Jeremy Corbyn

the policy of the party at that time was made by conference. Not Blair. Blair later changed that but IIRC not until after his first win.

Thats right, Blair changed it so that he, alone, could make LP policy:

[i]3. When in Government the NEC, the seven backbench members of the Parliamentary Committee of the Parliamentary Labour Party (‘PLP’) plus the Chair of the PLP, the Cabinet, the Chair and three vice Chairs of the NPF, two CLP members of the NPF to be elected by CLP delegates to the NPF, and eight Trade Union members of the TULO Contact Group, shall decide which items from the party programme shall be included in the manifesto which shall be issued by the NEC prior to every general election. The joint meeting shall also define the attitude of the party to the principal issues raised by the election which are not covered by the manifesto.

4. When not in Government the NEC, the Shadow Cabinet, the Parliamentary Committee of the Parliamentary Labour Party (‘PLP’) and the Chair and three vice Chairs of the NPF shall decide which items from the party programme shall be included in the manifesto that shall be issued by the NEC prior to every general election. The joint meeting shall also define the attitude of the party to the principal issues raised by the election which are not covered by the manifesto.
[/i]

🙄

Has this thread overtaken the Scottish Independence thread yet, in no. of posts?

If not, I suspect it will soon and keep running for the forseeable future....still so much bollox to spout from all sides!

(what is the longest ever STW thread BTW?)

THMs I don't see so I have no idea what level of nonsense he has posted

Is this a premier member feature? I may sign up! 😆

[b]Revisionist History AS Paper 1[/b]

All candidates will be expected to ignore the positive impact played by Bliar in the electoral success of the Labour Government 1997-2005. Reference to landslides will be penalised heavily. Higher grade students will be required to overplay his role in its downfall and cite direct evidence of his sole responsibility for it. No reference should be made to the level of vote achieved in relation to the Party's positioning on the historic notion of the RW/LW political spectrum, nor the personal approval ratings secured in the aftermath of the "People's Princess" moment, nor the 95% support for the changes from previous Labour administration laid out in the 1997 manifesto.

A* 40-49%
A 35-40%
B 30-35%
C 25-30%
D 20-25%

Extra marks to be awarded for poor spelling and use of inappropriate grammar

Is this a premier member feature? I may sign up!

No its made up - use of blocking software is not allowed in the rules

AA - its a little webby gizmo someone wrote a few years ago that allows you to block certain users. What I see when THM posts is:

teamhurtmore - Member

teamhurtmore said something stupid.

It has two effects. one I no longer see his posts and two it amuses my inner child.

No its made up - use of blocking software is not allowed in the rules

Queensbury?

No the STW version - now the chance to see how consistently they are applied! 😉

Extra marks to be awarded for poor spelling and use of inappropriate grammar

Your shitting me!! Finally a markskeme i can excel in.

[quote="anagallis_arvensis"]

No its made up - use of blocking software is not allowed in the rules

Queensbury?

Its not made up. this thingy( i think its called a script) was written years ago by a forum member and offered freely to all people on the forum. NO fuss was made by the mods at the time. Its very useful and amusing.

😀

Try to be as 'comprehensive' as poss 😉

Rules
In addition to the above guidelines we have a limited number of hard and fast rules that you should familiarise yourself with before posting on any of our forums.

