FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Brrr ...

''Fit-for-work tests linked to relapses in those with mental health problems
Dr Jed Boardman says work capability assessment causes distress for people with severe problems and has led to relapses''
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... h-problems" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


That's probably a plus for some Tories.

Wonder if John Mann will be all over the airwaves today denouncing the WCA & demanding IDS should go as not being suitable for the job.

Just checked his tweets, and saw this from earlier in the week.

John Mann ‏@JohnMannMP Nov 19
The Dickens file contained 19 names of Tory activists and was also given to central office and Ian Gow as Tory vice chairman in 1984

John Mann ‏@JohnMannMP Nov 19
The documents on child abuse that back up the Dickens file include precise allegations and locations.

John Mann ‏@JohnMannMP Nov 18
1984:A copy and briefing on the Dickens documents was given to the Conservative party vice chairman by Central office official Mark Worrall.


Coincidentally, the Indie had a piece the other day, a Tory saying the police should not investigate old child sexual abuse cases to save money.

Good-morning, everyone.

Apparently Yougov polled all those who could have voted in the Labour leadership elections Times (paywall). Now, it looks like good news (66% think Corbyn is doing well), but I think I missed the email.

refitman wrote:Apparently Yougov polled all those who could have voted in the Labour leadership elections Times (paywall). Now, it looks like good news (66% think Corbyn is doing well), but I think I missed the email.

Ditto.

Turkey and Russia sounds disturbing.

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

I hadn't heard about REDD+ until I read this:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/n ... w-on-trees" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have reservations about it, but they are well documented on the REDD+ wiki.
I wondered too why the focus was on distant countries and why we are not curbing the damage our interests in such places are doing. As it seemed to me to be very similar to the EU offset schemes and subsidies, I had to wonder why they were calculating the girth of individual trees after ten years or so - if they behave like other trees they gain in girth.

That is more an aside to another question though. Are we doing anything to subsidise broadleaf trees here, and if not why not, and what did happen to the national forest they were supposed to be planting?

I also became very concerned that this might be misused as monoculture agricultural cropping plantaiins were to be included. The last thing I would want to support is something that monetised forests resources that are at present held by states on behalf of the people/the planet, or disenfranchise peoples who are currently subsisting on forests garden type agriculture.

I really don't know with a lot of this stuff, scheme or scam, or just an unworkable idea. My biggest problem is it seems like just another way to ignore the need for industrialised societies to modify the way they use resources, and make meaningful changes.

Well some answers in the Wiki title I didn't look at properly.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reducin ... Safeguards" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

YouGov also asked about Britain taking part in air strikes against Islamic State in Syria. A majority of adults (58%) are in favour, and 49% of Labour voters support bombing.

But amongst Labour members and those eligible to vote in the leadership contest (affiliated supporters and registered supporters) the figure is just 30%. And, amongst those who voted for Corbyn, the figure is a mere 14%.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a huge problem for Labour. The views of the majority of the voting public are shaped by the MSM. The MSM are extremely biased, not just towards the Tories, but also against Labour. There is little Labour can do about this bias from opposition. The 2015 GE really was a critical election. There was an opportunity for a centre-left coalition to curb the power of the press, with ownership restrictions to promote plurality. As it is, public perceptions are being shaped by a small clique of unaccountable, tax dodging billionaires.

RogerOThornhill's depressing post above, about plans afoot for complete academisation by 2020, only underlines what a crucial defeat for the left 2015 was. The only hope is for Labour to fight for every last piece of power to get in the Tories' way. They need solid advances in local elections, Assembly and mayoral elections next year. With Corbyn so far out of step with Labour voters, let alone voters more generally, is that likely to happen? What kind of sea change will prompt the wider public to reassess their right-wing opinions? Decades of a diet of the Mail and Express have left voters with upside down perceptions that prompt them to vote against their own interests. It may take something on the scale of a house price collapse or a run on the pound to shake voters out of their misplaced complacency. Am feeling bleak again today, I'm afraid.

Paddy Ashdown, the former Lib Dem leader, has accused David Cameron of suppressing a report on the Muslim Brotherhood to please Saudi Arabia. He made the claim this morning in an interview on the Today programme in which he claimed that the Tories were too soft on Arab countries which have helped to fund Islamic State (Isis).

I was listening to that. I don't know who the interviewer was, but they sounded absolutely horrified that such criticism of Cameron's government was going out live on air and there was seemingly nothing they could do to stop it!

