Jeremy Corbyn

binners - Member

Alan Johnson is on the weekly politics now. Hardly an arch 'Blairite''. He was asked why his party didn't respect Jezza. His answer: "because you can't instill respect by intimidation".

Scary Corbyn, going around giving the MPs chinese burns. What the genuine ****.

[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Whip#The_whip_as_a_party_line ]On the subject of intimidation, here's a few interesting snippets[/url]:

Whips can often be brutal to backbenchers to secure their vote, and [b]will resort to a mixture of promises, threats, blackmail and extortion[/b][4] to force an unpopular vote. [b]A good whip will know secrets and incriminating information about Members of Parliament. A whip should know major figures in an MP's local constituency party and the MP's agent.[/b]

For a minister, the consequences for defying the party whip are absolute: they are dismissed from their job immediately, if they have not already resigned, and return to being a backbencher. Sometimes their votes in Parliament are called the "payroll vote", because they can be taken for granted. The consequences for a back-bencher can include the lack of future promotion to a government post, a reduction of party campaigning effort in his or her constituency during the next election, deselection by his or her local party activists, or, in extreme circumstances, "withdrawal of the whip" and expulsion from the party.

How relevant is [url= http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/28/blairite-labour-coup-plotters-protected-media-giant-tied-tony-blair/ ]this[/url] under the circumstance...

The earlier version of the Sky News report, which has now been completely scrubbed from all published versions available online, suggested that the sudden uprising was not spontaneous, but carefully planned.

[b]The report quoted Sky News political correspondent Sophy Ridge accusing one of Corbyn’s own whips, Conor McGinn MP, of coordinating the resignations to “try to cause maximum impact”[/b]:

Meanwhile, the party’s leaders in the Lords – Baroness Smith of Basildon, Labour leader in the Lords, and Lord Bassam, the chief whip – are likely to boycott shadow cabinet meetings while Mr Corbyn remains, a spokesman for the House of Lords said.

Former shadow education secretary Lucy Powell, who resigned on Sunday, insisted the resignations were not a ‘planned coup’ against Mr Corbyn, but a reaction to the ‘seismic’ events which have shaken Westminster in recent days.

But Sky’s Senior Political Correspondent Sophy Ridge said she understood that the man choreographing the resignations is Conor McGinn, Labour MP for St Helens North.

She said: [b]‘He’s ringing shadow cabinet members and ministers, organising the timings and co-ordinating the resignations to try to cause maximum impact.[/b]

[b]‘This is significant because he’s one of Jeremy Corbyn’s Whips – tasked with ensuring party discipline.’[/b]

The censored Sky News passages confirm that Conor McGinn worked closely with Hilary Benn, Corbyn’s now resigned Shadow Foreign Secretary, in coordinating the sudden spate of resignations.

Benn, a supporter of the disastrous 2003 Iraq War, was Secretary of International Development under Tony Blair.

[b]In addition to McGinn, the deleted Sky News paragraphs reveal that two of Corbyn’s other most senior whips had also been involved the coordinated mutiny: Baroness Angela Smith of Basildon, who as of May 2015 has been Leader of the Opposition in the House of Lords; and Lord Steve Bassam, Jeremy Corbyn’s chief whip.[/b]

Democracy at work...

Thanks JHJ, your link gave me two bits of information which I didn't know about. First this :

[url= http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-legal-advice-automatically-on-ballot-leadership-challenge_uk_577003cfe4b0d2571149d42a ]Jeremy Corbyn does not need MPs’ support to fight a fresh leadership election[/url]

I knew that they were seeking legal advise but I hadn't realised that it had been established, and frankly I wasn't hopeful.

And secondly this :

[url= https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/05/17/labour-members-increasingly-bullish-on-corbyn/ ]Labour members increasingly bullish on Corbyn's chances[/url]

I was aware that his approval ratings had increased since he became leader but I only knew of older polls.

That's really cheered me up. I now think that as long as he doesn't give up the coup is more likely to fail.

I have to say that in the past I have found some the adulation directed at Corbyn by some in the Labour Party a tad nauseating, and I had recently become quite critical of his lack of action in redemocratising the party.

But I am starting to see him in a different light now. His determination in the last week not to let those who count on him down has been exemplary. He has shown significant leadership qualities imo.

