Jeremy Corbyn

It's all the media's fault that he can't do it.

Careful dissonance, people on the internet and STW in particular can only cope with a black and white worldview.

It's Marie Le Conte, that later stated that the Leader's Office were very quick.
[img] [/img]

But it seems that there is some kind of wall between the Leader's office and the rest of Labour.
That needs to be broken down very quickly, or Labour are screwed.

Would it not be an idea that all the anti corbyns defected to the Lib dems?
When I've finished dancing on May's grave I'll go and have a jig on corbyn's for letting this country down when we needed an effective opposition. He seems to think he is the deputy pm.

Its worse than that. He still seems to think he's a backbencher. In a constituency where you could stick a labour rosette on a pot noodle and it'd get elected.

Just sort of muddling along, not doing anything of any great importance....

I think I might go and spend the day on the allotment, as there's not much going on.....

It's Marie Le Conte

What about the other journalist I illustrated, what about the fact that Labour don't put a phone number on Press Releases so no one to call get to further information etc etc.

Even in his rant he misses an opportunity, rather than talk about his colleagues whose work that isn't mentioned, he could mention the policy.

[img] [/img]

Do you miss him Binners?
It's precisely because nobody thought they could trust the spin, that Labour lost the 2010 GE

Do you miss him Binners?

Not him specifically, as such. Just someone within the vicinity of the Labour front bench who looked like they knew their arse from their elbow, and who's politics had advanced beyond 6th form common room level.

It's precisely because nobody thought they could trust the spin, that Labour lost the 2010 GE

Cobblers, quite frankly. And the Tory's, who are as spin-heavy as Nu Labour ever were - in fact more so, as they had the press onside - still couldn't get a majority against a tired, discredited GB.

Spin hasn't changed. In fact, its far worse, and more pervasive now than it was when Malcolm was in his prime. Its just that in Jeremy-land they've decided they're not going to bother with that. All part of the kinder, gentler politics, I presume. Great idea!

The only trouble is that when your opposition are very much doing it, are pretty bloody good at it, and have an inbuilt advantage of a friendly press, its like sending your team out minus a goalkeeper, a striker, and most of your defence.

And thinking that having some left-wing, 6th form numpties ranting into their echo chamber on social media is a replacement for an actual media strategy is (one of many, many reasons) why they're 19 points behind in the polls. You can't win people over if your communication 'strategy' is to put posts about why everything is, just, like, SOOOOOOO unfair on Facebook

As with so many things Jeremy does when do 'principles' just become plain old self-defaeting stupidity? Maybe thats a question he could have someone like Malcolm Tucker ask him before he actually [url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/15/jeremy-corbyn-silent-during-national-anthem-battle-of-britain-service ]went and did it[/url]?

the only trouble is that when your opposition are very much doing it, are pretty bloody good at it

Are they?
It was entertaining to watch how Cameron went from being a master of the press to being slated as soon as he went against some of the press barons interests.
Same with May. Her mastery of spin appears to be as soon as they start shouting to fold immediately.

Cobblers, quite frankly. And the Tory's, who are as spin-heavy as Nu Labour ever were - in fact more so, as they had the press onside - still couldn't get a majority against a tired, discredited GB.

We might need a good centre ground now, but posting pics of spin doctors isn't going to get you that. Neither is this sub-twitter black/white rocks/sucks bollocks.

As noted by Stoner though, this is all academic for the time being. We've got the totally useless Corbyn who's basically handed May a 'Get out of Jail Free' card. And as the labour party has been taken over by the 6th form, what comes after him could well be - difficult to imagine this is possible, I know - even more completely hopeless.

I believe this is Momentums anointed one...

[img] [/img]

Anyone who saw her on QT the other week, will know that this would be the greatest gift that Theresa could ever receive. Clueless! Absolutely clueless!!! Truly the spawn of Jeremy! To quote Mrs Binners directly while she watched it... "Who the * is this muppet?!"

So as an unrestrained Tory party goes galloping off to a world of right wing nationalist UKIP style populism, And Labour to navel-gazing, never-ending leftie pettty bickering and irrelevance, I suppose all of who aren't totally unhinged in either direction are just going to have to look to the Lib Dems and wonder how the * we ended up here?!

& your choice is binners?

Didn't see the above on QT but generally am unimpressed with Labour peeps on it- jokey/ friendly having a laugh, saying **** all etc.

Possibly connected my local Labour councillors are a bunch of wet blankets.

Like I said.... it's all academic anyway. When Jezza steps aside, probably after reducing the party to 100-120 seats at a general election, and destroying the party as an electoral force, who'd fancy the 'William Hague' job?

They won't get it anyway because Len and Momentum get to decide who gets to 'lead' the Labour Party into eternal, irrelevant single-figure-polling and deliver permanent single-party-state Tory rule.

At the moment I'd say for the labour leadership .... absolutely anyone apart from the catastrophic bearded ****-wit or any of his clueless, and totally unelectable lefty Momentum acolytes. Can you imagine anyone ... ANYONE.... doing a worse job of it?

