Weekend Edition - Sat.20th.August/Sun.21st.August 2016

[pk1]

I thought some of you were going to look for another board so you didn't have to read this 'crap'?

I think that exemplifies your contempt for others of a different view to you

Can only speak for myself but I decided to post when I want to - I was here long before some of you & I won't allow myself to be silenced by you or anybody else.

[howsillyofme1]

Khan made it clear in his Radio 4 interview who he would be voting for, just didn't name the candidate.
Talked about the need for Labour to be in government, if my memory is correct.

Amusing to see the accusations against Khan, betrayal, he's a Muslim extremist who wants Sharia law, yet he's a fake Muslim who is a puppet of Tel Aviv !
Christian Woolmar got the same betrayal stuff thrown at him when he switched his vote away from Corbyn.

I think it is fair to challenge Khan on loyalty to the party leader and who did more for his election than Smith did. That doesn't mean it is correct though and he should be allowed to support Smith if he want......I just commented that I though his article today was poorly thought out and I think it is fair to question his motives, as it does not seem to be with any realistic hope of persuading people away from Corbyn

I also thought the comments copied from Twitter were fair enough....people who feel a bt frustrated but not being in anyway abusive

Some people will react poorly to these things and post stupid things - obviously you can point us to where someone close to Corbyn has accused him of supporting Sharia law (find that doubtful) and is a 'puppet of Tel Aviv'?

I think then we can also point to the accusations from senior PLP members accusing Corbyn of being a misogynist and anti-Semite

Both sides should stop with the abuse and get on with trying to have a positive campaign

[howsillyofme1]

I thought some of you were going to look for another board so you didn't have to read this 'crap'?

I think that exemplifies your contempt for others of a different view to you

Can only speak for myself but I decided to post when I want to - I was here long before some of you & I won't allow myself to be silenced by you or anybody else.

I am not asking you to be silenced...it is what one of the other posters said...

I just found your comment pathetic

[howsillyofme1]

It's getting so silly.

well shall we stop it then......?

I particularly take offence at pk1 comment that you 'liked'

I have seen no 'crap' posted on here today - just people's opinions which can be challenged and debated. To see someone just describe that as 'crap' is not condusive to harmony and, as you liked it, I suggest you agreed with it

[ephemerid]

Blimey, there are times when this place rivals twitter for crap. It's rapidly becoming meme central.

Not really.

[ephemerid]

Here we go again. Too boring.

Have a nice day.

[pk1]

Tories stockpiling these

https://www.politicshome.com/news/world ... nd-go-away" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and this will be mentioned time & time again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02z3x45" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If Corbyn is at the helm in 2020 or whenever Theresa May calls a general election, Labour is out for another 5 years.

[pk1]

Blimey, there are times when this place rivals twitter for crap. It's rapidly becoming meme central.

Not really.

Pop into the Corbyn thread. There you'll see a vast array of memes & twitter posts, alongside quotes with no reference point.

[howsillyofme1]

Here we go again. Too boring.

Have a nice day.

I was having a good morning posting as well, trying to open up some subjects for debate such as Tessa Jowell's comments on the Olympics and the main article in the Guardian (as well as having an enjoyable pop at Hodges!)

It seems though we cannot debate anymore or challenge the substance of posts.

I have posted my views and I am sure there are a lot who disagree

Instead of calling it 'crap' why not post why it is 'crap' and then I can respond

[AnatolyKasparov]

It's getting so silly.

On that, I suspect most of us can agree

[howsillyofme1]

Blimey, there are times when this place rivals twitter for crap. It's rapidly becoming meme central.

Not really.

Pop into the Corbyn thread. There you'll see a vast array of memes & twitter posts, alongside quotes with no reference point.

do you include your own in that...?

I don't go to those threads much as it is not tot intended as a place to debate

[ephemerid]

I am disinclined to pop into the Corbyn/Smith threads because they're about Corbyn/Smith.
There's quite enough of that here.

Twitter is good for some things.

There's a brilliant picture of the Christ the Redeemer statue, overlooking Rio, with his arms up in a "Mo". Class.