And if he survives he will have proved how he can cope in highly stressful situations. A quality which he would need as prime minister and one which until now I wasn't that convinced he possessed.

Look at the contrast with Boris Johnson who was so easily outmaneuvered and threw in the towel as soon as the plotters revealed their hand. They done him like a kipper.

Plus of course if he wins the 2020 general election he will make Tony Blair look extremely silly which by definition will also make a lot of other people also look extremely silly.

A lot of people are very determined that Corbyn should never win a general election. And a lot of other people are very determined that he shouldn't give up. I don't envy him, truly.

As a party they are ready fora split, it would probably please a lot of Corbyn's supporters if it happened (initially) but they wouldn't be able to pull the funding over.
As somebody said earlier a greater spread of smaller parties who were actually united forming coalitions might not be a bad way. Let the Far left go left, let the swivel eyes loons go right stop having to pander to their views along with the mainstream.
Sound familiar

The four left the Labour Party as a result of the January 1981 Wembley conference which committed the party to unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the European Economic Community. They also believed that Labour had become too left-wing, and had been infiltrated at constituency party level by Trotskyist factions whose views and behaviour they considered to be at odds with the Parliamentary Labour Party and Labour voters.[citation needed]

also on website registration I'd probably be looking to collect a few possible ones just in case - doesn't mean a conspiracy just being slightly more organised and removing your head from the sand

but they wouldn't be able to pull the funding over

Have you some information to suggest that? My understanding is that some major trade unions are very likely to disaffiliate from the Labour Party should the PLP coup against the party be successful.

A party with a lot of MPs but few members and little funding will struggle. They certainly won't win the next general election.

Sound familiar

The four left the Labour Party as a result of the January 1981 Wembley conference which committed the party to unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the European Economic Community. They also believed that Labour had become too left-wing, and had been infiltrated at constituency party level by Trotskyist factions whose views and behaviour they considered to be at odds with the Parliamentary Labour Party and Labour voters.[citation needed]

And where are they now? The answer is in political oblivion. Ultimately it was a failed Labour right-wing split. It did help the Tories win the general election though.

As your wiki article points out the two principle reasons for the Four breaking away was Labour's policies of unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the European Economic Community.

Today unilateral nuclear disarmament is the policy of the governing party in Scotland. And one of the Four, David Owen, resurfaced during the EU campaign to strongly make the case [u]in favour[/u] of leaving the EU.

A right-wing Labour MP famously called the 1983 Labour manifesto 'the longest suicide note in history' because of its commitment to unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the European Economic Community. Today they appear to be very "electable" policies.

It seems that the Labour Party back then was just ahead of the times.

And where are they now? The answer is in political oblivion. Ultimately it was a failed Labour right-wing split. It did help the Tories win the general election though.

Today unilateral nuclear disarmament is the policy of the governing party in Scotland. And one of the Four, David Owen, resurfaced during the EU campaign to strongly make the case in favour of leaving the EU.

A right-wing Labour MP famously called the 1983 Labour manifesto 'the longest suicide note in history' because of its commitment to unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the European Economic Community. Today they appear to be very "electable" policies.

It seems that the Labour Party back then was just ahead of the times.

The PLP are either simply looking after themselves as career politicians or being pragmatic enough to understand you can't change anything in opposition.

The current fight is over the name of the party and who gets to keep it.

I was talking about the electors of the MP's in the general public who gave those MP's the mandate to represent them.

So you are assuming that the Labour Party members as they were last summer, and th trade unions who supported Corbyn are the "arrivistes"? Because that is who got him in. It doesn't matter whether you are looking at that from the point of view of the PLP or the ordinary voters, the evidence points to theae people always having been close to the Labour Party as opposed to being over-run by militant socialists.

And then remember the far out crazy policies Corbyn was talking about at the time? Renationalisation of the railways, reversal of changes to the nhs, that sort of thing? How quickly we forget that statistically his policies at the time were remarkably popular across all voters (including conservatives in the case of railways iirc) trident was the only really contentious one in there.
Recent council and by elections, and polls/ surveys even very recently simply do not support your idea that Labour voters in their droves are turning away from labour asking "wtf happened to my party and its policies" and Corbyn's difficulties lie not in the popular vote but in the media, people who won't vote labour whatever happens, and the PLP. Oh and Binners now. whoever is in charge of labour, the challenge is as much about getting the young and disenfranchised non voters on board and managing the [s]gerrymandering[\s] boundary changes ahead of us.

according to Ernie

Labour is currently supporting all of the Tory government's policies.