No posts of a sexual nature, including images of a sexual nature or intended to provoke a sexual response.
No Trade or business advertising – except bona fide retailers may respond to genuine enquiries from potential customers.
Usernames or names displayed in forum threads or story comments may not be used to criticise individuals or companies and are subject to the same rules as for any other post or comment on the site. Where a username is in breach of this rule the account will be deleted or the username altered by a moderator.
No posts which, in the Moderators opinion, are likely to cause offence to either an individual, or group, whatever their gender, sexual inclination or ethnicity.
No posts, including links to other sites that are deemed to be of a sexual or distasteful nature, incite racial or sexist behaviour or are in any way discriminatory and/or offensive towards individuals or minority groups.
No abusive or foul language – There is a swear filter on the site that will capture what we consider to be the most offensive vocabulary but any attempt to evade this swear filter will result in that post or thread being deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned. Our swear filter is not exhaustive and the moderators reserve the right to moderate any language regardless of its inclusion or otherwise in the swear filter library.
No posting of referral links and codes where the poster will benefit financially or otherwise
No ‘Paging…’ threads. They only gum up the forum. If a user wants to be contacted their email address will be on their profile page.
No posts which in the opinion of the moderators are solely intended to, or are likely to provoke or abuse any individual or group.
No impersonation of any other poster, or use of another poster’s identity, including letting a banned user post via your account.
Placing images on the forum requires you to link to the site where the image originated from. Read forum help for details on how to achieve this.
Multiple accounts are not allowed. One member – One account. Users who are found to own more than one account may have ALL accounts deleted. At the very least the extra accounts will be deleted and the user’s remaining account will be suspended for at least 48 hours.
The consequences of infringing these rules and guidelines are entirely at our discretion but will generally start with a 48 hour suspension from posting on the forum for which we may or may not give warnings or notify the user of their ban. In addition moderators may suspend any account for any reason they see fit at any time.

I expect you are going to need a high court injunction to make this stick THM!! I suggest trying the European court of human rights quick smart before Brexit. You have the right to make everyone hear your garbage!!

ninfan - Member

And theres me remembering all the fuss about Blair amending Clause IV, when it turns out that apparently this made no difference at all in the 1997 election.

You know that's a straw man, I didn't say Blair made no difference at all. But there's no doubt whatsoever that Smith would have won had he survived, and that alone puts the lie to the myth that "Blair made Labour electable"

Would they won by as big a margin? Probably not. Doesn't really matter.
Would they have won the next 2 elections? Absolutely unknowable.

Nah, AA, use is daft. Much better to actually read the silly stuff that gets posted. That amuses my inner adult much more!! Why do you think this one keeps going? Its hilarious.....

that alone puts the lie to the myth that "Blair made Labour electable"

It would be more accurate to state that Black Wednesday made the Conservatives unelectable,

Smith took over the leadership just as it happened, but it was that that was pivotal, not Smiths policies. Remember that it was the Kinnock/Smith manifesto that lost at the '92 election. Blairs manifesto was miles beyond that, and Labour never polled anywhere near the 60% that they were getting under Blair.

It would be more accurate to state that Black Wednesday made the Conservatives unelectable,

Yes, that's pretty much what I recall. Blair was then able to convince us that New Labour would be a safe pair of hands for the economy. Without that, he wouldn't have won anything like the landslide he did.

JC isn't following that path.

ninfan - Member

Smith took over the leadership just as it happened, but it was that that was pivotal, not Smiths policies. Remember that it was the Kinnock/Smith manifesto that lost at the '92 election. Blairs manifesto was miles beyond that, and Labour never polled anywhere near the 60% that they were getting under Blair.

There's merit in that argument- I always say it was a team effort, John and John. But you see, it doesn't actually make any difference- in either case, "Blair made Labour electable" is bobbins. 2 different roads to the same conclusion.

daft is amusing
to a point
but
endless lying
just gets
tiresome
and destroys
any
meaningful discussion
and so
ruins the forum
for everyone
much more corrosive
than swear words
or name calling

Blairism/Blairities is probably as misused at Thatcherism/Thatcherites

Neither were a good/bad as their supporters/detractors make out. Neither -ism stands up to much scrutiny. Still unlike most, they did deliver election success - luck or judgement, you decide.

Mmm. Lovely bike ride marred only slightly by a torn sidewall in a very expensive tyre. 😳

Oh, I'll actually be with Corbs (doing some photography for one of the speakers at an event tonight) later; anything you lot would like me to ask him? Binners?

Good one for you then Clodhopper

Gaitskell famously said that he "would not wish, for one day, to remain a leader who had lost the confidence of his colleagues in parliament"

Why does Jeremy disagree?