I'm off to do something useful and interesting for a while. Play nice, people.

[citizenJA]

Good-morning, everyone.

[howsillyofme1]

Good-morning, everyone.

Well it isn't really as someone has just posted on here that it is full of 'crap' - and seeing I have been posting then that suggests that includes mine

As you 'liked' said post can you point out the 'crap' being posted please, as the person who said it seems disinclined to do so?

[citizenJA]

I don't think Jeremy Corbyn unifies the Labour party and MPs. Under his leadership, Labour are torn apart.

[letsskiptotheleft]

Tim Montgomerie ن ‏@montie 13h13 hours ago
He nominated him. Traded on his popularity to beat @TessaJowell. And now turns on him. Such an opportunist

Crikey! Some scathing stuff about Khan this morning.

Worth remembering Montgomerie joined in with some of the most odious politicking during the mayorship election, when it suited him to bolster Goldsmiths pathetic campaign.

Twitter is basically full of twats, mostly, it isn't the electorate, it is one vacuous echo chamber for all sides, it doesn't win elections.

[pk1]

Tim Montgomerie ن ‏@montie 13h13 hours ago
He nominated him. Traded on his popularity to beat @TessaJowell. And now turns on him. Such an opportunist

Crikey! Some scathing stuff about Khan this morning.

Worth remembering Montgomerie joined in with some of the most odious politicking during the mayorship election, when it suited him to bolster Goldsmiths pathetic campaign.

Twitter is basically full of twats, mostly, it isn't the electorate, it is one vacuous echo chamber for all sides, it doesn't win elections.

2015 is perfect proof of this statement but the people who go out door-knocking for Labour report huge numbers of people saying they won't vote Labour whilst Corbyn remains leader yet they are called liars by strangers on the internet. Labour-supporting keyboard activists can be most abusive toward other Labour activists.

In any case, if the Corbynites are right when they claim Corbyn is a dead-cert to win, how can Corbyn have this contest in the bag AND Khan be opportunistic for backing Smith? Surely an opportunist would back the likely winner.

[howsillyofme1]

I don't think Jeremy Corbyn unifies the Labour party and MPs. Under his leadership, Labour are torn apart.

Fair enough, I personally think it is too easy to blame one side........people in the membership would see the same of Smith but they will just leave the party if he wins......

I still don't get what is 'crap' though in what was posted?

[howsillyofme1]

Crikey! Some scathing stuff about Khan this morning.

Worth remembering Montgomerie joined in with some of the most odious politicking during the mayorship election, when it suited him to bolster Goldsmiths pathetic campaign.

Twitter is basically full of twats, mostly, it isn't the electorate, it is one vacuous echo chamber for all sides, it doesn't win elections.

2015 is perfect proof of this statement but the people who go out door-knocking for Labour report huge numbers of people saying they won't vote Labour whilst Corbyn remains leader yet they are called liars by strangers on the internet. Labour-supporting keyboard activists can be most abusive toward other Labour activists.

It didn't seem they voted Labour in 2010 either, or even back to 2005 - how many voters lost over that time - 4 million or something?

The electoral evidence so far doesn't back that up so strongly though does it either - it seems that this argument is that when Labour do well it is in spite of Corbyn but if they do slightly less well than hoped then it is all because of him!

Perhaps now he is damaged goods but how much of this is also down to the PLP and their behaviour?

Oh, and about Twitter, perhaps someone should tell Jess Phillips?

[citizenJA]

I don't think Jeremy Corbyn unifies the Labour party and MPs. Under his leadership, Labour are torn apart.

Fair enough, I personally think it is too easy to blame one side........people in the membership would see the same of Smith but they will just leave the party if he wins......

I still don't get what is 'crap' though in what was posted?

You're demanding me to supply you with information about something I didn't write. Please stop.

[frightful_oik]

Crikey! Some scathing stuff about Khan this morning.

Worth remembering Montgomerie joined in with some of the most odious politicking during the mayorship election, when it suited him to bolster Goldsmiths pathetic campaign.