The Corbyn leadership hasn't produced a single policy change to date, he's like Victor Meldrew type character railing against the government with no actual ideas of his own to replace the policies he so objects to. The way he can say things which are objectionable makes it look like he has a political form of Alzheimer's

The current fight is over the name of the party and who gets to keep it.

assets, cash, and funders needed to be added to that list

ernie_lynch - Member
'but they wouldn't be able to pull the funding over'
Have you some information to suggest that? My understanding is that some major trade unions are very likely to disaffiliate from the Labour Party should the PLP coup against the party be successful.

A party with a lot of MPs but few members and little funding will struggle. They certainly won't win the next general election.

I think they'll get funding no problem. From the foreign billionaires whose interests they have been serving from the day they turned the Labour Party into the Red Tories.

Corbyn is showing his real leadership now. He has patiently waited until the Blairites have taken enough rope.

Not that I want him to win - as long as the Labour party is infested with Blairites it's never going to gain traction in Scotland and they'll not be able to effectively oppose independence because of the contempt we have for them for selling out.

But for the sake of the poor, the vulnerable, and working people, I hope Corbyn sticks in there because no other major party really cares.

The PLP are either simply looking after themselves as career politicians or being pragmatic enough to understand you can't change anything in opposition.

And thats the rub. Jeremy Corbyn isn't going to win an electoral majority now, next week, or in 2020. He is unelectable before the events of the last week.This week, electoraly, he's a dead man walking. .

I just can't get my head round why his supporters think he is.

Ernie - serious question

Do you honestly think that the voters of this country, who have never elected a government with views as left wing wing as Corbyns (even before labour lost every seat in Scotland!), are suddenly going to have some kind of socialist epithany, ushered in by the present Corbynist line, and realise the error of their centrist ways? If so, why? What evidence is there at all to support this? Because I can't see any. What am I missing?

As I've said countless times, the party needs to re-enter the real world, as it is, not how they'd like it to be. This is the world that has just voted us out of Europe, and 12 months ago elected David Cameron with a commons majority that not even he thought he'd get. I just fail to see how anyone thinks that veering shaprly to the left is ever going to lead to anything other than permanent oposition? Effectively just becoming a pressure group. One that those in government can just ignore.

How on earth is delivering a tory hegemony doing anything the labour party is meant to do? I think the left of the party needs to stop its ridiculous student protest posturing, and face up to reality

Corbyn is showing his real leadership now.

That's the scary part...hold the front pages..."read all about it, real leader emerges, read all about it"

...meanwhile out in the real world (remember that?)

Thanks goodness people can turn to [s]The Tories[/s] err [s]The Lib Dems[/s] err The Greens. Phew, so who is in charge at the Greens these days?

binners agrees with DC shocka!

Thanks goodness people can turn to The Tories err The Lib Dems err The Greens. Phew, so who is in charge at the Greens these days?

I think they are having elections to get a new leader, the problem is the only person anyone has heard of is doing a Carswell (i.e. doesn't want the job and won't stand)

someone neither left nor right wing so you will be voting for them I assume

BnD - it was a rhetorical question.

A a time of constitutional and economic chaos, leadership of the major parties has gone AWOL

Hello, anyone there?!?

@ julianwilson

So you are assuming that the Labour Party members as they were last summer, and th trade unions who supported Corbyn are the "arrivistes"

No.

It doesn't matter whether you are looking at that from the point of view of ... the ordinary voters,

I don't agree.

And then remember the far out crazy policies Corbyn was talking about at the time? Renationalisation of the railways

Well, quite.

How quickly we forget that statistically his policies at the time were remarkably popular across all voters (including conservatives in the case of railways iirc)

Insert historical John McEnroe statement here...

Recent council and by elections, and polls/ surveys even very recently simply do not support your idea that Labour voters in their droves are turning away from labour asking "wtf happened to my party and its policies"

I didn't say that.

For what it's worth, which objectively probably isn't much in the grand scheme of things, I will say this for him - he certainly sticks to his guns. I think the earlier comparison with the Black Knight from Monty Pythons Holy Grail is misplaced. He still has all his base support limbs.