You know in spite of all the shrill warmongering, Turkey shooting down a russian jet is a game changer. I have a sneaking suspiscion that Dave is going to lose another Syria vote, and that Corbyn will be on the right side of the argument. How the bloodthirsty blairites and armchair generals in the press and public will spin that could be interesting - contortions worthy of a Barnum show is my guess. The mood seems to have subtly shifted from the anger at Paris and desire for a knee jerk vengeance bombing, to a more considered wtf are we actually doing.

StephenDolan wrote:
Turkey and Russia sounds disturbing.

I hope the pilots will be ok, and it seems they're not in Daesh territory, which is good.
Having said that, it's a timely reminder to the warmongers that bombing raids aren't risk-free.

Temulkar wrote:You know in spite of all the shrill warmongering, Turkey shooting down a russian jet is a game changer. I have a sneaking suspiscion that Dave is going to lose another Syria vote, and that Corbyn will be on the right side of the argument. How the bloodthirsty blairites and armchair generals in the press and public will spin that could be interesting - contortions worthy of a Barnum show is my guess. The mood seems to have subtly shifted from the anger at Paris and desire for a knee jerk vengeance bombing, to a more considered wtf are we actually doing.

Cameron's drowning in fiscal problems of his own making at the moment. Winning a Syria vote - any Syria vote - has become a totemic salve for his much tarnished reputation. I think there are enough symathetic Labour MPs for him to win, but it is likely to be on their terms, not his. I suspect that's the most we can hope for now the UN has fudged a sort of mandate for war on Isis.

I believe the traditional phrase for such incidences is "bumboils".

Sorry for the repeat post.

yahyah wrote:

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

yahyah wrote:

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

That's the spirit.

Who do you think should be leader? How do you foresee them becoming the elected leader? Can you please indicate the evidence that they are deemed electable by the public?

gilsey wrote:

StephenDolan wrote:
Turkey and Russia sounds disturbing.

I hope the pilots will be ok, and it seems they're not in Daesh territory, which is good.
Having said that, it's a timely reminder to the warmongers that bombing raids aren't risk-free.

This is good old Turkey standing up for ISIS. Presumably Russia will retaliate by shooting one of theirs down over Syria the next time they are bombing the Kurds.

Incidentally the Cameron plan seems to be to contribute air power to a project to close the Syria/Turkey border. Anything moving in or out will be struck, this is probably going to be effective, although I doubt Turkey likes it much.

Whether they (Turkey) will shoot down NATO aircraft or vice versa will be interesting. Hard to see America tolerating their behaviour much longer

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

yahyah wrote:

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

Good morning

Wow TE that is such a departure from every post you have put on here since July and I was really impressed by the depth of the argument you presented

Will take me a while to analyze it in the depth it merits

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

yahyah wrote:

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

I have great sympathy for your view. I agree with Corbyn on several issues, but I remain unconvinced he can sell his very worthy vision to the wider electorate. We need a Labour leader that can engender confidence in voters, someone who looks and seems conventional, at least on the surface, regardless of actual policy, which many voters have little interest in. There are some very capable people within the PLP who are all but invisible, while we have Diane Abbott making on policy on the hoof live on tv. With the best will in the world, I can't see it working and I don't share others complacency that Labour can risk bad results next May for the good of the longer term. There may not be a longer term for Labour at this rate, which is why I sympathise with MPs who are struggling to give Corbyn a proper chance. He may be popular with members, but he doesn't seem to be cutting it with Labour voters, which can't be ignored, regardless of the reasons why that may be, such as the influence of a biased press.

StephenDolan wrote:

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

yahyah wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CUjpKj1WIAAmJT_.jpg

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

That's the spirit.

Who do you think should be leader? How do you foresee them becoming the elected leader? Can you please indicate the evidence that they are deemed electable by the public?

Corbyn isn't electable and he has made no attempts to be so. It is this latter point (stupidity like the CND gig, hopelessness on security) and a lack of interest in compromise (how many times is he going to humiliate Maria Eagle for example) that pretty much show he is doomed. He didn't have to behave like this, it could have worked, but as others pointed out before he was elected he doesn't know how to lead.

Pinning any hopes for a Labour government on Corbyn is delusional.

The leader needs to be centre left, a serious politician with charisma, some sort of ability to judge the public mood. They also need to be acceptable to 85% of the parliamentary party.

I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn.

Did you hear that? Me neither.

(Not for you TE!)

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

StephenDolan wrote:

TechnicalEphemera wrote: Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

That's the spirit.

Who do you think should be leader? How do you foresee them becoming the elected leader? Can you please indicate the evidence that they are deemed electable by the public?