Twitter is basically full of twats, mostly, it isn't the electorate, it is one vacuous echo chamber for all sides, it doesn't win elections.

2015 is perfect proof of this statement but the people who go out door-knocking for Labour report huge numbers of people saying they won't vote Labour whilst Corbyn remains leader yet they are called liars by strangers on the internet. Labour-supporting keyboard activists can be most abusive toward other Labour activists.

In any case, if the Corbynites are right when they claim Corbyn is a dead-cert to win, how can Corbyn have this contest in the bag AND Khan be opportunistic for backing Smith? Surely an opportunist would back the likely winner.

Of course, there are also those who won't vote Labour if the PLP win.

[howsillyofme1]

I don't think Jeremy Corbyn unifies the Labour party and MPs. Under his leadership, Labour are torn apart.

Fair enough, I personally think it is too easy to blame one side........people in the membership would see the same of Smith but they will just leave the party if he wins......

I still don't get what is 'crap' though in what was posted?

You're demanding me to supply you with information about something I didn't write. Please stop.

well why did you like it then?

If you don't think that the thread was 'crap' then just say so

It wasn't a long post though - it had just one point to it

If you don't want to respond then fine...will be the last time I ask

[howsillyofme1]

Crikey! Some scathing stuff about Khan this morning.

Worth remembering Montgomerie joined in with some of the most odious politicking during the mayorship election, when it suited him to bolster Goldsmiths pathetic campaign.

Twitter is basically full of twats, mostly, it isn't the electorate, it is one vacuous echo chamber for all sides, it doesn't win elections.

2015 is perfect proof of this statement but the people who go out door-knocking for Labour report huge numbers of people saying they won't vote Labour whilst Corbyn remains leader yet they are called liars by strangers on the internet. Labour-supporting keyboard activists can be most abusive toward other Labour activists.

In any case, if the Corbynites are right when they claim Corbyn is a dead-cert to win, how can Corbyn have this contest in the bag AND Khan be opportunistic for backing Smith? Surely an opportunist would back the likely winner.

On the last point - I personally think Corbyn is likely to win, just based on the polling and discussions with fellow members. If Smith wins then I will support him in implementing the policies he has set out in his campaign

As to khan, the poortunism isn't about supporting Smith. Don't have an issue for that although he has opened himself up to some questions, some of which have been alluded to earlier in the thread

The opportunism in his article was supporting some of the memes (that word again) on the referendum and not being able to win. Some of these are weak in substance and others self-fulfilling. I wish he had been more positive about Smith instead of spending a lot of time talking about Corbyn

Also, I would repeat my point about the unity question - is he going to do the same if Corbyn wins, will he fully back the new leader?

[citizenJA]

The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) MPs, each one elected Labour, all working together in the Labour party, can form a Labour government.
There's no other way the PLP exist.
One leader doesn't 'win' against the PLP.

[AnatolyKasparov]

But the PLP can only do that in conjunction with the rest of the Labour movement.

Contrary to what too many of them seem to quite genuinely believe, they were not elected due to their transcendent individual brilliance - but because they were LABOUR.

And we all know that quite a few of them whined and moaned about Ed M as well - not to mention Brown.

In part this is because the PLP is *far* too unbalanced and right wing. This needs correcting.

[howsillyofme1]

The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) MPs, each one elected Labour, all working together in the Labour party, can form a Labour government.
There's no other way the PLP exist.
One leader doesn't 'win' against the PLP.

What Labour Party do they support though...one that the members want or one that has lost two elections on the bounce and only just scraped the 2005 one thanks to FPTP. The same party that lost 95% of the seats in Scotland?

Perhaps what you are suggesting that all put themselves up for reselection for the 2020 election so that we can be sure that they are still representing the party?

Or would it be more sensible if the PLP didn't fight so strongly against the leadership and try to find the way to work together?

Again you looking at it as being down to one side, can you not see that the PLP has made themselves look really bad in this - and that is their own fault

[gilsey]

Blimey, there are times when this place rivals twitter for crap. It's rapidly becoming meme central.