I truly now believe he is ushering in the end of the Labour Party as a relevant political force, and it's just going to be interesting to see what emerges from the wreckage.

I just hope it happens soon. Before it's too late. Because unless he goes, which he won't, then he's already gift-wrapped a landslide for Theresa, no matter what she does

Investigate Livingstone for 11 months, wrist slap, tsunami of complaints, launch another investigation ...

"big" policy announcement tomorrow. VAT on private school fees. Last proposed in '83 manitesto .. cool at least thats not the '70's

Good policy. Not sure its a good policy to announce though.

Note to J.C we know your a lefty

ctk / VAT on private schools so when do Unis follow ? How many parents will be unable to pay extra so send kids to state schools = more pressure on those. How many staff made redundant so more pressure on welfare system?

Private edudcation is a gift to UK state schools, people paying income taxes for services they don't use. I understand the politics of those parents kids in classes of 35 being hacked off at classes of 20 for those with money to pay privately. So address state system.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ken-livingstone-labour-mps-letter-jewish-labour-movement-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-hitler-a7669256.html

[url= http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/15827362?ir=UK ]Huffington Post: Yvette Cooper Blog[/url]

Ken's ensured the "big policy" announcement with get little coverage

"ctk / VAT on private schools so when do Unis follow ? How many parents will be unable to pay extra so send kids to state schools = more pressure on those. How many staff made redundant so more pressure on welfare system?"

This.

It's mental. Last year there were three private schools in my area. All struggling. One went under last year, the other two are still on a knife edge.

All the kids leaving private education due to closures and the additional cost are going to need state school places, funded by the tax payer.

Moreover, my kid's state school has already double in size at the expense of the outside play area, are they going to build on more of it to make space for additional kids who previously provided their own education.

So kids in state and private schools are going to lose out through this. Who's going to win? I can't think of anyone.

Thank Christ this nutter is never going to get power.

Yes VAT on uni fees for anyone who had a private education- good idea Jamba.;-)

I've not really been following this thread but i am genuinely curious, do the Labour Membership not see that JC is totally unelectable? Surely the aspiration of a political party like Labour is to be in Government, why then do they perservere with a Leader that will simply never win a general election?

I've not really been following this thread but i am genuinely curious, do the Labour Membership not see that JC is totally unelectable?

Nope, they reflect their own hate back at them, like CTK arguing for VAT on university fees above ( I mean, really, WTF ? ).

Electability, who cares!

I've not really been following this thread but i am genuinely curious, do the Labour Membership not see that JC is totally unelectable?

Would think most do. However, the lack of somebody better is the crux of the problem and is why he won the last 2 contests.

If I was trying to get into power I would be picking the most presentable and likeable leader as a front man with true labour policies underneath. The policies are largely irrelevant as most people who would be better off under labour don't realise it or don't look at the policies.

Again, same problem - who in the labour party is likeable, charismatic, good on TV etc,.

Private edudcation is a gift to UK state schools, people paying income taxes for services they don't use.

Oh look, another example of those wonderful rich people doing the rest of society a favour out of the goodness of their hearts. You really do believe this bollox don't you?

"Oh look, another example of those wonderful rich people doing the rest of society a favour"

Well they are, aren't they? Every kid in a private school is a kid who's not in front of my kid in the list for our first choice school and a kid who's taking up zero education budget.

Again, same problem - who in the labour party is likeable, charismatic, good on TV etc

We don't know yet, do we? Nor will we. Because everyone in the Labour party knows that to stand up as a leadership contender at the moment is a futile exercise in political suicide, as the decision is entirelyin the hands of Momentum.

And as we know, they have little or no interest in fielding a candidate capable of winning a general election (tory-lite Blaire scum), and just want to float pie-in-the-sky ideas they've resurrected from the early 80's, and wave their placards. As todays finger-on-the-pulse announcement confirms. VAT on private school fees is going to provide free school meals for every primary school child in the country? I'd like to see the figures they used to work that one out. Its almost as if they've settled on being what the Lib Dems used to be, and just announced any old uncosted nonsense, because they know they'll never have to deliver it. Not really a good place to be for the Labour party really, is it?

Well they are, aren't they? Every kid in a private school is a kid who's not in front of my kid in the list for our first choice school and a kid who's taking up zero education budget.

The solution to problems in state schools is to fund them properly and fairly, not to subsidise some parents to buy a better* education at the expense of everyone else. What you're basically saying is that you could solve the problems in state schools by getting rid of them.

*Not that I think private schools automatically offer a better education, in many cases research has shown it's no better than many state schools. What they do buy though is privilege and access to social and professional networks which will be of advantage in later life.

You said:

Oh look, another example of those wonderful rich people doing the rest of society a favour

I said:

Well they are, aren't they? Every kid in a private school is a kid who's not in front of my kid in the list for our first choice school and a kid who's taking up zero education budget.

Then you said:

The solution to problems in state schools is to fund them properly and fairly, not to subsidise some parents to buy a better* education at the expense of everyone else. What you're basically saying is that you could solve the problems in state schools by getting rid of them.