Corbyn isn't electable and he has made no attempts to be so. It is this latter point (stupidity like the CND gig, hopelessness on security) and a lack of interest in compromise (how many times is he going to humiliate Maria Eagle for example) that pretty much show he is doomed. He didn't have to behave like this, it could have worked, but as others pointed out before he was elected he doesn't know how to lead.

Pinning any hopes for a Labour government on Corbyn is delusional.

The leader needs to be centre left, a serious politician with charisma, some sort of ability to judge the public mood. They also need to be acceptable to 85% of the parliamentary party.

I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn.

" I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn. "


Yes, yes, yes but who do you suggest? You advocate him going now, right now, so who should replace him?

StephenDolan wrote:

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

StephenDolan wrote: That's the spirit.

Who do you think should be leader? How do you foresee them becoming the elected leader? Can you please indicate the evidence that they are deemed electable by the public?

Corbyn isn't electable and he has made no attempts to be so. It is this latter point (stupidity like the CND gig, hopelessness on security) and a lack of interest in compromise (how many times is he going to humiliate Maria Eagle for example) that pretty much show he is doomed. He didn't have to behave like this, it could have worked, but as others pointed out before he was elected he doesn't know how to lead.

Pinning any hopes for a Labour government on Corbyn is delusional.

The leader needs to be centre left, a serious politician with charisma, some sort of ability to judge the public mood. They also need to be acceptable to 85% of the parliamentary party.

I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn.

" I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn. "


Yes, yes, yes but who do you suggest? You advocate him going now, right now, so who should replace him?

Hilary Benn? Angela Eagle? There aren't many experienced people who haven't already been rejected by members, that's the problem. The most attractive options, such as newbies like Jarvis or Starmer, are just as big a gamble as Corbyn, given their lack of experience. The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.

StephenDolan wrote:

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

StephenDolan wrote: That's the spirit.

Who do you think should be leader? How do you foresee them becoming the elected leader? Can you please indicate the evidence that they are deemed electable by the public?

Corbyn isn't electable and he has made no attempts to be so. It is this latter point (stupidity like the CND gig, hopelessness on security) and a lack of interest in compromise (how many times is he going to humiliate Maria Eagle for example) that pretty much show he is doomed. He didn't have to behave like this, it could have worked, but as others pointed out before he was elected he doesn't know how to lead.

Pinning any hopes for a Labour government on Corbyn is delusional.

The leader needs to be centre left, a serious politician with charisma, some sort of ability to judge the public mood. They also need to be acceptable to 85% of the parliamentary party.

I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn.

" I don't care who, anything is better than this, but I would rule out a Blairite. At the point the PLP has a candidate that meets general approval they can dump Corbyn. "


Yes, yes, yes but who do you suggest? You advocate him going now, right now, so who should replace him?

Theyre plan is to scweam and scweam and scweam until they are sick. Its called the Violet Elizabeth approach to politics. Rationality and reason are dumped in favour of sneers and smears and chanting the same mantra over and over hopiing that somebody/anybody will join in; press, tories etc etc ad nauseum. Labour's poolling is up on the GE, Corbyns satisfaction is fine with the membership, in spite of every smear leak and outright lie, and Oldham is looking like a safe win. Therin lies the problem for the scweamers. They are on the wrong side in history; they have become the new militant. As an outsider looking in, it's hilarious if saddening that they would debase themselves so.

Good morfternoon.

All the pages here are too wide, today. Is anyone else experiencing the same problem?

Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

I make helpful contributions all the time, maybe if you were here more often you would have noticed.

Taking margin of error into account, I can't say Labour are polling especially better than at the election. At best I would say voters are mostly indifferent to Corbyn taking over as leader, which given he shares some of the disadvantages that affected Ed last time out, that makes some sense. Labour needs circumstances to change, to come to them, I think. Corbyn isn't putting people off particularly, but he needs some kind of "moment" where he can be in his element and win greater recognition and trust. Hard to know what such a monent might look like, but Cameron can't keep getting away with taking all the wrong decisions indefinitely. Something, at some point, will come back to bite him on the arse and all Corbyn has to do is say I told you so.

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

All the pages here are too wide, today. Is anyone else experiencing the same problem?

Not me. I'm on a tablet, on the android browser.

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

All the pages here are too wide, today. Is anyone else experiencing the same problem?

Can you see a particular post that is causing a problem? I can see if I can adjust the formatting if so.