Not really.

Pop into the Corbyn thread. There you'll see a vast array of memes & twitter posts, alongside quotes with no reference point.

Why would I want to 'pop into the Corbyn thread'? I'm very grateful that that stuff isn't on here so I don't have to see it.

Anything that reduces the amount of labour leadership debate on the daily threads is very welcome to me. I wish I had some hope it would stop after the election, meaning here and elsewhere, but it's not going to, is it, whoever wins.

For the avoidance of doubt, that applies to the Smith thread also.

[howsillyofme1]

Not really.

Pop into the Corbyn thread. There you'll see a vast array of memes & twitter posts, alongside quotes with no reference point.

Why would I want to 'pop into the Corbyn thread'? I'm very grateful that that stuff isn't on here so I don't have to see it.

Anything that reduces the amount of labour leadership debate on the daily threads is very welcome to me. I wish I had some hope it would stop after the election, meaning here and elsewhere, but it's not going to, is it, whoever wins.

and I am as guilty of that as anyone - I think it is okay to have a debate on the leadership (you may disagree) when there is something substantive, such as the Khan article

What tends to happen is that we quickly seem to have the equivalent of Godwin's Law whereby every subject descends to a Corbyn argument (not as often Smith though - just about Corbyn)

It is these latter discussions we should try to avoid, but I cannot guarantee I will be able to behave

[citizenJA]

But the PLP can only do that in conjunction with the rest of the Labour movement.

Contrary to what too many of them seem to quite genuinely believe, they were not elected due to their transcendent individual brilliance - but because they were LABOUR.

And we all know that quite a few of them whined and moaned about Ed M as well - not to mention Brown.

In part this is because the PLP is *far* too unbalanced and right wing. This needs correcting.

The Parliamentary Labour party can only get elected by the Labour movement in conjunction with enough electors returning them to government.

I don't know what 'too many seem to genuinely believe', I know what I believe - Labour has many competent MPs as well as their Labour party membership. I'd vote for them for their own sake.

I've never hidden my admiration for both Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown.

UK election structure relies heavily on party endorsement, membership and affiliation. Other election structures exist - is that part of the 'correction' you're writing about? The Parliamentary Labour party MPs are 'too unbalanced and right wing'? How's that 'correction' going to take place, please?

[howsillyofme1]

But the PLP can only do that in conjunction with the rest of the Labour movement.

Contrary to what too many of them seem to quite genuinely believe, they were not elected due to their transcendent individual brilliance - but because they were LABOUR.

And we all know that quite a few of them whined and moaned about Ed M as well - not to mention Brown.

In part this is because the PLP is *far* too unbalanced and right wing. This needs correcting.

The Parliamentary Labour party can only get elected by the Labour movement in conjunction with enough electors returning them to government.

I don't know what 'too many seem to genuinely believe', I know what I believe - Labour has many competent MPs as well as their Labour party membership. I'd vote for them for their own sake.

I've never hidden my admiration for both Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown.

UK election structure relies heavily on party endorsement, membership and affiliation. Other election structures exist - is that part of the 'correction' you're writing about? The Parliamentary Labour party MPs are 'too unbalanced and right wing'? How's that 'correction' going to take place, please?

The correction could be done by mandatory reselection so the party membership have someone that truly represents them.

I am not in favour of this but then that would depend on the response if Corbyn wins again....any indication the PLP is not prepared to accept the result in the face of the membership vote makes it more likely to happen

If the MP are not reselected then they can stand as independents.....not sure I would give much for their chances but seeing they are so popular to not need the party then all should work out well for them shouldn't it?

[Temulkar]

An article Ive done on the leader of the Diggers - William Everard.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... Revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) MPs, each one elected Labour, all working together in the Labour party, can form a Labour government.
There's no other way the PLP exist.
One leader doesn't 'win' against the PLP.

What Labour Party do they support though...one that the members want or one that has lost two elections on the bounce and only just scraped the 2005 one thanks to FPTP. The same party that lost 95% of the seats in Scotland?