Why does Jeremy disagree?

errrr.... cos this is 2016 and he's surrounded by a bunch of privileged middle class plastic ****ers who are determined to ensure that the poor keep their grubby hands off the moolah

that's just a guess mind

Blairism/Blairities is probably as misused at Thatcherism/Thatcherites

Neither were a good/bad as their supporters/detractors make out. Neither -ism stands up to much scrutiny. Still unlike most, they did deliver election success - luck or judgement, you decide.

..the latter largely luck, the opposition being split into SDP (and Libs) and Labour that had yet to chuck out a few Militant Tendency entryists who'd succeeded in pulling the party into unelectable political territory (nationally, GLC etc notwithstanding). Fwiw I recall 'traditional' lab members winging about being regarded as right wing by their constituency parties. Though those left-wing fire-brands Blunket, Banks, Bryant etc - my memory's only doing Bs - eventually ended up deciding doing things in central govt was better than local govt or complaining.)

Still, it was a great time for going on demos with like-minded folk.

anything you lot would like me to ask him?

Does he feel that his educational achievements assisted him in making fairy cakes today ?

Does he actually have a policy regarding fairy cakes ?

Is he against them ?

Seamus Milne only "middle" class. Yunki you do know how to hit below the belt....

Do you know how much a Winchester education costs?!?!?

Labour that had yet to chuck out a few Militant Tendency entryists who'd succeeded in pulling the party into unelectable political territory

Sssh, the young cuckoos dont know about that. Its best to keep quiet about that "golden" era.

Clodhopper just ask him what the plans is.... as someone who has never had a job or run a business or ever has been required to pay wages and turn a profit I will be really interested what he has to say (oh - no slogans please they don't pay the bills for ordinary folk)

Christ don't know why I bothered asking I already know the answer- there won't be one

Oops he does have to list how much money he has spent in his expenses claim - so some Admin skills. Question is if someone turned up to your business in their 50s with no CV or work history would you give them a job? Would you **** the man's been on benefits all his life and you want him to run a multi billion budget? No guesses where that will end.

anything you lot would like me to ask him?

If his answer is not satisfactory call him a trot and hoof him in the slats whilst chanting their is only one tony blair ...one tony blair

Cut him some slack, he has trimmed the roses (?) around the front door. Impressive stuff. I hope no nests were affected as its about a month too early. Nests are delicate things after all...

Oops he does have to list how much money he has spent in his expenses claim - so some Admin skills. Question is if someone turned up to your business in their 50s with no CV or work history would you give them a job? Would you **** the man's been on benefits all his life and you want him to run a multi billion budget? No guesses where that will end.

What other jobs did Cameron, Gideon, Blair, Brown and Clegg have? Genuinecquestion I have no idea vut I would guess **** all of much worth outside politics. I dont see how having run a factory or whatever would help.

As long as we minimise the impact that any of these folk can have on our lives, does it matter?

Ok we need talent in the main offices of state, but the civil service run the rest and constituency MPs have different roles.

Jeremy who? Which event is he doing? Can't see him in the scratch race.

Yep few if any have any real world experience

From memory:
Cameron was a PR flack for a media company for a couple of years (Friends of his dad? ) Gideon Eff all IIRC. Blair a lawyer but I am not sure he ever practiced much. Brown nothing outside of politics. Clegg not sure but nothing much I don't think

Few politicians these days have had proper jobs for long. Sturgeon a lawyer (barrister??)who did practice for a while - law centre for poor folk not in it for the money. Only senior politician who actually worked in the real world as far as I can remember

😀 and 😯

You can fool some of the people ALL of the time

trump
has real world
experience
your ideal candidate
i suppose

Last time I checked Trump wasn't running for PM... although he probably thinks he can/should. It is interesting that we have no politicians with any definitive work experience (Nicola Sturgeon is a possible exception) none of them would be likley to get a proper job outside parliament

whoosh
last time i checked
it is still possible
to evaluate him
as a
candidate
for the office he is running for

Cameron was a PR flack for a media company for a couple of years (Friends of his dad? ) Gideon Eff all IIRC. Blair a lawyer but I am not sure he ever practiced much. Brown nothing outside of politics. Clegg not sure but nothing much I don't think

Few politicians these days have had proper jobs for long.

