Jeremy Corbyn

Yes - the SDP and the liberal democrats are irrelevant todays politics with almost no representation and a small % of the vote. The blame for The thatcher yeas rests firmly on the shoulders of those who split the left - and that was the gang of four.

Revise history all you want. It does not alter the facts.

I'm amazed that you still maintain this completely made up nonsense binners that Sadiq Khan was well known to Londoners and that they didn't vote for him simply because he was the official Labour Party candidate.

where's your evidence for that - Sadiq was regularly featured in the Evening Standard and I think has a column in it as well. That's a pretty popular paper in London and it's stories are often echoed in the Metro the next day, which is also quite popular.

Even though the standard was pro Goldsmith Sadiq was given pretty equal covergae I reckon.

Revise history all you want. It does not alter the facts.

Horses and mouths spring to mind all of a sudden

Ctk, google givernment defeats - its not unknown.

Blame for Brexit needs to be laid at many doors.But don't forget that by his own admission that was Jezza doing his best. So the level of the bar has been set quite clearly.

But the revisionist approach to the rise of the Ernie's poster girl is quiet something and illustrative of the "it's never our fault" brigade.

The blame for The thatcher years rests firmly on the shoulders of those who split the left - and that was the gang of four.

By that token, you could argue that the blame lies with those who made life intolerable for the gang of four: all that militant tendency stuff, de-selection and dragging the Labour party to the left.

EDIT: I think this really may well be one of the daftest threads I've seen for a while on STW, but that's not necessarily a negative.

tjagain - Member

Actually its not the left that let thatcher in. It was splittists from the right of the labour party forming the SDP and splitting the leftwing vote

Hmmm, Thatcher became PM in 1979, SDP formed in 1981. Not sure how this is possible.

if a government has a majority what can the opposition do?

The 'right' has 170+ MPs, so it would be Corbyn.

But the revisionist approach to the rise of the Ernie's poster girl is quiet something and illustrative of the "it's never our fault" brigade.

FWIW ernie has been consistent in disagreeing with the cult of personality over the iron lady and the lefts focus on her, even your cheap slur has no basis in fact...like you care.

What % of the party agree with Corbyn and disagree with the MPs

Hmmm, Thatcher became PM in 1979, SDP formed in 1981. Not sure how this is possible.

Revise history? Then you can alter the facts to suit 😀

I do find the obsession with the party odd.

I did not realise that constitutionally all that mattered was what the Mps think - perhaps you can reference that in labour party articles?
Anyway we were discussing who harmed the party have you looked at the polls as to where they were before the Mps decided to ignore the party and try unconstitutional shenanigans to rid them of the leader?
Perhaps you wish to sidestep that one as well
Lets be honest their obsession with votes - from either the labour party or the wider election is not exactly bearing fruit is it.Obviously that is someone else fault.

No winners here but dont pretend Mps are blameless here.

No winners here but dont pretend Mps are blameless here.

labour party members only represent a small percentage of the people that voted for the MPs - the MPs 'mandate' is wider than just labour party members.

I did not realise that constitutionally all that mattered was what the Mps think - perhaps you can reference that in labour party articles?

The MP represents those that voted for them, they are the elected voice for them so that is what matters...

so yes this could well be history repeating itself as the right of the labour party are going to be responsible for greater periods of tory rule by damaging the party.

I thought you didn't want the Blairite cuckoos in the Labour Party anyway

The Sadiq Khan interview pretty much sums up what the majority of people have (hardly surprisingly) concluded. And that all poling backs up. That Jeremy is a well-meaning, decent bloke, with a lot of firmly held beliefs that most people would support, but.....

He has found himself woefully out of his depth as leader of the opposition. This was glaringly apparent in the EU referendum. And with the best will in the world, he hasn't got a cat in hells chance of winning a general election, and in fact if he is at the helm at that point tge Labour Party will be decimated

Are we not all liberal democrats:

The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity

I am! And so's my wife!

So how's this Cooperative Party idea going to work? Will the cooperate?

Are we not all liberal democrats

He has found himself woefully out of his depth as leader of the opposition

its a real shame some sort of compromise could not be reached as its its evident he is going to win again, change the NEC and then beat them to death with his new - possibly higher?- mandate from the party

they will still continue to do this i imagine and continue to blame him for their refusal to follow him or the party

Its a ****ing mess basically and all sides should be looking for some sort of peace deal. At the moment they are digging trenches, and as this thread proves, the RW are loving it and the only real winners here.