I think he'll probably win another internal leadership election and then the Labour MP's opposing him will have to figure out what they are going to do next, given that there will ge no way back to the front bench for them.

Although, of course, my opinion is only semi-detached as I'm not currently a supporter of his party, floating voterly out here in my normal non-algned position on the observational couch... 8)

Binners.
What do you think the Labour Party is for?

Serious question, btw.

A the moment [s]Comic Relief[/s] opposition to HM Government.

RS - here's a question for you - why did Labour lose the last election, what happened to the core vote?

I've no intention of engaging with you thm, please don't bother.

Rusty Spanner - Member
Binners.
What do you think the Labour Party is for?

That's a very good question which goes to the heart of the debate.

Does the Labour Party become able to offer a "Socialist" restructuring of society, root and branch and hope to achieve that via votes into Parliamrnt and the subsequent ability to pass laws thereto? Then retain support in the civil war that inevitably follows?

Or does it continue to try and make what it thinks are improvements to the country by compromise and persuasion from inside the system?

Aye, there's the rub.

Indeed its a serious issue for the left as many of the traditional labour voters have been lost due to middle class intellectual liberal elites - despite the terrace house dwelling status of self and the council upbringing i am seen as one of thise

Truthfully i have no idea how I am meant to appeal to, nor do i want to tbh, to those working class who are intend on blaming immigrants rather than RW capitalists for their current plight

Solidarity has been lost, everyone thinks about themself, society is fractured, even the working class demonise the poor - who them punch themself in the face by voting to leave the EU and hand even more power to those even more RW than what we have.

I dont see how we unite on the left and i cannot see what we unite over

I respect Corbyn - though he has been a shit leader as he cannot decide whether to tbe true to himself or play the game [ national anthem for example] but I do know he wont win the middle ground voters needed to win an election

I also dont think another middle class Blairite will unite the activists

I dont see an easy solution

tp do this whilst the tory party is in disarray is terrible as well as the labour party is busy punching itself in the face over and over and over again.

Corbyn has to realise he cannot lead a team when he has lost them ...its like footy manager having the owners support but not the players. It can only end one way.I guess n this case we can split the party but how the heel does that help lefties of any kind

Its a mess and this thread is just lefties squabbling [ and THM trolling]

Currently i dont think a radical left or even vaguely left message[ ernie is correct on this point] can win an election

Is there a sufficiently large disenfranchised left leaning populace who currently don't bother to vote as even the current Labour Party doesn't represent them? (and are they likely to be in constituencies that Labour isn't already winning?)

This is a genuine question chakaping because I would actually be very interested in the answer, it's something which honestly baffles me.

Why do you think Corbyn is that far left ?

I know that the Tories, the Blairites, and their friends in the media, portray Corbyn as far-left, but why does anyone believe them?

Apologies, I should have known better than to use the words "far" and "left" next to one another - that's undermined what I was trying to say.

I don't see Corbyn as particularly being "far left" in the ultimate sense, but he's further left than I expected to see Labour going for a while - and more importantly further left than I think the electorate would accept at the moment.

He has a fine voting record and appears to be in about the same spot politically as myself (you are right he's a social democrat rather than a strict socialist).

Unfortunately it seems that (like not-very-red-Ed Milliband) he's struggled to communicate his ideas - he says all the right things but sadly doesn't seem to have the personal charisma of, say, Bernie Sanders or Neil Kinnock (the Labour leader who won me over as a youth), to make it connect.

I think a large portion of the Labour party and wider population would quite like another Blair, just without the warmongering. David Milliband probably. I'd take that over more of the Tories obvs, but I'd hope for something better.

I've no intention of engaging with you thm, please don't bother.

No need, its not my problem. But until you engage with...

why did Labour lose the last election, what happened to the core vote?

...you will condemn yourself to internal navel-gazing and petty if vicious squabbling and opposition. Your choice.

With a wide open goal in front of you, how do you think you look at the moment. A serious government in waiting?? 😯

But FFS chose a leader - and no Eagle is not the answer. There are plenty of obvious candidates......

I also dont think another middle class Blairite will unite the activists

I dont see an easy solution

We can compare this to Newcastle United, the supporters weren't satisfied with mid-table and a manager and owner from down South, only a Geordie would do. Now they are in the Championship with an owner from down South.