Temulkar wrote:


Theyre plan is to scweam and scweam and scweam until they are sick. Its called the Violet Elizabeth approach to politics. Rationality and reason are dumped in favour of sneers and smears and chanting the same mantra over and over hopiing that somebody/anybody will join in; press, tories etc etc ad nauseum. Labour's poolling is up on the GE, Corbyns satisfaction is fine with the membership, in spite of every smear leak and outright lie, and Oldham is looking like a safe win. Therin lies the problem for the scweamers. They are on the wrong side in history; they have become the new militant. As an outsider looking in, it's hilarious if saddening that they would debase themselves so.

I agree with you, Tem.

On a day when a poll is published showing that more members think Corbyn is dong well than actually voted for him, it really is time now for the PLP to get behind him - if they do not agree with him and/or his shadow ministers on policy, they need to sort it out with the leader and at the very least they should cease with the constant sniping which just gives the Tories more ammunition.

I wanted Ed Miliband for PM. I still do. But it is not going to happen in the foreseeable future - and with the likes of Burnham/Cooper or the oleaginous Umunna getting nothing like the support Corbyn has, and with no obvious individual who could challenge Corbyn now, the party needs to sort itself out and organise a strong and principled opposition to the real enemy - the Tories.

I have resigned my Labour membership. I see no point in paying to belong to a party whose senior members are acting like spoilt brats.
I will join again when/if the previous heirarchy do what they have been asked by the membership to do - until that happens, Corbyn cannot oppose effectively, and the so-called "moderates" are betraying people like me under the cosh of Tory policy.

Some here say that Corbyn is unelectable. Adamantly. There is zero evidence for this, as he has not faced a General Election in the few months of his leadership. Nobody knows what he could achieve if only he had the backing of his fellow MPs. Nobody.

I resigned with a heavy heart. But until or unless the PLP get a grip, stop this internecine squabbling, and either support the leader elected in a landslide by their own rules or put forward a challenger, then I want no part of it. Enough is enough.
Some of those people were way too quick to attack Ed Miliband after the GE - I considered leaving the party then; but Corbyn seemed to signal hope, I voted for him, and I'm glad he won. But he will get nowhere if the PLP carries on with this crap.

We are living in difficult and dangerous times. We are led by serial incompetents, liars, ideologues, and morons whose vanity knows no bounds and whose policies are quite literally killing people.
The Labour MPs who are sniping at Corbyn from the back benches they were too arrogant to believe they'd occupy are a disgrace - it is the Tories they should be fighting, not their own leader.

Temulkar wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

I make helpful contributions all the time, maybe if you were here more often you would have noticed.

refitman wrote:

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

All the pages here are too wide, today. Is anyone else experiencing the same problem?

Can you see a particular post that is causing a problem? I can see if I can adjust the formatting if so.

Hello. Now I've pinned it down, it's the ones which are associated with the photo' of the Commons. Unfortunately, loads of posts have used it! Thanks (in advance) for your help. And - well, thanks in general!

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

And TE?

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

Temulkar wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

I make helpful contributions all the time, maybe if you were here more often you would have noticed.

More helpful than both your posts today, Chuckles.

Temulkar wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

Temulkar wrote: I make helpful contributions all the time, maybe if you were here more often you would have noticed.

More helpful than both your posts today, Chuckles.

PorFavor wrote:

refitman wrote:

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

All the pages here are too wide, today. Is anyone else experiencing the same problem?

Can you see a particular post that is causing a problem? I can see if I can adjust the formatting if so.

Hello. Now I've pinned it down, it's the ones which are associated with the photo' of the Commons. Unfortunately, loads of posts have used it! Thanks (in advance) for your help. And - well, thanks in general!

That any better? I've taken away the image (but left the link) from the nested posts.

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

Temulkar wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

More helpful than both your posts today, Chuckles.

Ok children,that's the lunchtime bell.Could you take it out to the playground please?

refitman wrote:

PorFavor wrote:

refitman wrote: Can you see a particular post that is causing a problem? I can see if I can adjust the formatting if so.

Hello. Now I've pinned it down, it's the ones which are associated with the photo' of the Commons. Unfortunately, loads of posts have used it! Thanks (in advance) for your help. And - well, thanks in general!

That any better? I've taken away the image (but left the link) from the nested posts.

Perfect - thank you.

........

howsillyofme1 wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

And TE?

TE's view, while not palatable to many here, is obviously heartfelt and maybe born out of frustration. Now personally I think it is too early to say Corbyn has failed, I think (hope) he will recover from the early missteps (and Abbott will get herself sacked soon enough anyway) and could prove to be effective; like Ephe I would prefer that we had stuck with Ed and shown him the same loyalty being demanded by Corbyn's supporters but, hey ho, that is not going to happen.