Forget the non-sequiters. Defend your original point which strikes me as bollocks.

*Not that I think private schools automatically offer a better education, in many cases research has shown it's no better than many state schools. What they do buy though is privilege and access to social and professional networks which will be of advantage in later life.

I must have been off the day that they did privilege and professional networks.

You've not been to a private school, have you ? I suspect you read about them in a book ?

[img] ?auto=format&dpr=1.5&fit=max&h=780&ixjsv=2.2.4&ixlib=rb-0.3.5&q=66[/img]

[img] ?auto=format&dpr=1.5&fit=max&h=790&ixjsv=2.2.4&ixlib=rb-0.3.5&q=66[/img]

[img] ?auto=format&dpr=1.5&fit=max&h=790&ixjsv=2.2.4&ixlib=rb-0.3.5&q=66[/img]

[img] ?auto=format&dpr=1.5&fit=max&h=780&ixjsv=2.2.4&ixlib=rb-0.3.5&q=66[/img]

You've not been to a private school, have you ?

He can't have been.

In September I went through the process of choosing schools. The local Private Schools are struggling and one of the three has already gone to the wall. In contrast the State Schools are superb. For me it was a no-brainer, the state school shone in compared to the private schools and I get them for free. AFAIC the parents who send their kids to the three schools I saw *are* subsidizing the state schools at the expense of their own kids.

The pupil-teacher ratio is completely misleading as well - at primary level there are two teaching assistants and a teacher which makes the ratio comparable to local private schools. *BUT* the local private school pupil/teacher ratio isn't 'low' enough to survive long term. So far being positive an 8-1 ratio is more likely to mean the schools going to go down the tubes imminently. (I said to the reception teacher at one of the schools were saw how impressive the 8-1 ratio was - he said "Yeah, but if we don't get it to 12-1 we won't be here in 3 years time.")

I see the problem in very different terms to Corbyn. The 'non-elite' private sector seems to me to be on its last legs and there's a real danger that the state is going to have to place a few hundred kids at very short notice.

Corbyn's acting out of pure spite. He want's to punish wealthy people and if that means normal people suffer, that's a price he's willing to inflict on my kids.

ulysse - what's wrong with being a waiter? It's an important front of house sales role.

Nothing. It's the attitude of the scum on the left panel of the cartoon i take issue with.

Corbyn's acting out of pure spite. He want's to punish wealthy people and if that means normal people suffer, that's a price he's willing to inflict on my kids.

Difficult to take people seriously when they come out with nonsense like this.

Britain has some of the worst social mobility in the developed world. I'm sure someone is going to claim that private schools don't entrench privilege next. 🙄

ulysse - what's wrong with being a waiter? It's an important front of house sales role.

Nothing.

So why pick it as an example of someone who's failed in life?

A decent waiter can add a fortune to the bottom line. An extra round of drinks, an desert for a whole table when people weren't going to have one.

Would Corbyn be an effective waiter? Is he articulate and charismatic enough to encourage a table of people to have a few extra drinks or a couple of extra side orders? I'd say not.

The VAT on fees is to fund free school meals, the spiteful bastard.

I don't think the point of the panel was the effect on the bottom line.

And would Corbyn make a good waiter? FFS

Do you really, in your own head, see that cartoon portraying the waitress as someone who's failed in life?

You see, right there, the gulf in thinking and empathy between someone like you, and someone like me

The VAT on fees is to fund free school meals, the spiteful bastard.

Another mental policy. Our local school had to split lunchtime to provide hot meals which was a nightmare plus they lost a big chunk of hall to hot food preparation. Kids need to be educated at school, they don't need hot food - parents can do food.

It was just an eye-catching policy that sounded good at first glance. In practice it was detrimental to education or perhaps neutral in schools that already had facilities to deal with hot food.

Diverting education funding to catering was madness.

Do you really, in your own head, see that cartoon portraying the waitress as someone who's failed in life?

To me it's saying she had a poor start in life and therefore ended up in a 'bad' job like a waitress. Do you see it as saying "she had a poor start in life, but isn't it great she finally ended up in a useful career"?

erm.... it's a construct so that she can be in the same place at the same time as richboy rather than a social comment on the importance or otherwise of waiting staff.

Some folks will pick an argument over anything 🙄

im see it as - despite the hills put in her developmental path, shes overcome, found a job and might still find her true potential given the opportunity. Shes certainly got the gumption.
The other character is an ungrateful unthinking spoilt shit who has had life handed to him on a plate, combined with a little personal struggle in education, granted, and he aught to look up the meaning of "therefore the grace of god go i"

it's a construct so that she can be in the same place at the same time as richboy rather than a social comment on the importance or otherwise of waiting staff.

We may have to agree to disagree because I think it's both.

They could have chosen the construct of her being rich boys dentist. They didn't they made her a waitress. Why? Because they think waitress is a bad job.

...and it isn't, it's a seriously important job.

Pretty sure outofbreath is just trolling.