Indeed. But it does make me laugh about people wailing against the 'Career Politicians' in modern politics. They then name a group of politicians, like the ones above, who, love them or hate them, were actually quite good at being politicians. Effective. Election Winners. Repeatedly in these cases.

The antidote to these politicians? A man who is... a Career Politician. Its all he's ever done. The difference to that roll-cal above though, is that his career was little noticed. Successful? Hardly? He never even made it to the rank of junior bag carrier to a junior minister, and won re-election in a constituency where you could paint a wheelie bin red and it'd get elected. He's only now party leader by accident. 50% a bit of a laugh by some people. 50% administrative error.

And now we know why he never even made it to the rank of junior bag carrier to a junior minister. Because he's just really really shit at politics. The actual day-to-day job of being a politician. Absolutely pants at it. The work experience lad before him was twice as effective.

He stumbles into every elephant trap set for him by the opposition, like he's in a Laurel and Hardy film. I mean.. WTF has he been doing all his career if he walked into the Trident trap that Dave set for him as his parting gift? Playing on his phone? Reading the Morning Star App? Everyone except him saw that for what it was. Hence the faces like smacked arses on the labour front bench as he plummeted down the great big floodlit hole that'd been dug for him. You could see it from space FFS! Hardly quick on the uptake, is he? Not exactly the sharpest tool in the box, to say the least.

He mumbles away ineffectually at PMQ's. His permanently fixed scowl is to the TV cameras what Browns rictus grin was. Electoral kryptonite. And (unsurprisingly) the more that normal people see of his 'performance' (excluding weird cult members) the less they trust him to do the job of PM. So his approval ratings amongst voters (excluding weird cult members) continue to plummet, taking the fortunes of the Labour Party with them.

If only Malcolm were still around to give a full and frank appraisal of his performance so far. I think we can guess what he'd (perfectly correctly) say....

😆

becoming
boring
binners

none of them would be likley to get a proper job outside parliament

Untrue. I had ex-ministers as colleagues and as clients all doing proper jobs and from both sides of the House. However, I did interview a few retiring MPs at the last election who were woeful but thought that their contact book was 10x more valuable than it was. 😉

Course you did Walter, course you did

So his approval ratings amongst voters (excluding weird cult members) continue to plummet,

Thats what they're banking on everyone doing, isn't it?

Then the lunatics will truly have taken over the asylum. I'll stick around and vote for anyone but Corbyn thanks mate. It might be a futile gesture, but I'm sort of fond of them 😀

Then I get to say 'I told you so' as a some mild recompense as whats left of the Labour party/beardy cult goes down to the biggest electoral defeat in its history and loses 150 seats to become a lib dem style fringe party

I don't believe we should comment on other people's political constitutions- now where did have hear that last oh yeah Boris V Obama

Maybe Trump is better equipped to be a president than Clinton could it be his rhetoric is a tool to "close" the deal or he could just be mad? We would all do well to remember how Ronald Reagan was vilified upon election and he turned out to be an OK president so who knows? Certainly not me.

However, I did interview a few retiring MPs at the last election who were woeful but thought that their contact book was 10x more valuable than it was.

They wanted to be economics teachers? I is confused. What do you do?

What he appears to do is make things on the internet then forget what they were and then end up looking "inconsistent" oh and bearing grudges and patronising folk with a bit of trolling thrown in.

He did indeed claim he was an economics teacher and all his students got A *. I am sure there is an easy explanation not involving lies being told.

They wanted to be economics teachers?

No, what use is an understanding of economics in politics, especially post-truth politics?

I [s]is[/s] am confused. What do you do?

Correct grammar among several other things. One of the beauties of modern life is that it is possible to do different things at the same time - including delivering top marks in Econ and Geog. Fun if unsettling/taxing at times.