Perhaps what you are suggesting that all put themselves up for reselection for the 2020 election so that we can be sure that they are still representing the party?

Or would it be more sensible if the PLP didn't fight so strongly against the leadership and try to find the way to work together?

Again you looking at it as being down to one side, can you not see that the PLP has made themselves look really bad in this - and that is their own fault

There's currently only one Labour party.
No.
It would be sensible for the Labour party leader to acknowledge the vote of no confidence given him by his colleagues and resign for the good of the Labour party.
You're always down to one side.

[gilsey]

What tends to happen is that we quickly seem to have the equivalent of Godwin's Law whereby every subject descends to a Corbyn argument (not as often Smith though - just about Corbyn)

It is these latter discussions we should try to avoid, but I cannot guarantee I will be able to behave

I don't object to leadership debate in theory, after all it's not for me to say what people should talk about.
In practice I get weary of it and descend to tetchiness.

[citizenJA]

But the PLP can only do that in conjunction with the rest of the Labour movement.

Contrary to what too many of them seem to quite genuinely believe, they were not elected due to their transcendent individual brilliance - but because they were LABOUR.

And we all know that quite a few of them whined and moaned about Ed M as well - not to mention Brown.

In part this is because the PLP is *far* too unbalanced and right wing. This needs correcting.

The Parliamentary Labour party can only get elected by the Labour movement in conjunction with enough electors returning them to government.

I don't know what 'too many seem to genuinely believe', I know what I believe - Labour has many competent MPs as well as their Labour party membership. I'd vote for them for their own sake.

I've never hidden my admiration for both Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown.

UK election structure relies heavily on party endorsement, membership and affiliation. Other election structures exist - is that part of the 'correction' you're writing about? The Parliamentary Labour party MPs are 'too unbalanced and right wing'? How's that 'correction' going to take place, please?

The correction could be done by mandatory reselection so the party membership have someone that truly represents them.

I am not in favour of this but then that would depend on the response if Corbyn wins again....any indication the PLP is not prepared to accept the result in the face of the membership vote makes it more likely to happen

If the MP are not reselected then they can stand as independents.....not sure I would give much for their chances but seeing they are so popular to not need the party then all should work out well for them shouldn't it?

Do you think me responsible for all the actions of those I may sometimes support?
Do you think I answer for others?
I'm not responsible for all their actions nor do I speak for anyone but myself.
Why are you asking me if it will work out for anyone?
I can't answer for them.

[AngryAsWell]

An article Ive done on the leader of the Diggers - William Everard.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... Revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"They really were the Sex Pistols of the English Reformation!"
I love your writing, you have such a way of putting things as to make them come alive. This period of history is not one I've had an interest in, but you have changed that.
Thanks

[JonnyT1234]

It would be sensible for the Labour party leader to acknowledge the vote of no confidence given him by his colleagues and resign for the good of the Labour party.
You're always down to one side.

That isn't for the good of the Labour Party though, is it? It's for the good of the PLP. If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

PS. The PLP should never have opted for that vote of no confidence. It is the stupidest of the extremely long line of stupid things they've done. They should have gone straight for the leadership election.

[citizenJA]

That isn't for the good of the Labour Party though, is it?

Yes, it is.

[citizenJA]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

[howsillyofme1]

The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) MPs, each one elected Labour, all working together in the Labour party, can form a Labour government.
There's no other way the PLP exist.
One leader doesn't 'win' against the PLP.

What Labour Party do they support though...one that the members want or one that has lost two elections on the bounce and only just scraped the 2005 one thanks to FPTP. The same party that lost 95% of the seats in Scotland?

Perhaps what you are suggesting that all put themselves up for reselection for the 2020 election so that we can be sure that they are still representing the party?

Or would it be more sensible if the PLP didn't fight so strongly against the leadership and try to find the way to work together?

Again you looking at it as being down to one side, can you not see that the PLP has made themselves look really bad in this - and that is their own fault

There's currently only one Labour party.
No.
It would be sensible for the Labour party leader to acknowledge the vote of no confidence given him by his colleagues and resign for the good of the Labour party.
You're always down to one side.

