Tactical manoeuvring because of the Chilcot report being announced soon is what some people suggest…he’s right to wait to see what the grassroots want since they’re the ones who put him where he is …..

if that’s the case, that the £3 votes made no difference whatsoever to the outcome, and that essentially it was just a donation to party funds/dropped down the drain – then presumably the LP will repeat the £3 exercise in any upcoming leadership election? 😀

It’s in the forum rules – haven’t you read them?

Perhaps what needs to happen is all those Labour MPs who don’t like the way JC is taking the party should all resign and join the Lib Dems.

Labour would then be on the left, Lib Dems hold the centre ground and Conservative on the right.

Boom – back to 3 party politics! 😀

I’ve avoided most of the political threads recently.

Is it always like this?

No. Sometimes it’s worse.

“Perhaps what needs to happen is all those Labour MPs who don’t like the way JC is taking the party should all resign and join the Lib Dems.
Labour would then be on the left, Lib Dems hold the centre ground and Conservative on the right.
Boom – back to 3 party politics!”

That really is a good idea! Won’t work though, they all hog the centre ground there the votes are.

Corbyn reminds me a bit of Stannis in Game of Thrones; highly principled but rigid to the point of obstinacy.

I wonder who his ‘Ramsey’ will be…

…they all hog the centre ground there the votes are.

Seems JC doesn’t want that centre ground though, which just leaves one party to clean up.

ernie_lynch – Member
This isn’t a coup against Corbyn, it’s a coup against Labour Party members.

I’m not so sure. Corbyn was elected by party members, however since there hasn’t really been any effective opposition during his tenure some might say that he hasn’t performed and so this needs to be called out which is what the MPs have done. This should lead to a leadership election. Personally I think this is a good thing as we really need an effective opposition now.

Mind you if 85% of your team say they are not confident in you perhaps the sensible thing would be to stand down. But that’s again another example of how naive he is and why he needs to go.

Shame as he is possibly the only honest politician out there 😥

In his defence, he’s been on the back foot fighting off internal battles from day 1, so never really had any support or stability to help him get his message out. So I don’t think we’ve ever had a chance to see what he could do (not that the media would bother reporting it as it doesn’t fit their agenda either).

The only other (Labour) option seems to a Blairite / Tory Light party, with more austerity and crowning Blair a war hero after Chilcott.

effective opposition

What does effective opposition mean?

Tactical manoeuvring because of the Chilcot report being announced soon is what some people suggest

Well it is going to be published next Wednesday and the Blairites are going to be on the defensive, unless of course it exonerates Blair, Straw, etc, so now seems a good time to attack.

To be fair they’ve had this planned since the day Corbyn was first elected leader. However since Corbyn received more votes than all the other candidates put together they needed something pretty major to oust him.

So they have been patiently waiting for some great disaster to befall Labour.

With none coming and the possibility that none would come, as opinion polls showed increased support for Labour with them either level pegging or overtaking the Tories, and also Labour winning elections often with increased votes, they decided to blame Corbyn for the fact that over 17 million people voted to leave the EU.

Plus of course the “Corbyn is a loony hard-left friend of terrorists” narrative in the media had passed its use by date, as more people started to consider that Corbyn is in fact both quite moderate and a decent honest man.

Their patience seems to have run out.

What does effective opposition mean?

forming a sufficiently coherent, defensible and broadly popular argument against a government bill so as to convince sufficient of government’s own members to vote with you and defy their whip.

In his defence, he’s been on the back foot fighting off internal battles from day 1, so never really had any support or stability to help him get his message out. So I don’t think we’ve ever had a chance to see what he could do (not that the media would bother reporting it as it doesn’t fit their agenda either).

Also the whole media knew this whole brexit debate was really an fight for power in the tory party, they just didn’t expect the ending we got. I barely saw a single labour politician given a chance to get a word in edgeways. Ben only popped his head above the parapet when it was all over to point his finger at Corbyn.

I now have an opinion.

Listen to some of his speeches in the leadership debates, and some of the things he’s said since, then you might find out why he’s so popular with Labour supporters.

The current disaster has been caused by self serving duplicitous scumbags who crave power.

I’d *much* rather be governed by a decent honest man who didn’t want power.

Is it happy hour?

😀 Yep!

