mockingbird_franklin Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Corbyn became an MP in 1983 and says the same things now that he said then: planned economy, wholesale nationalisation etc. Consistent, but consistently wrong. being consistently wrong didn't seem to do Thatcher any harm. Hmm, Corbyn wins and Labour get dragged back to the centre left.... After all we've been without one for a couple of decades. First thing, Corbyn is a Marxist and closer to Syriza than the centre left, second the reason the UK has been without a large really left wing party for ages is because they were unelectable. All electing Corbyn achieves is perpetual Tory Government in Westminster. I suppose it comes down to this: does those on the left want an ideologically pure option at the ballot box, or do they want a reasonably left wing government? can you point out where I said Corbyn was Centre Left? I reasoned a far left leader would maybe balance out the effect of the torylite right leaning members of the party and end up with something nearer the center left, like a pair a scales, 100 x 5gram weights on the right, balanced out by a whopping 5kg weight on the left side well we haven't had a reasonably left wing government since the 70's so I fail to see how having another thatcherite leader of the labour party would lead to a reasonably left wing party. Anything bar electing a right wing neoliberal to lead the labour party yet again would see the full force propaganda of the usual suspects effect a Labour fail. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mockingbird_franklin Posted July 16, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted July 16, 2015 I want there to be a socialist party I can vote for, even if the odds against them being elected are massive. A Labour party that just mimics the Tories is pointless. Actually Mike, Whenever the British public are asked what they would like the government to do without the overtones of a named party being behind the policies, by far and away the majority (and way more than the 25% of the electorate that enabled the current fascist party to get elected) would favour left of centre policies that would be traditional Labour ones of the post war balanced economy, I fully understand why the odds of such a party winning an election against the sustained campaign of the usual suspects and with the usual propaganda with it's pro corporate agenda, Me I'd just be happy with a Party made up of decent human beings that actually representative of the electorate as we'd probably end up with a reasonable centre ground party, non of the nastiness and unfairness of either the extreme right or extreme left, would make a nice change. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I want there to be a socialist party I can vote for, even if the odds against them being elected are massive. A Labour party that just mimics the Tories is pointless. something akin to SNP and Plaid but without the nuisance nationalist bits I get a choice at least. A choice between a faux Labour Party or Plaid that have some good ideas spoiled by flag waving and chippy shoulders. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) I want there to be a socialist party I can vote for, even if the odds against them being elected are massive. A Labour party that just mimics the Tories is pointless. something akin to SNP and Plaid but without the nuisance nationalist bits I get a choice at least. A choice between a faux Labour Party or Plaid that have some good ideas spoiled by flag waving and chippy shoulders. many SNP and Plaid voters say it's the Labour party that deserted them not the other way around, so considering these parties success it begs the question, just why would such a party be unelectable to the greater British population as a whole doesn't it?. especially when you couldn't argue that Welsh or Scottish voters are any more left wing than the majority of their English counterparts. Edited July 16, 2015 by mockingbird_franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Corbyn seems to be the only Labour candidate worth electing, all the more important after the Lib Dems elected an evangelical to head their lot now. Future is right, far right for now. He won't win, obviously it'll be a Blairite tossrag and it'll be another case of who cares in 2020, even more so than this year. Can you imagine any of the blairite lot trying to repeal the economic murder that Osb**ne and his cohort of words removed are inflicting, if they ever got in? They'd just be sneakily grateful they didn't have to oppose it. Edited July 16, 2015 by Rodders 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Corbyn seems to be the only Labour candidate worth electing, all the more important after the Lib Dems elected an evangelical to head their lot now. Future is right, far right for now. He won't win, obviously it'll be a Blairite tossrag and it'll be another case of who cares in 2020, even more so than this year. Can you imagine any of the blairite lot trying to repeal the economic murder that Osb**ne and his cohort of words removed are inflicting, if they ever got in? They'd just be sneakily grateful they didn't have to oppose it. Well the independent agrees with you Rodders, it also agrees with Awol, http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/labours-tragedy-is-that-jeremy-corbyn-is-much-the-best-leadership-candidate-10389228.html Matthew Norman Tuesday 14 July 2015 Labour’s tragedy is that Jeremy Corbyn is much the best leadership candidate This black-hole contest distorts time; it feels like years since the shortlist was unveiled For lovers of the English tongue, there is no greater thrill than being present at the birth of a dramatic linguistic development. I refer here not to the OED’s annual list of newly accepted words. You can see the addition to the lexicon of popular slang words like “hashtag” and “omnishambles” coming. What I mean is something wholly unforeseeable, if not totes amazeballs, and for the latest contribution to this precious etymological sub-species we give thanks to Harriet Harman. The acting leader of the Opposition this week boosted the ranks of contronyms – words with definitions that diametrically contradict one another. You’ll be familiar with “cleave” (to stick to and to separate), “sanction” (to allow and to disallow), and