Am I really......? At least I lay out my arguments.....and I am happy to be challenged on them......which I am regularly

'There is currently one Labour Party' - what does that mean?

Your view that the leader has to resign on the say so of the PLP, despite having the mandate within the party membership leaves us with a dilemma....

I think your arguments only leave us with a few options

Corbyn resigns

Unlikely to happen if he wins
If you support the status quo and think the party will turn itself round after the defeats in 2010 and 2015 then this would be a favoured option
Some of us think the PLP have not demonstrated that and I have no confidence in them providing a credible opposition

PLP Gets Behind Leader

With all the talk of unity you would expect this to happen
The talented members of the PLP will come together in a shadow cabinet that can challenge the Tories and make up for Corbyn's weaknesses
Unlikely to happen either, as wagons have been drawn

PLP Split

In theory very possible, but in practice not so sure
SDP didn't do so well
Legal position not clear but NEC hold the power now....and the unions are not likely to be too happy
Who would be the leader in this case?


Mandatory Reselection

I think this may come to pass if the PLP does not accept the result but cannot bring themselves to split. I know there is an outcry against this but it would deal with the issue about what is the Labour Party.
I think a good number of MPs would stay but some wouldn't
Would be really painful I imagine

So there you have it - my views. The most palatable and easy to see are the first two options - but the first one would stop me voting for Labour and lead to me leaving so obviously not happy with that.

The second one would be the best for me but unlikely to happen

The next two would drain the wound but would be an existential threat

So, to me there is not one Labour Party at the moment and until we try to deal with it then it will fester

As you can see I have looked at all sides and made my decision - your accusation that I only look at one side is erroneous and actually, as I am a scientist, my difficulty is usually the opposite - I do not deal in certainties

My opinion is mine only, and many others will challenge it - it is just that I do not believe it is 'crap'

[howsillyofme1]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

Crikey those last two comments show a high degree of certainty

I wish I had your level of self-belief (that is the polite word)

[AngryAsWell]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

Not this member either.

[howsillyofme1]

The Parliamentary Labour party can only get elected by the Labour movement in conjunction with enough electors returning them to government.

I don't know what 'too many seem to genuinely believe', I know what I believe - Labour has many competent MPs as well as their Labour party membership. I'd vote for them for their own sake.

I've never hidden my admiration for both Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown.

UK election structure relies heavily on party endorsement, membership and affiliation. Other election structures exist - is that part of the 'correction' you're writing about? The Parliamentary Labour party MPs are 'too unbalanced and right wing'? How's that 'correction' going to take place, please?

The correction could be done by mandatory reselection so the party membership have someone that truly represents them.

I am not in favour of this but then that would depend on the response if Corbyn wins again....any indication the PLP is not prepared to accept the result in the face of the membership vote makes it more likely to happen

If the MP are not reselected then they can stand as independents.....not sure I would give much for their chances but seeing they are so popular to not need the party then all should work out well for them shouldn't it?

Do you think me responsible for all the actions of those I may sometimes support?
Do you think I answer for others?
I'm not responsible for all their actions nor do I speak for anyone but myself.
Why are you asking me if it will work out for anyone?
I can't answer for them.

What does this mean?

If you are referring to the liking of the post when pk1 said that the thread was full of 'crap' then I am just asking you what was meant by it? In my book liking a post written as that was suggests agreement......pk1 has not responded

If I am mistaken and that you just look at who posted something before you 'like' it rather than reading it I apologise

[howsillyofme1]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

Not this member either.

Well let us wait until September

If you are in the minority then do you accept the result seeing it will come after this stupid vote of no-confidence?

Or are you and CitizenJA 'supermembers'?

[JonnyT1234]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

Had a longer answer but... Whatever, waste of time.

Will limit myself to crap jokes about other stuff as far as is possible. Speaking of which... Iain Duncan Smith.

