP who briefed against him onside (many of whom are now doing the same to Corbyn), was something that many here actually admired at the time.

Corbyn has been in post for 9 months and has had to deal with - 75% of all press articles being hostile and/or mendacious (says the LSE); local government elections (and Labour did OK); mayoral and PCC elections (and Labour did very well); and the EU Referendum (in which campaign he did much more than the Labour Remain leader Alan Johnson and got 63% of Labour voters to vote Remain); and on top of all that he's had constant sniping against him, acres of newsprint devoted to his uselessness, plots and coups threatened then abandoned then started again.....a lesser man would have crumbled.

Nobody moaned about Cameron not having any policies. He left all that to his minions. The Libbing Dead had loads of polices then abandoned them all at the first whiff of power.

Ed had policies. Corbyn has policies. Eagle doesn't. Smith has one which will cost £200 Billion.
And the PLP has a policy - just the one - get rid of the Leftie. The same one it has had since Blair went.

I despair.

[mbc1955]

Oh, come on now Temulkar!

Just when we were all doing so well.

[SpinningHugo]

Corbyn said from the start he wanted a different sort of politics. .

Well, that he has achieved, and then some.

De-selections here we come.

What heppens when these Blairite/Bitterite Quislings have been driven out?

Surely you'll have to keep a few?

Otherwise who will you have to blame for electoral defeat?

(Other than the Evil MSM, of course).


[deleted by Paul on request of another member]

[yahyah]

I don't agree with OhSo that we might as well vote Tory if we have a more middle/right Labour leader or party.

Just look at what happened under the Thatcher and Major years, and the Coalition and Cameron's lot without the Lib Dems.

Wouldn't it be far better to compromise, hard though that might be for our individual egos, the part of us that tells us we are right and everyone else is wrong, and be able to win an election, than be idealists who are rejected at the ballot box ?

I voted for Corbyn despite initially writing him off.
It was a lovely dream that people would warm to him, and that the party would unite behind him.
If Brown, Ed & now Corbyn had been helped rather than hindered by some in the party we may not be in the mess we are today, the party or the country.

Corbyn hasn't always helped himself, and now even papers like the Guardian repeat lies and untruths about him and his supporters - John Harris' piece still claims Angela Eagle cancelled her hotel meeting because of threats, whereas the Luton press actually quote the hotel who say they cancelled it, I am not sure a left wing Labour leader is an option at present. No such person will be allowed to succeed.
They'd have to be a remarkable mix of competent, charismatic, and able to really sell the vision we want to see come to reality.
It'd be tough enough for a Labour leader people like Rentoul, or the Guardian, would warm to.
Giving the media someone they hate again is a burden Labour doesn't have the luxury of going for surely ?

If Labour splits, it will be those who need a Labour government most who will suffer in the short term, and maybe even the longer term.
I would bet my house that a centre/right Labour government, for all its sins would still be much better than a Tory one.

[JonnyT1234]

[Deleted by Paul on request of another member]

Ewwww. Taste of sick in my throat.

[mbc1955]

I suppose Sunday's the appropriate day for the smell of burning martyrs...

[ohsocynical]

Now this is interesting and perhaps explained what's happened to Labour and why there is such a rift...

This article:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ganisation
was posted on our local Labour Facebook page.

An argument then ensued, BTL over - as far as I can make out - about who is an 'authority,' and just because they wear the label it doesn't mean they're necessarily right. And even Holocaust deniers are entitled to their opinions.
That caused one of the members who only joined a couple of days ago, to resign from the site in disgust.

In the meantime despite a new leader it's the same bunch of incompetents in charge; Brexit isn't going to go away, homelessness is rising and a great many people are hungry, heartsore and angry.

Like it or not, there are two distinct Labour parties now.

[yahyah]

Two distinct parties ? Is there no one in the middle ground ? Is it really so polarised there are no grey areas left ?

[ohsocynical]

I don't agree with OhSo that we might as well vote Tory if we have a more middle/right Labour leader or party.

Just look at what happened under the Thatcher and Major years, and the Coalition and Cameron's lot without the Lib Dems.

Wouldn't it be far better to compromise, hard though that might be for our individual egos, the part of us that tells us we are right and everyone else is wrong, and be able to win an election, than be idealists who are rejected at the ballot box ?

I voted for Corbyn despite initially writing him off.
It was a lovely dream that people would warm to him, and that the party would unite behind him.
If Brown, Ed & now Corbyn had been helped rather than hindered by some in the party we may not be in the mess we are today, the party or the country.

Corbyn hasn't always helped himself, and now even papers like the Guardian repeat lies and untruths about him and his supporters - John Harris' piece still claims Angela Eagle cancelled her hotel meeting because of threats, whereas the Luton press actually quote the hotel who say they cancelled it, I am not sure a left wing Labour leader is an option at present. No such person will be allowed to succeed.
They'd have to be a remarkable mix of competent, charismatic, and able to really sell the vision we want to see come to reality.
It'd be tough enough for a Labour leader people like Rentoul, or the Guardian, would warm to.
Giving the media someone they hate again is a burden Labour doesn't have the luxury of going for surely ?

If Labour splits, it will be those who need a Labour government most who will suffer in the short term, and maybe even the longer term.
I would bet my house that a centre/right Labour government, for all its sins would still be much better than a Tory one.

But if they [PLP] were prepared to head off the more moderate Andy Burnham as leader, what direction do you think they want to take us? It's quite clear when you read of their attempts to dislodge every leader since Brown that they're going to be satisfied with no less than Tory lite.

[ephemerid]

[Deleted by Paul on request of another member]

Ewwww. Taste of sick in my throat.

Vile.

Actually, first they came for the disabled, the sick, the "useless eaters". They forced them to work for their subsistence, then took it away bit by by bit until many of them starved. The ones that were left were taken away for experiments.
Then they came for the foreigners, the gypsies, the Jews, and anyone else who didn't fit the Aryan template. They stole their property, left them destitute, herded them into wagons, then made them work till they were ready for the gas chamber.

That was what was going on then. For some of us, some of that is going on now.

When Corbyn spoke at the Durham Miners' Gala about what pressure is, that is what he was talking about.
Hungry people. Homeless people. Ill people and poor people unsupported in a very rich country.

Not people who spend a lot of time concern trolling and posting specious comments which escalate in nastiness.

Vile.

[HindleA]

Forget all that,even with wholehearted support of the PLP,do you think he has more basic management/leadership skills than an average plant pot?
As much as possible because to claim full immunity would by disingenuous,I make my own mind up.
I don't have blinkers more panoramic view attempting to distil the extremes of bullshit,either way,and peer through the fog and have some feedback from those closer-equally aware I have to distil that.
There is a lot of distilling going own,it is rather a tortuous method aI agree.
To answer my own question,it appears not.
In lieu of a plant pot candidate(as far as I know,I wouldn't be surprised)
I will vote not for him
I am not blinkered,I am determinedly not so my eyes pop out with the effort
Neither am I blindfolded
I am not in what in reasonable times(sadly we are not)a Tory,Blairite etc
Horrifically I am someone with an HONEST view
That or part of a mass conspiracy to remove a leader that has much chance of becoming PM than I have of becoming Pope,winning the grand national as a horse and winning Miss World(if it's still going)
Delete as appropriate