I think something had to change in the Labour Party. Members knew it and wanted it, nobody wanted to have another 5 years of so so opposition with Cooper or Burnham or Kendall. Corbyn offered a change and smashed the election because he stood for something and had ideas and policies (yes he did)

Its a massive **** up now and I blame most of it on the plotters. I am not blind to Corbyn's failures but until a better option presents itself I'll stick with him.

I think most folk will see the plotters to blame - especially a they keep on lying in the press and Corbyn is not making public criticism of them in the same way. One thing the public hate above all else is public disunity in political parties.

As I have said labour tried to be all things to all people for a couple of decades now - steadily losing vote share until they lost 2 elections in a row.

the problem is the anti corbyn lot are psychologically unable to accept they are in the wrong as it would mean admitting to themselves that ditching their idealism was wrong and that they have wasted a large part of their political careers.

Alexander for example refused to stand alongside the junior doctors in their strike - a strike that had the support of the majority of the public. How much stronger would both the labour party and the doctors have been if we had seen the entire PLP on the picket lines?

More revisionism. Anyone can look at the long term trends in voter share of the main parties. Since the end of WW2, labour has seen a greater decline than the Tories. Except for......guess when?? And guess just how close the share of he-who-cannot-be-mentioned delivered as leader was to LT highs. And now....???

The facts can't be altered unless you want to revise history. TJ I take my hat off to you, the new username is perfect.

For the non-revisionists

http://www.ukpolitical.info/ConvLab.htm

One thing the public hate above all else is public disunity in political parties.

You mean like people consistently being against the party leadership? Yeah. People hate that....

🙂

Cmon Cpn be fair, as we were told a few pages back

In contrast Corbyn has been tirelessly supporting and fighting for the Labour Party for decades.

And facts cant be altered (apparently)

'Tis true CFH Remember Major and "the bastards" Don't matter what party - disunity is a vote loser.

[img] [/img]

Yep all those votes against PFI, Iraq War etc shame on him.

Blair won but I think it was a trick that cant be repeated every G.E. for evermore. A more palatable version of the Tories he was for 3 elections, a clever ploy which coincided with some shit Tory leaders.

But people now will just vote Tory if they want Tory. Labour had lost the ability to be critical of the Tories as the Tories couukd just say for example "you started the privatization of the NHS" or "Academies were your idea" or "selling the Royal Mail was your idea" etc etc

Members knew it and wanted it, nobody wanted to have another 5 years of so so opposition with Cooper or Burnham or Kendall.

Stop being so naive. The only thing that counts is winning the game, being in power, and having bragging rights over the other lot.

Aye - and Labour were never going to win with Cooper, Burnham or Kedall - and certainly not with Smith

The only thing that counts is winning the game, being in power, and [s]having bragging rights over the other lot.[/s] actually being able to make some of your policies happen.

Or, just remain a protest party, sniping from the sidelines.
It's not about winning a game, it's about being able to actually do something.

That's an interesting speech that Corbyn made at the anti NATO rally. He really seems to be saying that NATO is responsible for the Cold War??? And NATO should not have got involved in the Balkan war (the UN were so effective, weren't they?) ??? From the tone of the speech Corbyn sounds like he'd want Britain to leave NATO! Apart from wanting world peace, what are his foreign policies ?

If politicians answered all the hypothetical questions put to them there would no end to them, that's the beauty of a hypothetical question - you can change them is any way you want to catch out your opponent, they don't refer to actual real circumstances.

Would you be prepared to go to war with Russia ?" is a pointless and rather silly question, just like answering "yes", or "no" for that matter, would be a pointless and rather silly answer.

It's a sad reflection on British politics that support for a politician might be dependent on their willingness to go to war with Russia.

I'm glad he didn't answer it. Let's focus on grown-up politics, although I know it's a novel idea.

The question was at a debate, where, you know, politicians are meant to be answering all kinds of questions, on where they stand on all kinds of issues. Corbyn couldn't be honest and say he was anti NATO, as in that video a few pages back.

Oh another thing, don't expect Corbyn to automatically, do the right thing, and step down if he loses the next election, I read that if he still had his precious 'mandate' he could stay on as party leader, rejoice now 😉

Alexander for example refused to stand alongside the junior doctors in their strike - a strike that had the support of the majority of the public. How much stronger would both the labour party and the doctors have been if we had seen the entire PLP on the picket lines?

maybe she didn't agree with the reasons for the strike

the doctors didn't even agree with the BMA negotiating team

and if JC wins a general election will the GP's strike when he removes all private providers from the NHS?