Not really confusing, so don't worry, although it appears that such an idea is beyond the comprehension of the sub bridge dwellers - but that's not odd either.

post truth indeed THM post truth indeed

I is confused is a perfectly acceptable STW ism like I am disappoint as you well know.

"Clodhopper just ask him.."

😆

I was being completely sarcastic; as if I'd waste my time, or Jezza's, even considering what a few keyboard warriors think! Tbh I forget what most of you say once I'm off here, as is so utterly inconsequential. If you want to ask a politician questions, get off your arse and go and do so.

We had a great time; I got some cracking photos, and gained more experience of photojournalism. One overwhelming fact that struck me, was the sheer diversity of the crowd; all colours, ages, backgrounds and genders etc. Fantastic. You'd never get that at a tory rally, ever. Kind of puts paid to the nonsense Binners etc spout about Corbyn only appealing to the middle classes. But then, Binners etc clearly spend all their lives on here, and don't ever get out and see the real world, so they simply won't know what's actually going on.

Talked to friends about the Blairite cuckoos that we need to get rid of. These are people who genuinely are life long Labour members and political campaigners. Not just people who are Labour voters simply because it's what they've always done, and it's what their parents did etc. No, these are people who are actively engaged in the political process, and have a tad more insight into things than those who sit reading mainstream bullshit without ever questioning it.

And it's clear that Corbyn has been the catalyst for many, many young people joining Labour and getting involved in proper grassroots politics. Whether you see him as a 'leader' or not, there's no denying his effect. It's clear to see why the right are so frightened of the threat to their comfortable status quo, and seek to attack the left at any opportunity. Whole generations are growing up, who will never vote tory. It is clear that the political landscape of the UK is changing, and the establishment are absolutely terrified.

Its true he is inspiring a certain type of young activist- some folk want real and genuine change rather than a slightly nicer ****- and it will be interesting to see what happens with a grassroots and active left wing movement- can it really win hearts and minds?Can it convince all the voting does not amatter/we cannot change anything typoes to vote?
WHat worrying is even labour voters seem to be swallowing the lies about him and his supporters

Correct grammar among several other things.

C'mon AA, don't you miss the joke too!!!

Sounds like you had a good time clod.

"As for our anti-racism campaigning definitely no anti-semitism in the party JC the leader .. we have 92% of Jewish Labour Movement supporters voting for Smith. 92%"

Ah, Jamba. Let's have a look at the Jewish Labour Movement, shall we?

[url= http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/who-are-jewish-labour-movement/ ]The Jewish Labour Movement, founded in 2004, is the successor organisation to Poale Zion (founded in 1905), and the British section of the pro-apartheid Israeli Labour Party (ILP or ‘Havoda’ in Hebrew).[/url]

Unsurprising then, that they are opposed to Corbyn. And they do not represent Jews, any more than the BoD do. They represent right-wing Zionism and the state of Israel. The Jewish people I spoke to last night, do not recognise the JLM as a valid group of representation.

As for Michael Foster labelling Corbyn supporters as 'Sturm Abteilung' (Nazi stormtroopers); this is one of the worst cases of scraping the barrel yet. Having failed to oust Corbyn from the leadership ballot, this vile man is now desperately trying to defame anyone who supports Corbyn, but to use such language is not only deeply offensive, it's also utterly disrespectful of the victims of the Holocaust. The sooner scum like him are expelled from Labour (and I don't doubt he knows his days are numbered), the better. What a ****.

troll plays the edinburgh
AWESOME

It is confusing because you make it up and forget about consistency - thanks for letting me know you still read them though 😉
and you claim I troll 😆
Brilliant

clod
would be interesting
photoj project
to
document diversity
at meeting
just
an idea

Clod, that's an idea. Go to rallies of several parties, develop the photo journalism skills and test the hypothesis re diversity. The results would be interesting.

Well, someone a few days ago, appeared not to know the difference between Momentum members, and the far-right. So it would serve as an educational resources for some folk.