During Corbyn's election campaign people where asked would they rather have a leader capable of winning or one "true to their left-wing values" but not winning. Many chose option B and it seems thats still the case.

I do believe it will take an absolute disaster at a General Election before they get the joke. No doubt it will be a conspiracy, undue influence from the rich etc etc All excuses under the sun except looking at themselves

@ninfan Insee you've been busy. Guardian reports 60,000 new members last week.

A question can you join more than once ? Seems you really only need an email and postal address, must be trivial to join multiple times. They can't possibly verify 60,000 applications in a week, doing so would cost more than £3 each.

Ernie - serious question

Do you honestly think that the voters of this country, who have never elected a government with views as left wing wing as Corbyns ...

I made the mistake of thinking that it might be worth reading one of your posts binners but I stopped right there. If I wanted to read drivel like that I'd pop down the road and get myself a copy of the Daily Mail.

You have obviously never heard of the 1945 landslide Labour government which was closer to Fidel Castro than I am to Corbyn. Or the later Labour governments whose reforms such as decriminalisation of homosexuality, equal pay for women, and race relation acts, just to give a couple of examples, transformed what was still a conservative society. Nothing Corbyn suggests is a radical as that.

I asked a couple of pages ago why some people are still claiming that Corbyn is far-left, it was a genuine question as I am genuinely baffled as to why some people believe that. I got nothing and now you trot out the little gem that Corbyn is more left-wing than the 1945 Labour government which created the Welfare State.

At the start of this thread you were one of Corbyn's most vocal supporters now you're ranting that he's so extreme Left that you know with complete certainty that he would lose the general election.

What's changed, apart from the target of your ranting? Has Corbyn swerved massively to the left since the start of the thread? Has Labour witnessed electoral meltdown since the start of this thread?

And poor old big_n_daft is so lacking in ammunition to attack Corbyn that s/he resorts to accusing him of having Alzheimer's.

In fact the obvious lack of ammunition Corbyn's enemies have, the PLP want to blame him for the fact that over 17 million people voted to leave the EU, convinces me more than ever that Corbyn is the right man for the job.

I supported Corbyn's election as I thought every other candidate would be eaten for breakfast, just as Miliband was. I thought Corbyn would more than likely fail but the others definitely would.

The one hope for Corbyn in my mind was that he'd be a breath of fresh air that the disenfranchised could relate to and support. That he could get his message across and gain support from the young on a ticket of hope and of alternative. The long shot was that this could create a movement that dragged people along and gained momentum up towards the election where people would finally be fed up with the Tory lies.

Unfortunately that's not going to happen and Corbyn has been exposed as leader just at a time when he needs to be stamping his authority. He'll never recover from this.

Problem is if there's a new leader we'll be back to my original thought. the prospective candidates will be eaten for breakfast....... So what do we do?

OK ernie as the only informed Labour historian here

Why did Labour lose the last election?
What happened to the core vote?

Should be easier enough to answer....

charisma of, say, Bernie Sanders or Neil Kinnock

Well ALLRIGHT!

jambalaya - Member
We can compare this to Newcastle United, the supporters weren't satisfied with mid-table and a manager and owner from down South, only a Geordie would do. Now they are in the Championship with an owner from down South.

You have obviously never heard of the 1945 landslide Labour government which was closer to Fidel Castro than I am to Corbyn

There are plenty of obvious candidates......

rhetorical again??

there isn't anyone who would be credible in the current generation that want the job now due family or other issues

I assume labour are holding out for 2025 as their next best chance

rhetorical again??

😉

Just matching the mood BnD!!

You have obviously never heard of the 1945 landslide Labour government which was closer to Fidel Castro than I am to Corbyn

Some how does that relate to today?

May I?

The suggestion is that Corbyn is not as "left wing" as the media is potraying him, if you look back into recent history. They are whipping up a foam of nonsense despite the fact that even when the Labour Party WAS really left wing, nationalisation of just about everything, they won by a landslide...

As I understand it. 8)

I think that large parts of the labour party need to stop spitting the word Blairite out like its a swear word too. Grow up FFS!

Yes, the man is odious on a personal level! Yes, we view everything through the toxic legacy of Iraq. But to discount everything else is absolutely ridiculous. He was elected with a landslide. Then re-elected twice (despite Iraq!). When I look around the northern towns, at the schools, libraries, Surestart centres, and facilities that were built, you have to ask yourself would any of that stuff have been built if we'd have had 3 Tory administrations during that period. Well given that they're presently trying to close them all down, or sell them off, I think we all know the answer to that. What about the minimum wage?