I post here very little these days, partly because of internet access difficulties, but also because the atmosphere here has become increasing nasty. I cherished the notion that this forum was, like the Labour Party, a broad church which could accommodate a range of views but I am genuinely beginning to question whether that is the case; the fact that Tem feels he can come on here and make such a openly derisive comment toward another poster with impunity concerns me - the fact that he appears to be right saddens me.

Willow904 wrote: The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.

The party made a mistake by not going on their knees and begging Ed to stay.
I console myself with believing that he wouldn't have anyway.

gilsey wrote:

Willow904 wrote: The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.

The party made a mistake by not going on their knees and begging Ed to stay.
I console myself with believing that he wouldn't have anyway.

Yes. He was impressive on Newsnight last night.

Has a party in opposition come under so much scrutiny and discussion relative to the government in the past? The usual suspects in the PLP don't exactly help matters. A secret poll of the PLP, now that'd be interesting.

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

yahyah wrote:

Come on all Labour MPs.

Get behind the majority of Labour members and remember just who you should be fighting.
The pic's a clue for those who think people like RR, Ephie and myself are the enemy.

Stop helping the media, force them to confront what the Tories are doing instead of earning money from dissing Corbyn and the grassroots.

Sorry, Corbyn has to go.

Pretending otherwise is just gifting the Tories a huge election victory in 2020. The Labour Party has a duty to be electable, he isn't as the polling numbers show. Corbyn really has nobody to blame for this but himself.

And he will go. But in his own time.

He won for genuine legitimate reasons, and those will not go away even when he does (2017/18, most likely)

HindleA wrote:Neutral question.How the ##ck does people leaving/threatening to leave the Party-Anybody -until they get what you want,help?What is the priority?

What does this actually mean?'until they get what you want,help'
Don't understand the question.

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

And TE?

TE's view, while not palatable to many here, is obviously heartfelt and maybe born out of frustration. Now personally I think it is too early to say Corbyn has failed, I think (hope) he will recover from the early missteps (and Abbott will get herself sacked soon enough anyway) and could prove to be effective; like Ephe I would prefer that we had stuck with Ed and shown him the same loyalty being demanded by Corbyn's supporters but, hey ho, that is not going to happen.



I post here very little these days, partly because of internet access difficulties, but also because the atmosphere here has become increasing nasty. I cherished the notion that this forum was, like the Labour Party, a broad church which could accommodate a range of views but I am genuinely beginning to question whether that is the case; the fact that Tem feels he can come on here and make such a openly derisive comment toward another poster with impunity concerns me - the fact that he appears to be right saddens me.

TE is entitled to his opinion but that sort of post just repeats what he has said a thousand times before and made no other point than one we know already

You then chose to pick out Temulkar's post and I was just pointing out that his seemed to have more depth to it, than TE's previously

There are plenty of posters on here who oppose Corbyn - Tubby, Willow, Anatoly to an extent and others but they make points that are provoking and interesting. TE just says Corbyn has to go and that's it - no solution, no answer to the question who could replace him etc.

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Nice to see Tem making his usual helpful contribution to the debate!!

And TE?

TE's view, while not palatable to many here, is obviously heartfelt and maybe born out of frustration. Now personally I think it is too early to say Corbyn has failed, I think (hope) he will recover from the early missteps (and Abbott will get herself sacked soon enough anyway) and could prove to be effective; like Ephe I would prefer that we had stuck with Ed and shown him the same loyalty being demanded by Corbyn's supporters but, hey ho, that is not going to happen.



I post here very little these days, partly because of internet access difficulties, but also because the atmosphere here has become increasing nasty. I cherished the notion that this forum was, like the Labour Party, a broad church which could accommodate a range of views but I am genuinely beginning to question whether that is the case; the fact that Tem feels he can come on here and make such a openly derisive comment toward another poster with impunity concerns me - the fact that he appears to be right saddens me.

Your 'thinking' and 'hoping' is always welcome as far as I'm concerned, whatever your opinion, and I feel it's good that this forum reflects different views. I'm also happy to read TE's contributions myself, I'm open minded, but given the MSM spent the last 5 years insisting Ed Miliband was "unelectable" with the explicit purpose of turning opinion into fact, I can understand why some people may react negatively to this type of comment.

Sadly reports are both pilots killed. Game changer both in international and domestic politics. I think Dave will have serious trouble getting a vote through now, and only Putin knows what happens next in Syrian airspace. I can see tit for tat shootdowns if we are not careful.

Of course we can hope foor a calm rational response from Putin, but somehow I doubt it,