I was actually mindful of trying to avoid clichéd pictures of 'diversity', you know, white people enjoying engaging with 'ethnics', that sort of thing, but I couldn't actually avoid it! It genuinely was so mixed. Benetton would have killed to get such a range of people into it's advertising.

I might try to get along to a couple of Owen Smith rallies. Mind you; I could easily miss them, I've seen larger family groups out shopping, than what's been at some of his gatherings! 😆

Well, someone a few days ago, appeared not to know the difference between Momentum members, and the far-right. So it would serve as an educational resources for some folk.

even labour voters seem to be swallowing the lies about him and his supporters

I'm fed up with the aggressive psychological tactics that are being employed in this class war..

The establishment and the snivelling defeated sycophants that balefully prop up the establishment's sinister dystopian empires are so petrified of change, so terrified of losing their pathetically outdated and corrupt notions of pride and esteem...
So afraid of taking some moral responsibility that they have seemingly no insight, no self-awareness, no clue about the transparency and [i]futility[/i] of the harrowingly violent intellectual strategies they are employing to try to stem the tide..

silly canutes

Benetton? Another blast from the past, how apt!!!

Blimey - they're working really hard to dig stuff up.
If all they can come up with is this then it's pretty complementary of Corbyn imo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/15/jeremy-corbyn-called-for-complete-rehabilitation-of-leon-trotsky/

Imagine if they dug as deep for stuff on the Tories!

struggling to see relevance
of obscure parts
of
russian history
to
anything

benetton
blast from the past
trotsky
important current issue
???

I think the issue with JC is he doesn't even have any experience of a senior or even a junior job in government / shadow cabinet. The goof up he made with his tax return is just embarrasing - do you have any pension income - yes/no. Not rocket science. He earns more than enough miney to pay an accountant £500 to do his tax return (he has a pension worth £1.6m FFS). Its an example of his stubborness and "leftie credentials" that he didn't do so.

@clod you do understand that Zionism is simply the belief that the Jewish people have the legitimate right to a homeland, to self governance ? So pretty much the whole world supports Zionism including the UN and the Palastinian Authrotiy. Clearly Hamas do not as they wish to drive the Jews into the sea and eradicate the State of Israel. There is rather a lot of very deliberate misuse of the term to deligitimise it, Jewsand the entire State of Isreal. You just did it yourself with the Jewish Labour Movement. Its also convenient shorthand for anti-semitic abuse. I have been frequently called a Zionist here as a term of abuse, I am unashamedly Zionist as I believe in the right of the State of Israel to exist. I am in favour of a two-state solution. It is possible to be both.

I think the issue with JC is he doesn't even have any experience of a senior or even a junior job in government / shadow cabine

Whereas his supporters see this as a good thing. Its not like ministers do anything other than give instructions to cival servants anyway.

Thats all well and good. Perhaps his supporters might also like to hop on a bus with someone who's never actually driven behind the wheel. After all... all driving is is turning a wheel and stamping on some pedals. How hard can it be?

You do realise that Yes Minister wasn't actually a documentary, right?

You do realise that Yes Minister wasn't actually a documentary, right?

😆

"@clod you do understand that Zionism is simply the belief that the Jewish people have the legitimate right to a homeland, to self governance ? So pretty much the whole world supports Zionism including the UN and the Palastinian Authrotiy. Clearly Hamas do not as they wish to drive the Jews into the sea and eradicate the State of Israel. There is rather a lot of very deliberate misuse of the term to deligitimise it, Jewsand the entire State of Isreal. You just did it yourself with the Jewish Labour Movement. Its also convenient shorthand for anti-semitic abuse."

Did you actually notice that I wrote 'right-wing Zionism'? Or did you conveniently ignore that bit deliberately? You will of course be aware that Zionism takes many forms, from the original, left-wing (Socialist, even!) liberal Zionism, to the more modern extreme right wing form which is basically another form of fascism. So don't go accusing me of 'misusing' the term. I'm more than aware of the term being used as a form of abuse (as is 'Socialist' these days, even evidenced on this very thread!). But don't start crying that anti-Semitism wolf; it's not working any more. Those who support and attempt to legitimise the actions of the Israeli state towards the Palestinian people cannot, and must not continue to cry 'anti-Semitism' any time anyone criticises Israeli state actions and government policies.