This centre left administration did a lot of good. Just imagine what the Tories would have done in that time? They'd probably have devised a way to privatise the air we breath by now.

So for the people now at the top of the labour party to just reject this out of hand. To use it as a term of abuse, and totry and purge it from the party is patently ridiculous. Its petty, and juvenile, and more importantly it is completely counter productive to a population that has shown in election after election that it quite likes the centre ground. Enough to vote for it in the last 5 elections. Because although Dave has been derided as the heir to Blair, its won him 2 elections. And the administration about to be ushered in now I fear is about to show us how truly centrist Dave was.

Which is why now more than ever, Labour needs to re-occupy that centre ground. The PLP knows this. The almost Maoist cult of Jeremy are far too blinkered to see whats staring them in the face.

And the last time they did that, they cast themselves into the political widerness for the best part of 2 decades

chakaping - only just read your post, thanks for the clarification.

I don't agree with your suggestion that Corbyn is a poor communicator though, on the contrary, I think he is an excellent communicator.

He's not a great public speaker but Tony Blair was and I never knew what the **** Blair was trying to say. No one knew what Blair was saying when he made speeches, they just thought it sounded good. Although the WI weren't impressed when they famously slowed clapped him.

Corbyn has the ability to speak very clearly and make others understand exactly what he means. I am convinced that every time Corbyn is interviewed in a TV studio and is asked relevant questions Labour gains a few more votes.

How do think Corbyn went from absolutely nowhere at the start of the leadership election to winning it by the biggest margin in Labour Party history if it isn't the skills he has to communicate his ideas to people? Was it all that good press he was getting what did it?

Morning binns.

I assume that your position on the question of "What is the Labour Party for" is for persuading change for the "better" by working inside the system, would that be fair?

How do think Corbyn went from absolutely nowhere at the start of the leadership election to winning it by the biggest margin in Labour Party history if it isn't the skills he has to communicate his ideas to people? Was it all that good press he was getting what did it?

That's a very good point. 😯

mikewsmith - Member

"You have obviously never heard of the 1945 landslide Labour government which was closer to Fidel Castro than I am to Corbyn"

Some how does that relate to today?

Yes it does.

Because today is the day that binners said :

[i]"Do you honestly think that the voters of this country, who have never elected a government with views as left wing wing as Corbyns"[/i]

HTH

No one knew what Blair was saying when he made speeches, they just thought it sounded good.

Yes... thats why he won 3 elections, because people liked his speeches, even though they didn't understand them

Jesus! Typical bloody left wingers. You think people only reject what you are advocating because they're thick? And if only they'd let you get on with running things, then they'd soon learn whats best for them comrade?

And then they wonder why they never get elected? I've never heard such sanctimonious, superior, patronising drivel in my life

@ ernie

I think, however, that the collective character of the current voting public may just have changed in the past 76 years.

You can't extrapolate those past circumstances and overlay them on today's situation. It's not a good fit.

@ binners

So what you are saying is that lying to and nanipulating the public to get what you want is ethical?

Does the end justify the means, then?

I've never heard such sanctimonious, superior, patronising drivel in my life

[img] [/img]

Corbyn has the ability to speak very clearly and make others understand exactly what he means. I am convinced that every time Corbyn is interviewed in a TV studio and is asked relevant questions Labour gains a few more votes.

I agree. The problem is no-one wants to give him airtime so others can listen.

Calm common sense and rational thought doesn't sell papers or get coverage. Accusing MEPs of never working while in Brussels or stabbing your mate in the back does.

Didn't you complain earlier that all binners wanted to do was post pictures, ernie?

Although i do like the conceptual link to "the end justifying the means"... 😆

Didn't you complain earlier that all binners wanted to do was post pictures, ernie?

Why would I do that? It's up to binners what he posts. If he wants to post pictures and ask me if I fancy mefty why would it bother me?

.

@ ernie

I think, however, that the collective character of the current voting public may just have changed in the past 76 years.

You can't extrapolate those past circumstances and overlay them on today's situation. It's not a good fit.

You need to direct that comment at binners not me.

It was him that was making the point concerning how voters have voted in the past, not me.