[citizenJA]

PS. The PLP should never have opted for that vote of no confidence. It is the stupidest of the extremely long line of stupid things they've done. They should have gone straight for the leadership election.

Disagree.

It is unprecedented for a Labour leader to cling to leadership after losing 75% of his colleagues' confidence.

The Parliamentary Labour party MPs' vote of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn was a legal, just action called after Corbyn's poor administration, lack of communication with party colleagues, irresponsible demands and poor loyalty shown Labour MPs working for Labour, country and people.

Do Greens do it differently?

[yahyah]

I am disinclined to pop into the Corbyn/Smith threads because they're about Corbyn/Smith.
There's quite enough of that here.

Twitter is good for some things.

There's a brilliant picture of the Christ the Redeemer statue, overlooking Rio, with his arms up in a "Mo". Class.

I'm off to do something useful and interesting for a while. Play nice, people.

The idea for them originally - despite people seemingly wilfully misunderstanding, was to provide a place were posts would be kept, in date order, showing announcements, policies, campaign info etc for both candidates.

I, and I know others agreed, that having a place to bookmark significant pieces of info would be useful, as we did with Trollbusters on the old site, as those who have been longstanding members of the forum will know.

The onslaught against any non-Corbyn contender means people who are genuinely open minded, undecided, or have decided that in their opinion, based on observations and experience over the past year, feel they have to brave a hostile crowd for daring to hold the view Corbyn is not the right leader.

Maybe the best thing to do, for a temporary period, if people want it, is two daily threads ?
It would unfortunately reflect the way the wider party is going ''I'm right/You're wrong' but why should those of us who have stuck with FTN, often through thick and thin to keep it going, be bumped off the site ?

[citizenJA]

So, to me there is not one Labour Party at the moment and until we try to deal with it then it will fester

This is your opinion. There isn't more than one Labour party now. Asking others to tell you which Labour party they support doesn't make sense.

[Temulkar]

An article Ive done on the leader of the Diggers - William Everard.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... Revolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"They really were the Sex Pistols of the English Reformation!"
I love your writing, you have such a way of putting things as to make them come alive. This period of history is not one I've had an interest in, but you have changed that.
Thanks

I thought it might be a welcome distraction from Labour's leadership woes. here's another less political but far more tragic, I think. And a womens story rather than a mans which is also important.

http://jemahlevans.wixsite.com/jemahlev ... 612---1684" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[howsillyofme1]

PS. The PLP should never have opted for that vote of no confidence. It is the stupidest of the extremely long line of stupid things they've done. They should have gone straight for the leadership election.

Disagree.

It is unprecedented for a Labour leader to cling to leadership after losing 75% of his colleagues' confidence.

The Parliamentary Labour party MPs' vote of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn was a legal, just action called after Corbyn's poor administration, lack of communication with party colleagues, irresponsible demands and poor loyalty shown Labour MPs working for Labour, country and people.

Do Greens do it differently?

You forgot to add 'in my view' here! You don't know for certain what is going on behind the scenes do you?

It was perhaps a legal, just action just as it was a legal, just action for the leadership to vote for Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the party

It is just one has no meaning and the other one is constitutionally relevant

I think the argument was that it was a stupid thing to do and it has backfired - can you tell me what it actually achieved? Do you think it will make bringing the party back together any easier?

It was done as a way to force the leader to resign and try to keep him off the leadership ballot.....followed up by an attempt to do it at the NEC. It is one of those things that has to succeed...if not it is massively counter-productive

The PLP/establishment do not want Corbyn as leader and they have messed up every attempt to do so - the coup, the no-confidence vote, the NEC vote, the lack of a credible candidate in the leadership campaign, the continual use of the press to undermine him - so much so now they are starting to get desperate

What they do if he gets reelected is anyones guess as they are becoming less and less rational......they have to win because if the don't some of them have lost their career!

[yahyah]

If he resigned he'd be betraying the Members.

No, not this Member.

Not this member either.

Nor the two members in this household.

Last year was last year. A year later, with so much changed and the EU vote for leave, it is a different political landscape.

Things change, that is as certain as taxes and dying.