" Clearly Hamas do not as they wish to drive the Jews into the sea and eradicate the State of Israel. There is rather a lot of very deliberate misuse of the term to deligitimise it, Jewsand the entire State of Isreal."

You do understand that not all members of Hamas think like this, don't you? Without wishing to justify the actions that group has been responsible for (and there are many utterly morally reprehensible aspects of Hamas), it is a fact that Hamas gained support and popularity as a direct consequence of the actions of the Israeli government and military. The vast majority of Palestinian people want peace, as do most Israeli people. But there are equally vile characters on both sides, the main difference being, some of those on the Israeli side hold an awful lot of power. There are far more anti-Arab fascists in Israel, than there are anti-Semites in Palestine. The appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as defence minister, even attracted concern from a former Israeli prime minister.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-politics-idUSKCN0YE1I6

Then there's the appointment of a religious extremist who advocates the rape of women, becoming chief rabbi in the Israeli army:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-politics-idUSKCN0YE1I6

You are ominously silent on such things, Jamba. And openly hateful towards Corbyn, hence your continued attempts to slur him and Labour as 'anti-Semitic'. I have asked you more than once, about your views on the rise in far-right extremism and genuine anti-Semitism in Europe, yet you choose to ignore me and remain silent. This, I believe, is an indication that you aren't really so concerned about anti-Semitism, because if you genuinely were, you'd admit the attempted slurs on Corbyn are unfounded and nothing more than slander designed to undermine him.

Fantastic interview with Jess Phillips on Radio 4 just finished

I have to say, that for a ultra right-wing Red Tory she doesn't come across as very right wing...

@clod you do understand that Zionism is simply the belief that the Jewish people have the legitimate right to a homeland, to self governance ?

Zionism refer to the Israel right or wrong , that you epitomise, who shout racist at anyone who dares to criticise the MO of the apartheid state and then tell us all how Muslims are such a threat to our very way of life

As clod notes you are literally incapable of criticising anything israel does from bombing schools, collective punishments, "putting people on a diet- ie starving the entire territory,illegal land grabs and settlements, or carrying out political assassinations home and abroad.

I have to say, that for a ultra right-wing Red Tory she doesn't come across as very right wing

84% of local labour parties back Corbyn. Bloody entryists.

Nice to see a man of principle.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/16/jeremy-corbyn-floor-three-hour-train-journey-london-newcastle

Thats all well and good. Perhaps his supporters might also like to hop on a bus with someone who's never actually driven behind the wheel. After all... all driving is is turning a wheel and stamping on some pedals. How hard can it be?

Its hardly the same is it. So by your logic only an ex pm could be pm? The fact is regardless of the team in charge at the time they all just make decisions based on doctrine rather than in response to facts or whats going on around them. If Boris can be foreign sec Corbyn can be pm.

If Boris can be foreign sec

complete the sentence
any way
you like

The fact is regardless of the team in charge at the time they all just make decisions based on doctrine rather than in response to facts or whats going on around them.

You should change decisions based on the data, but the problem is the public and the media then accuse them of changing their mind and want 'conviction' politicians.

Only recent MP I've heard say he'll change his opinion based on the data is Vince Cable and guess what he spent most of his career in industry.

Corbyn clearly hasn't changed his opinion on anything in 40 years, despite the evidence that he is wrong on many accounts.

Binners - what experience did Blair have? Cameron? Gideon? Clegg?

Corbyn clearly hasn't changed his opinion on anything in 40 years, despite the evidence that he is wrong on many accounts.

He may have principles different from yours but if you dont admire the very few who have them and keep them, whatever their hue, then that is a reflection of you not them.

When the data shows you that your 'principles' will not result in the change you are trying to achieve then it's time to change.