of course “literally” (literally; and metaphorically). Thanks to Harriet’s brazen and bewildering attempt to bounce the party into backing George Osborne’s proposal to limit child benefit to two children, the verb “to oppose” may now be defined as: 1) “to oppose”; and 2) “to support”. Similarly, the parliamentary term “Her Majesty’s Opposition” might now be pithily translated as: “the political living dead who imagine that feigning agreement with the kind of regressive policies they went into politics to fight will somehow ingratiate them with the public”. The only thing that might prevent Harman being remembered less for her long and impressive career than a single act of folly at its conclusion is that the public isn’t listening. There is nothing she or the Labour leadership contenders could say that would interest anyone but a political hypernerd. If Liz Kendall regaled a hustings with her plan to make the culling of day-old beagle puppies a Labour manifesto pledge, it would float above the public consciousness. If Andy Burnham unveiled an initiative to scrap the RAF and give all the Typhoon fighter jets to fellow Everton fans in a half-time raffle at Goodison Park, it wouldn’t attract a shrug. If Sound of Music superfan Yvette Cooper declared that her priority, as PM, would be to make the failure to yodel “The Lonely Goatherd” while waiting at bus stops or on suburban railway platforms a statutory offence carrying an automatic 14-year sentence, who would care? A black hole contest like this distorts time; it may feel like years since the leadership shortlist was first unveiled. It is, in fact, precisely one month – and the only candidate with any momentum is the one who was allowed to make the cut only at the last moment by way of a satirical afterthought. Like Harman’s take on the duty of an opposition, Jeremy Corbyn’s candidacy presents a glaring paradox. He is by light years the best candidate, in that he actually believes in things and can articulate those beliefs in a way humanoid life forms can understand. He believes that limiting child benefit is wrong, for instance, since it would restrict the life chances of those who most need help to escape entrenched poverty. Harriet Harman once believed the same. Indeed she might have described it as an irreducible core belief that punishing the poor for being poor is vindictive and counterproductive. Now, her lone belief appears to be that moulding the party into an insipid, comically unconvincing Tory tribute act is the solitary option. Corbyn’s beliefs, on the other hand, have survived the passage of four decades intact, which is why he is by light years the worst candidate. Those beliefs are noble and sincere, but only about 17 people in this country share his faith in the command economy. Interviewed on Channel 4 News on Monday, Corbyn dealt splendidly with Krishnan Guru-Murthy, that laureate of preening self-regard, when asked why he once addressed Hamas as his “friends”. Corbyn, who appreciated the importance of dialogue with the IRA long before that came into vogue, sensibly replied that you have to talk to people you disagree with, and that he used “friends” as a courteous collective term. Such a trivial line of questioning, an impressively raging Corbyn went on, was purely tabloid. So it was. Guru-Murthy can be a smug twerp, and it was embarrassing to find a serious news programme indulging in babyish, Sun-style hectoring. Yet this is a tabloid world, and the thought of what the Daily Mail would do to Corbyn as Labour leader is too agonising to contemplate. While the notion that Labour faces an existential crisis has quickly become a cliché, Corbyn’s momentum and Harman’s lunacy suggests it is worse than that. When a woman who spent her entire working life fighting inequality finds herself actively supporting it, this begins to look like a post-existential crisis. For now at least, the Labour Party has effectively ceased to exist. It is as if that fiscal Dracula George Osborne sucked the lifeblood from its neck with his cunning, cynical Budget, and thus completed the vampirical process. And so, while Harman flirts with rewriting the opening lines of her obituary, the zombie leadership election plays on to deafening indifference for all but Jeremy Corbyn. In what reminds one of a stultifying dreadful fringe theatre production of a 127th-rate family psychodrama, they let the mad uncle out of the attic as a joke, but found when he came downstairs that he made far more sense than his sneering nieces and nephews. A victory for Corbyn, whose odds narrow all the time, would unquestionably be the silver bullet to end the suffering and lay the Labour Party to eternal rest. Failing that, the Night of the Undead must go on. Either way, we will not see any worthwhile opposition, in the word’s traditional pre-Harmaniac meaning, for a very long time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 All electing Corbyn achieves is perpetual Tory Government in Westminster. Missed replying to this point, we've had a Tory Government in Westminster since 1979, just under a different name for a few terms, you don't think Uncle Rupert would allow anything else do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condimentalist Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 The most credible Labour leader has just taken over at the Lib Dems. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PongRiddims Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I want there to be a socialist party I can vote for, even if the odds against them being elected are massive. A Labour party that just mimics the Tories is pointless. Exactly my concern MJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The most credible Labour leader has just taken over at the Lib Dems. You make an interesting point there, should Labour choose the path of electoral oblivion that may give the Lib Dems a route back to relevance with the moderate left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The most credible Labour leader has just taken over at the Lib Dems. You make an interesting point there, should Labour choose the path of electoral oblivion that may give the Lib Dems a route back to relevance with the moderate left. because we all know we can trust the Liberals... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The most credible Labour leader has just taken over at the Lib Dems. You make an interesting point there, should Labour choose the path of electoral oblivion that may give the Lib Dems a route back to relevance with the moderate left. because we all know we can trust the Liberals... I don't actually trust any of the bastards but it has to be said that the Tories' present policies reveal just how much the Lib-Dems managed to restrain Tory excesses. The Lib-Dems lost their gamble to get PR and paid the price but if the Tories carry on the way they have started and Labour pick the wrong leader, both of which seem likely, then the Lib-Dems could definitely make a comeback. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I see The Grauniad are reporting that Corbyn faces an exodus of talent from the front bench were he to win. That's on top of the departures of Cooper, Kendall and Umanna, I suppose? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted July 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted July 23, 2015 As everyone keeps warning the Labour Party, you can stick to your principles, or you can seek to be in power. Which side are you on? Yvette Cooper was on Radio 4 earlier having a light mauling from John Humphrys. Well, either that, or they were just having a script read through for the Thick Of It. 'You have to have a direction, people need to know where you want to take them' 'Exactly John, that is why its so important we get this right' 'So which direction, left, or right?' 'I want us to grow' 'That's not an answer, where do you want to take the party?' 'I want to take the people with us, this is very important' Well, you get the picture. We are all being warned not to go with Corbyn. The alternative appears to be people that want to be Blairlite but are too small time to actually say anything. I'm not suggesting Corbyn is the answer. I'm suggesting he's totally flushed out the other 3 no marks as clearly not being the answer to anything. The other 3 don't even understand what the question might be and wouldn't dare answer it until after some secret polling and reading the papers for a few days and waiting for the tory answer so they could pinch 75% of the words but then throw in something bland about poverty. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MakemineVanilla Posted July 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted July 23, 2015 Corbyn is the last person the British electorate want in Number Ten, he's just too honest and decent for that. He is all too likely to tell them exactly what they don't want to hear, and that they can have a Scandinavian-style welfare state and equality but they will have to pay for it, and they can renationalise the railways but that will cost them too, but that is giving the electorate truths they don't want to face and responsibilities they are desperate to avoid. What they actually want is a grinning snake-oil salesman, or woman, who will tell them convincing lies, take all the responsibility for their selfish choices and then take the blame when those choices produce a f***ed-up unequal society they can pretend to be appalled at. Until Labour find themselves a real shit to compete with the present Tory shit, they will be stuck in the wilderness. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Corbyn is the last person the British electorate want in Number Ten, he's just too honest and decent for that. Undoubtedly honest in terms of his beliefs and I respect that. Decent? A man who took part in a minute's silence for an IRA active service unit killed by the army while trying to kill soldiers on Gibraltar is not by my definition, decent. Certainly not someone I'd want leading the country. That said, totally agree that he has flushed out the essentially hollow nature of the other three candidates. The UK has a dearth of political talent across the board that may be without historical parallel. That is not good for any of us, whatever our political leanings. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I thought Margaret Beckett's comments yesterday were typically appalling and comical. In order to give some breadth of debate and appease any actual socialists lurking in the Labour Party she signed up for Corbyn's nomination. She felt it would be good to stimulate an inclusive and broad debate. However, at no point had she considered he might actually look like a credible alternative or shine a light into the empty vessels standing along side him. She now regrets having nominated him and wants to make it clear that whilst she nominated him, she doesn't endorse him and won't be voting for him. Moron "At no point did I intend to vote for Jeremy myself - nice as he is - nor advise anyone else to do it," Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robojoel Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 As much as I would like Jeremy Corbyn to win as it MIGHT just move Labour from being a right wing party to something meaningful I imagine that he will put most voters off as he is a 'bit scruffy' which means most of the vacuous shallow self centred simpletons will make their minds up without having to actually listen to any of his 'ideas' 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 As much as I would like Jeremy Corbyn to win as it MIGHT just move Labour from being a right wing party to something meaningful I imagine that he will put most voters off as he is a 'bit scruffy' which means most of the vacuous shallow self centred simpletons will make their minds up without having to actually listen to any of his 'ideas' As the voters in question will be Labour Party and Trade Union members, that seems a bit harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robojoel Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 As much as I would like Jeremy Corbyn to win as it MIGHT just move Labour from being a right wing party to something meaningful I imagine that he will put most voters off as he is a 'bit scruffy' which means most of the vacuous shallow self centred simpletons will make their minds up without having to actually listen to any of his 'ideas' As the voters in question will be Labour Party and Trade Union members, that seems a bit harsh. I meant in a general election, but yes that would describe a portion of those people too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts