Still no answers then?

Do you want me repeat the question?

Corbyns Brexit ‘strategy’….?

The idea that Corbyn wants a hard brexit is utter nonsense – same as the rest of the lies put about by the press about him –

Lets see one single quote from him saying that.

Corbyns brexit strategy – you maen the labour parties position. Labour is a democratic institution and more so now and Corbyn does not set polciy  Its .  laid out in a series of speeches and papers.

Its maybe not one you agree with but its there ( I don’t agree with it)

Basically its we cannot ignore the will of the people but we must limit the damage and avoid a hard border in NI and be no worse off as a result. So remain in a customs union.  But then you would know this if yo actually listened to what is coming out of the labour party rather than what the press invent about it.

I am going to pull you up on another one.  You keep on ranting about reselection.  Name one MP that has been ousted.  Not even Hoey has and you must agree she has no place in the labour party

They’ve not got mandatory reselection through yet, doesn’t mean they’re not going all out to get it!

Stands to reason though. More opportunity to concentrate on endless ‘procedure’ and naval-gazing, People’s front of Judes/Judeans People’s Front style factionalism and head in the sand ignoring of stuff like actually trying to win an election

Hey… 1981 called… they want their ‘politics back. It went really well last time around

Still no answers then?

You seem to be lacking in basic comprehension.

People’s front of Judes/Judeans People’s Front style factionalism

It seems to be Tourettes…

Still no answers then?

Jezza? Brexit? No…?

Still no answers then?

Not for you, as I’ve already said. Was it too difficult for you to understand?

What if somebody else asks?

Are you vetting all the recipients of your/Jezza’s wisdom?

People have posted a lot about Corbyn and Labour’s brexit strategy but that doesn’t really seem to be what you’re in this thread for. If you actually want to know, go back and read the posts that you ignored.

What if somebody else asks?

Are you vetting all the recipients of your/Jezza’s wisdom?

I’ll happily discuss politics with people who aren’t acting like posturing children. And I’m pretty sure that Corbyn’s views are widely reported.

People have posted a lot about Corbyn and Labour’s brexit strategy but that doesn’t really seem to be what you’re in this thread for.

Well, quite.

I’m genuinely intrigued to know why Momentum/Corbynistas are so glowing in their praise of a man who has a life long anti-EU agenda, wanted to trigger article 50 the day after the referendum, has totally failed to hold this shambolic governments insane attitude to Brexit to account, and has a personal Brexit agenda that doesn’t seem much different from Boris Johnson’s

Am I missing something?

Do feel free to enlighten me to my misconception of this huge inherent contradiction….

binners reminds me of a ukipper, ranting gammon faced at a low ceilinged country pub.  Same rant every night.

Yet no-one will explain the contradiction

makes you think…

The idea that Corbyn wants a hard brexit is utter nonsense – same as the rest of the lies put about by the press about him

he’s been very strongly anti-EU for most of his career and every now and again he slips out a comment that confirms he still has this view, or does something sneaky like saying ‘a customs union’ so that everyone things he wants to stay in ‘the customs union’ because they haven’t noticed the semantic difference.

I am like binners, I can’t believe that you guys are naive enough to think that he doesn’t.

If he really wanted a soft, or no, brexit then why is he not being very vocal about it which would gain him much greater support than he has now ? unless he is even less competant than I think he is.

I’ll leave these here to wind people up…

Jeremy Corbyn’s views on Brexit: a long held stance on Europe

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/14/jeremy-corbyn-wants-hard-brexit-labour

I’m sure if you listened you here the explanation.  You enjoy the sound of your own voice too much to listen to anyone else.

Yet no-one will explain the contradiction

Its only a contradiction if you are a member of the anti corbyn cult .  If you dont its not difficult to see how most momentum and co members can agree with him on some things but disagree on others.

Outside of true cults there really isnt a requirement to agree with the leader on everything.

If May went to the polls now with a promise of a 2nd referendum in her manifesto, she’d get all the right-wing Brexit fanatics (because they’d have no choice but to vote for her) and all the remainers (because they’d want the referendum and will realise by then that Labour are pro-Brexit) and she would sweep to power on a massive majority, and be a victorious PM for the next five years. By the time of the _next_ election, JC would probably have retired, a disappointed man.

anti corbyn cult

What did you call me?

having dipped my toe into this thread – I think I’ll back slowly towards the door

As unpopular as it might sound, we need a new Tony Blair.

The people of Britain are not generally enamoured of people that can be made to sound a bit ‘extreme’. Party politics is not the same as politics.

Does anybody genuinely think that the Labour Party wouldn’t either already be the party of Government, or would be in short order, if David Milliband had been voted to the post rather than his brother ? If not then one would suggest you think about it some more.

Britain is generally quite moderate, you seriously have to play to that.

Apart from the fact that such labour policies as taking trains an utilities back into public ownership are hugely popular.  these are positions labour have moved to under Corbyn and would never have under a technocrat like Blair.  YOu have to remember that Blair became less and less popular as he tightened control over the party, removed its internal democracy and moved the party to the right

I am certain David Milliband would have met the same fate as his brother as he simply does not have the instincts and positions to engage those on the left.

Under Corbyn labour has become reenergised and has a much bigger active membership.

Labours position on the EU is there if you want to see it.  I briefly outlined it above.  Its not the position I want to see but the position is there, its been well stated.

Britain is generally quite moderate, you seriously have to play to that.

The current Labour party policies are moderate, so what is the problem.

If he really wanted a soft, or no, brexit then why is he not being very vocal about it which would gain him much greater support than he has now ?

And you are calling other people naive.  How do you think coming out with no brexit would go down with the Labour voters who voted brexit?  How do you think a hard brexit would go down with Labour voters who voted remain?

Brexit is not party political.  It is a game you cannot win (which is why the Tories are finding it so hard) so he is being vague and staying in the middle as his best chance.

Read the article TurnerGuy posted above. Corbyn wants exactly the same as Iain Duncan Smith on Brexit – which right now, politically, and for the forceeable future, is the only game in town.

They may come at it from different directions, but neither of their viewpoints could in any conceivable way be described as ‘moderate’

Hence me repeatedly asking the Corbyn fans how they’re squaring this circle? I’m genuinely interested, as It’s the elephant in the room and a massive inherent contradiction

Another Piece worth reading if you’re still harbouring any illusions about where Jezza stands on Brexit

Keir Starmer clashed with Corbyn on Brexit ‘to brink of resignation’

https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/

A Labour government will end the uncertainty for our farmers and food producers by securing continued EU market access allowing British farmers and food producers to continue to sell their products on the Continent.

As our trading relationship with the EU changes it is vital that we retain unrestricted access for our goods and services.

Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union.

Sorry – but Labour position just doesn’t work. They want freedom of movement of goods but not people. EU have already said no to this.

If not then one would suggest you think about it some more.

Thought about it and its still fantasy. Blairs trick only worked until the traditional voters realised he loathed them. He jumped in time to not be bitten by it. David Milliband wouldnt have done any better.

Also Blair was anything but moderate in several areas. Its just most of them he was aping the tories so it got portrayed as tory since if both parties agree on it then surely its moderate?

Labours policy under Corbyn (such as it is) is exactly the same position as Boris Johnson was advocating…

1. Have cake

2. Eat it

Its complete cloud cuckooland nonsense. How many times do the EU have to repeat that ‘the 4 freedoms are indivisible’. But Corbyn knows this is unachievable and would inevitably lead ultimately to a Hard Brexit. But this is what he wants just as much Boris does. For very different reasons, but it doesn’t really matter how you get somewhere, does it? Just the fact that you’re there.

And the economic calamity of a hard Brexit will be just as catastrophic under a labour government as a Tory one, and would hit the working classes (who labour allegedly represent) the hardest

Ah, but red unicorns comrade.

Corbyn’s position on brexit is largely irrelevant. He’s not a dictator, he’s the leader of a democratic party, and he’s trying to make it more democratic. If the party decides to oppose brexit, support it, or something in between, it will be the decision of members, not some autocratic committee. If anyone wants to influence that, the options open to you are obvious.

I just don’t understand this obsession with Corbyn and what he may or may not have said in the past or what his position is on this or that. He probably is anti-brexit, I don’t think he’s the type to change long held principles. The question we should be asking is not whether he’s pro or anti brexit, but whether he will try to force through his own opinions against the wishes of the party he leads. Everything I hear from him, and everything he’s done since he’s become leader suggests that he won’t. The battle on brexit within labour is not persuading Corbyn, it’s to persuade the party.

Read the Guardian Article about Kier Starmer Daz. I’m sorry, but loads of things like that prove Corbyn is just like any other politician. They’re all for democracy until the point where they get into power and it then disagrees with them,. Then suddenly the previous enthusiasm wanes and they go very cold on the principle. He’s no different. Except that with him, after all his rebellions, it has the added whiff of rank hypocrisy!

Remember the 3-line whipping of his MP’s both to trigger Article 50 and then to scupper the motion for remaining in the Single Market? Oh, the irony.  As with every other politician, ignore what they say and watch what they actually do. He’s been supportive of Brexit all the way and has had to be railroaded into even the slightest of concessions to the hardest of Brexits

I just don’t understand this obsession with Corbyn and what he may or may not have said in the past or what his position is on this or that.

We have a two horse political system. And one is fit only for glue. So yes, I will take great interest in what the leader of the opposition does / say.

The battle on brexit within labour is not persuading Corbyn, it’s to persuade the party.

The membership is mostly remain. The problem is the voters.

The question we should be asking is not whether he’s pro or anti brexit, but whether he will try to force through his own opinions against the wishes of the party he leads.

He already has done. The split in the Brexit vote was so narrow that if an enthusiastic Remainer was leader of the Labour Party Remain would have won. It inconceivable that the leader of the Labour party couldn’t swing 1pc of votes.

Since then he’s used the whip to get his MPs to vote the way he wants on Brexit.

You can argue those decisions were right/wrong but you can’t argue Corbyn as Leader of the Labour party hasn’t made a massive difference, in spite of the views of his party.

I read the Starmer article at the time. I still don’t see the issue. Of course Corbyn is going to argue his position and being leader, his arguments inevitably carry more weight, but it doesn’t mean he can dictate policy. He has to bring the party with him. If he can’t we won’t be leader for very long. If the membership keep voting him in despite his brexit stance, then that’s their decision and it should be respected.

And as for the 3-line whips, that was inevitable, and the result of political strategy, not Corbyn’s personal position. If they hadn’t whipped the party, the tories would have howled about how labour weren’t respecting ‘the will of the people’ and trying to block brexit. We’ve already gone over how labour need leave voting constituencies to win an election so what choice did they have?

It’s fair enough if people don’t like Corbyn, or disagree with his policies. But really all this cult of personality stuff is fantasy. I don’t know anyone who supports Corbyn, either in momentum or not who blindly worships him like is portrayed here and in the media. The only cult in the labour party is the passionate devotion of new members to the project of transforming the party and subsequently the country with a new type of progressive politics. Corbyn’s job right now is to sort out the party, the job of sorting out the country will probably be passed to someone else.

Of course Corbyn is going to argue his position and being leader, his arguments inevitably carry more weight, but it doesn’t mean he can dictate policy.

In spite of examples where, rightly or wrongly, he has done precisely that.

And as for the 3-line whips, that was inevitable, and the result of political strategy, not Corbyn’s personal position.

Whether that’s true or not it’s still an example of Corbyn dictating policy. You can argue it was the right policy, but it was still a choice the leadership can choose to make. A committed remainer would have (perhaps wrongly) made a different choice and whipped the other way.

Corbyn’s job right now is to sort out the party, the job of sorting out the country will probably be passed to someone else.

It has already been passed to someone else…. The Tories. In perpetuity.

The electorate has already made its mind up about ‘The Project’ and passed judgement. Its decided that this absolute car crash of a government is a safer option.

Just look at this absolute shambles. Has this country ever been in such an unholy mess? Yet the labour party is still trailing in the polls, and seems pathologically incapable of taking advantage of the situation. And to be honest Corbyn and his cabal don’t even look that interested in doing so. Lets talk about mandatory re-selections and rural bus services instead, eh?

If you’re not 10 – 20 points clear of these idiots, who are a total rabble, fighting each other like rats in a sack, then you’re beyond hopeless. You’re not fit to be called an opposition. This is a gilt-edged opportunity. Its never going to be easier. If you can’t do it now, you never ever will

Apart from the fact that such labour policies as taking trains an utilities back into public ownership are hugely popular

Well yes and no.

people want to think that they can take back control of the trains and utilities then the price for both will drop, everything will become efficient and they will benefit massively.

the reality is taking them back will cost significant cash to nationalise them then bribing them up to the standard that people imagine they should be will take tens of billions in investments and updates, millions in ongoing subsidies and decades of work.

now by the time any progress has been made the massive costs will have made the public angry and they will be shunted off to the private sector in order to recoup some cash.

would it benefit the population, maybe. Will it be done, probably not. For any decent progress to be made a politician needs to stand up and say you will have to pay considerably more tax for decades,  while having poor service and reduced benefits to get the payout for your kids. No politicians have said this apart from the Brexi ones recently.

we are a nimby country that doesn’t want to pay for progress

If people actually voted for the things they say they’d vote for then the Tory party would never ever have won an election

The electorate has already made its mind up about ‘The Project’ and passed judgement. Its decided that this absolute car crash of a government is a safer option.

They did? When?

Was that a couple of years back when, at the time, the government was seen as a superbly capable set of hands. Something which only disappeared after the less than stellar results at the polls. Remember May only called the election since it was forecast to be a massacre.

Perhaps though if you “moderate” types hadnt been busy attacking Corbyn and trying to create a self fulfilling prophecy that he is unelectable it might have ended up differently.

You dont seem capable to learning the lesson though. I do wonder what makes someone dedicate themselves so heavily to attacking Corbyn and so aiding the hard right. Is it because you no longer have a political party dancing to your minority views?

One of the big problems for Labour is that Brexit is dominating – it’s using up all the political oxygen. Labour are stuck in a position where they cannot please the remainers/ second referendum or hard core brexiters. Labour members are overwhelmingly remainers but lots of traditional labour voters are hardcore brexiters. I have a feeling that this is impacting the polls as Labour dither in the middle.

There is actually a really good debate on economic ideology and policy to be had between Lab and Tory which just isn’t happening. On the back of the conference season all the non-tabloid press said that the Labour offering was interesting, coherent and new ( and dangerous from Telegraph etc which is a compliment) – but not more debate came from it because of bastard Brexit.