The right wing of politics has been enabling UKIP since its inception. In the last G.E the Tories had a pledge to reduce immigration to tens of thousands (pandering to UKIPers), this figure became a kind of par and made the actual net amount seem outrageous. Anyone who voted for a party that had a pledge to reduce immigration played their part in legitimizing this idea hence played their part in the Brexit vote.

In his defence, he’s been on the back foot fighting off internal battles from day 1, so never really had any support or stability to help him get his message out. So I don’t think we’ve ever had a chance to see what he could do (not that the media would bother reporting it as it doesn’t fit their agenda either).

Fair comment – perhaps a stronger leader would have handled that differently though.

What does effective opposition mean?

Dunno really. Nicola Sturgeon springs to mind. Came out of the blocks on Friday flying making her presence felt and used it to get Scotland right in the news and make the Scots think about things.

I get that Corbyn wants to be portrayed as a decent honest man.

Unfortunately my definition of honest is different to yours. In my old fashioned view honest men don’t say one thing and do another.

If he wanted to leave he should have damn well have said so.

I’d *much* rather be governed by a decent honest man who didn’t want power.

Only one problem with that noble sentiment – at some point you have to exercise power and leadership. It has been obvious from the start that Corbyn was the wrong man at the wrong time. Hence his own plea, to “make sure I don’t win.”

How obvious does it need to be – I guess the choice of the next leader will tell us.

Fair comment – perhaps a stronger leader would have handled that differently though.

Too much change too quickly. The Blairites / Polly Toynbee journos still cling on to their ideal of Champagne Socialism and desire to live like Tony Blair, ringing in £m whilst courting dictators, whilst thinking about the poor occasionally.

I think Game of Thrones is a good political analogy, JC is the High Sparrow and Magaret Hodge is Olenna Tyrell.

It’s a tough one but in the end it doesn’t matter if it’s a hostile media and an unruly parliamentary party that are to blame. If Jeremy Corbyn can’t hold the government to account and convince the electorate that he is somebody capable of forming a government, then he shouldn’t stay as leader.

It doesn’t feel that the country is ready for Jeremy Corbyn’s new politics. Labour’s membership wants a more left wing leader than they’ve had in the past few years and that is their right but they also need one who is capable of dragging their parliamentary party along with them and who is aggressive (or at least assertive) enough to keep the pressure on the government. Whether Labour’s MPs are being wickedly disloyal or are genuinely concerned about Labour’s electoral chances is almost besides the point – they’re the MPs Labour has and to get where you’re going you have to start with where you’re at now.

I don’t know how the electoral appeal of the left wing is going to play out. Many are plainly convinced that it isn’t large enough to secure the Labour party an election victory. Yet it is plainly a more energised part of the party than its more centrist elements. The question there is whether there is yet untapped left wing support that will come out in a general election or if those who voted Corbyn into the Labour leadership are all or most of who can be reached with that message.

Listen to some of his speeches in the leadership debates, and some of the things he’s said since, then you might find out why he’s so popular with Labour supporters.

It’s worth remembering that after the House of Commons “let’s bomb Syria” debate in which Corbyn stood before the Labour benches and put the argument against, while Hilary Benn put the argument for, 152 Labour MPs voted with Corbyn against bombing Syria, while only 66 voted with Hilary Benn in favour.

You could say that this was an example of forming a sufficiently coherent, defensible and broadly popular argument against a government bill so as to convince sufficient of government’s own members to vote with you and defy their whip.

So if Corbyn lacks “leadership qualities” then it seems rather possible that Hilary Benn lacks them even more.

Although unsurprisingly despite very clearly being the loser in the debate Hilary Benn was actually hailed as the winner by the media.

You couldn’t make it up.

This country needs an effective opposition more than any time in recent history, to try and curtail an ultra right wing Tory party, with a clean sheet of paper, ripping up workers rights, and human rights.

Jeremy Corbyn isn’t it.

The fact that he can’t even see that confirms it.

BY clinging on he demonstrates that he’s as self-regarding as Boris

In my old fashioned view honest men don’t say one thing and do another.

Very obvious that he has been forced to play the game to some extent. So people like you are complaining that he played it, and people like THM complaining that he doesn’t play it enough.

Now you see how impossible politics is? And amongst all this bullshit, the country has to be actually run. What a load of bollocks.

Corbyn’s approach has been to simply say what he would like to see, and let people realise that they agree with him. Sadly, that seems not to be enough for the hysterical idiotic circus we find ourselves part of. What a shame that is.