People voted for Mrs Thatcher not least as a rejection of the more traditionally left Labour Party's track record including having to be bailed out by the IMF, numerous power cuts due to striking miners and piles of uncollected rubbish in the streets. Those "working class" Labour voters who contributed to this could not have acored a bigger own goal if they had tried.

Referencing Mrs T in regard to Corbyn really is taking things back to what where very much to the bad old days of the 1970's

@yunki one of the reasons I am against uncontrolled immigration is it lowers the wages of working class people (as I said numerous times before EU migrants are no threat to my line of work at all) and contributes to higher levels of unemployment as jobs are taken in part by new migrants rather than existing citizens. Then we have the financial consequences of this where we get the complaints of "growing income inequality" and increasing demands on welfare as full time work doesn't pay enough. I do find it auite bizarre that the right are blamed for growing income inequaloty when its uncontrolled migration and a race to the bottom of lowest price that is driving dowm wages at the lower end

Cmon

someone in the know must be able to explain how this Cooperative Party thing is going to work....

@futon - if Corbyn makes to a general elction in 2020 we'll be seeing plenty more speeches from the archives like that one. It's a massive open goal which the Tories and Lib Dems will be only too happy to score into, again and again.

Cooperative Party

Just like Kinder Gentler Politics. Co-operate with us or you're out

@yunki one of the reasons I am against uncontrolled immigration is it lowers the wages of working class people (as I said numerous times before EU migrants are no threat to my line of work at all) and contributes to higher levels of unemployment as jobs are taken in part by new migrants rather than existing citizens.

Sorry Jambas thats still a crock. Read last week's report from the Rowntree Foundation

It's not about winning a game, it's about being able to actually do something.

DO something worthwhile Cpt not just do something

Being a little less tory than tories is not really doing anything much- certainly to the eyes of the lefties. We dont share your win at any cost and damn the principles mantra. DId not end up to well for Davey boy what with the referendum and all that...or for the country for that matter - though the later is debatable depending on your EU view.

someone in the know must be able to explain how this Cooperative Party thing is going to work....

based on the previous chairman, coke and hookers!!!

DO something worthwhile

Agreed! I thought that was implied, but apologies if not.

Being in opposition is a fine and noble thing, if you are able to effectively oppose, but surely the goal should be to be in a position to do something. Something worthwhile, obviously! Lots of it.

You can't do that in opposition.

We dont share your win at any cost and damn the principles mantra

Not my mantra.

It's not about winning a game, it's about being able to actually do something [i]that the party membership and voters want you to do[/i].

FTFY

Given that Owen Smith and his supporters have now accepted* most of Corbyn's policies and disowned the strategies of the last two failed elections it would appear the win at any cost approach has now been abandoned.

*A huge assumption of course, and one that the members don't look ready to swallow, with good reason.

Given that Owen Smith and his supporters have now accepted* most of Corbyn's policies and disowned the strategies of the last two failed elections it would appear the win at any cost approach has now been rejected by everyone.

True, but very unusual to opt for lose at any cost approach - who does that serve?

Plus we really do need an opposition at some point - a shadow cabinet would be a start

True, but very unusual to opt for lose at any cost approach - who does that serve?

Totally agree. But is that the strategy of Corbyn or his PLP and media opponents?

Plus we really do need an opposition at some point - a shadow cabinet would be a start

Totally agree again. Unfortunately most of the original shadow cabinet through their dummies out the pram and now they're bogged down with another leadership election.

True also CPt but one cannot capitulate on ones principles just to get power as that renders its meaningless.

The goal is to persuade the electorate of the justness of your ethos and the merits of your goals

i think we can all agree the Labour party is having a spectacular fail on that front, it is and is factionalized to breaking point.TBH, for me, after the first few months, social contract, minimum wage etc Blair did nothing much a Tory would not have done. PPI, Academy schools,Iraq etc I saw very little left wing in him at all or anything to feel passionate about- not quite as ****ty as the ****s would be my somethingion of him.
Its not something i aspire to massively, we are better than that IMHO, but its not as bad as the tories unfettered- from my perspective obviously

I am not really sure how you can object to a principled stance though you may well object to the principles stood for.

I dont think it will win though but i dis not mind seeing the experiment played out. Problem is the PLP and the forces of the media have ensured that we can see the result now.

EDIT:

Not my mantra.