BY clinging on he demonstrates that he’s as self-regarding as Boris

Well no, not really. His problem is that huge numbers of people voted for him. And if he leaves and betrays them, the party itself will lose a huge amount of support. This is the huge issue faced by the Labour party.

Although unsurprisingly despite very clearly being the loser in the debate Hilary Benn was actually hailed as the winner by the media.

Benn’s was an embarrasingly emotional speech. 10/10 for delivery 0/10 for content.

So if Corbyn lacks “leadership qualities” then it seems rather possible that Hilary Benn lacks them even more.

True but its not a race to the bottom – or is it?

Binners +1 Does the elephant have to actually tread on him? Either that or its a bloody big room.

nd people like THM complaining that he doesn’t play it enough.

Not sure what that means Mol. Its a simple issue – is he a leader or not? From the outset the answer has been clear. Its even clearer now. Its just odd that people find it so hard to see.

But she was doing that from a position of leadership with a popular mandate behind her. What have the SNP done as an effective opposition in the parliament where they are in opposition? (not that you can give credit or blame Sturgeon for that one way or the other – she has no status there)

Benn’s was an embarrasingly emotional speech. 10/10 for delivery 0/10 for content.

Which can be paraphrased as ‘It worked for Blair. 😉

[url=https://flic.kr/p/Hx5S5b]Chillcot defense[/url] by Ben Freeman, on Flickr

His problem is that huge numbers of angry smeggy people voted for him.

Indeed. His text-a-mob are on his side at the moment. If he jacks it in, they’re going to be blaming him and I suspect it’ll turn nasty.

That one needs redoing – “will **** up my own country for votes” (sorry, way OT, nothing to do with Labour)

I barely saw a single labour politician given a chance to get a word in edgeways.

The Remain campaign cleared whole days in the campaign to give Labour the opportunity to speak – one of the gripes now is that they didn’t use that opportunity.

is he a leader or not?

Well it’s debatable. He made a statement and set the tone. It just wasn’t the tone that the media or the PLP wanted.

I get that Corbyn wants to be portrayed as a decent honest man.

Does he? Just because everyone is queuing up to tell the media that Corbyn is a decent honest man doesn’t mean that he’s set them up to say that, most of them are actually his enemies.

Tony Blair definitely wanted to be portrayed as a decent honest man.

In fact just in case we didn’t know, he made a point of telling us.

The moral of the story – never trust a politician who tells you that he is a decent honest man, or words to that effect.

The Remain campaign cleared whole days in the campaign to give Labour the opportunity to speak

I’m sure your right, but Linky?

His problem is that huge numbers of angry smeggy people voted for him.

if you mean, by that, over 200k new Labour members, myself included, then yes he has a lot of support.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/13/revealed-how-jeremy-corbyn-has-reshaped-the-labour-party

I’m sure your right, but Linky?

The Sun

Guardian journalist on Twitter

Jeremy Corbyn isn’t it.

This. I mean really, it’s pretty irrelevant that the members voted for him and want him to stay. He just can’t do the job, irrespective of the media, blairite critics, neo-liberal conspiracy theories etc. Christ, he couldn’t even hold a photoshoot today without making himself look like an arse. He is no doubt a decent, honest, principled man, and that’s why I voted for him in september. But you can’t be a potential prime minister if the basic competence isn’t there. Self awareness and some humility need to come into it too.

If the brexit vote had gone the other way, and we were still looking at a 2020 election, I’d still advocate giving him more time, but that’s not a luxury that can be afforded any longer.

f you mean, by that, over 200k new Labour members, myself included, then yes he has a lot of support.

Whilst I’m sure you fully meet the smeggy criteria, 🙂 I was actually talking about the rent a mob who have been visible in the news over the last two days and who assaulted staff and journos at the BIC centre a while back.

That one needs redoing – “will **** up my own country for votes”

You think that the Country that Blair left us with in 2007 was worse than the one he started with in 1997?

Would you care to tell us in which area?

NHS waiting lists? Increased poverty? Higher unemployment? Minimum wage? Less fair taxation? Higher immigration?

I’m not disregarding your argument, in fact I think there are clearly areas where it holds, I would just like to hear the actual criteria on which you are basing your opinion that he ****ed up the country.

jeez ninfan, I did point out it had nothing to do with Labour