The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[Xann]

See how much better it makes you feel.

[bickster]

Just now, Xann said:

See how much better it makes you feel.

It doesn't make me feel very good at all that the leader of the opposition has basically been backing up the Tory Party over Brexit for three years. Whipped his MPs to trigger Art 50 no less

[blandy]

10 hours ago, Chindie said:

There'll be a sustained and nasty campaign to rid the party of him when the election is a failure again.

I can't think of any party leader who has lost 2 elections ever staying on. I can'teven think of one apart from Corbyn who's stayed on after losing a single election. The normal thing to do is resign if you lose an election. I understand reasons why Corbyn didn't, tbf. 

[Xann]

12 minutes ago, bickster said:

It doesn't make me feel very good at all that the leader of the opposition has basically been backing up the Tory Party over Brexit for three years. Whipped his MPs to trigger Art 50 no less

Both major parties are nobbled.

He's hamstrung by the wishes of the folk he was wanting to bring back into the fold.

It was always going to be slow process to bring it around.

There are lots of angry people wanting change and the rich man's media has made sure they've stayed confused and seen Brexit as the answer.

[bickster]

10 minutes ago, Xann said:

There are lots of angry people wanting change and the rich man's media has made sure they've stayed confused and seen Brexit as the answer.

If only the leader of the opposition had been telling people this. Heaven forbid a political leader tries to change the direction of the debate

But no, we had "respect the result of the referendum" ad nauseam with added unicorn chasing

The Labour Party slogan might as well have been Buggering the Country for the Many not the Few

He should have been out campaigning in places like Stoke, trying to persuade people, his voters that the idea of leaving the EU was wrong and why. He didn't once ever do that though. because deep down he was happy with Brexit because it suited his agenda and he never liked the EU anyway. A leader of a party so out of touch with what it's membership and the majority of it's voters wanted. Helping a policy that had and still has the potential to cause great misery amongst the very people he purports to represent.

[Dr_Pangloss]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

In a few years, when you're stood by a hospital bed, reading an email from an insurance company to the effect that they won't be paying for life saving treatment for one of your loved ones. Take some solace from the stand you took against the sluggish complaints system for Jewish complaints in the Labour Party.

I'd blame Labour for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by electing and persisting with a total incompetent shit bag for a leader.

[Xann]

A leader that enjoys no balance in the media and a sizeable chunk of a misinformed population making for the cliff edge.

I don't want to vote for him, but I'm sucking it up because I know the image that's been offered is the billionaire view, and it's a view that's been hammered home remorselessly.

2 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

I'd blame Labour for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by electing and persisting with a total incompetent shit bag for a leader.

Anyone suggesting taking power back from the suited psychopaths will be branded an incompetent shit bag.

[peterms]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

I can'teven think of one apart from Corbyn who's stayed on after losing a single election.

Wilson and Heath, for starters.

[bickster]

9 minutes ago, Xann said:

A leader that enjoys no balance in the media and a sizeable chunk of a misinformed population making for the cliff edge.

I don't want to vote for him, but I'm sucking it up because I know the image that's been offered is the billionaire view, and it's a view that's been hammered home remorselessly.

He has actively perpetuated this danger, he's as guilty of aiding the Billionaires as anyone. Which is why I don't understand your contrary view on him. 

• you tell us, Brexit is all about tax avoidance for the very rich
• you tell us they are trying to sell off the NHS
• I think you may even have told us all about the environmental issues associated here

I agree wholeheartedly. What I don't understand is why you want to support the numpty who has been helping the billionaires get away with it. It seems like you feel sorry for him because he's been bullied by the right wing media.

I just don't get it

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

I can't think of any party leader who has lost 2 elections ever staying on. I can'teven think of one apart from Corbyn who's stayed on after losing a single election. The normal thing to do is resign if you lose an election. I understand reasons why Corbyn didn't, tbf. 

I don't disagree.

I mention this not because I'd be disappointed to see him go. I mention it because if he didn't stand down himself after an electoral failure I expect the efforts to get rid of him to turn really, really nasty.

[Xann]

3 minutes ago, bickster said:

I just don't get it

There's not the time to find anyone else, even if there was? Further down the line any prospective candidate that hopes to alter the status quo will just get the same treatment.

Stark choice and we're coming to the crunch.

It's ugly, but it's what we have.

[bickster]

[Xann]

He's not the messiah, but the alternative looks very dark indeed.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Both major parties are nobbled.

He's hamstrung by the wishes of the folk he was wanting to bring back into the fold.

It was always going to be slow process to bring it around.

There are lots of angry people wanting change and the rich man's media has made sure they've stayed confused and seen Brexit as the answer.

They are, both nobbled, yes and self deservedly so.

I don't see that he's hamstrung by the wishes of the folk he was wanting to bring back into the fold, at all,. I do accept that there are plenty of former or current and from his perspective hopefully futureLabour a voters in some areas who feel that the way the country has worked has failed them, and they blame the EU for that, and so voted Leave. BUT, this doesn't hamstring him. What it does, if he wants their votes is oblige him instead of going "they blame the EU, therefore I must keep them onside by also blaming the EU" and therefore trying to hold two opposing positions at one, to do something along the lines of what Caroline Lucas did - attempt to listen and to persuade these prospective voters, indeed all prospective voters of what his view of the reality is - that they are not lacking in employment or benefits or wages or housing or NHS or etc. because of the EU, but because of how successive Governements in the UK have ignored them, taken them for granted, failed to decentralise the UK and the way most, or too much money gets spent on London, and that it's not fruit pickers and plumbers from Poland that have held them back, but the actions of the last few Gov'ts in not supporting areas of influx with commensurate funding for housing, hospitals and the rest.

Yes, that wasn't going to be a quick process, but he's been in his potting shed dithering for 3 years. Time wasted.

"the rich man's media has made sure they've stayed confused"  Do these angry people read the Telegraph, Mail, Sun and express a lot, and get their views from those papers? if they do, why were they allegedly former Labour voters at all?They are loathesome rags, though.

[magnkarl]

1 hour ago, Xann said:

He's not the messiah, but the alternative looks very dark indeed.

What? Do you mean someone (and I litterally mean anyone bar the 4-5 'top dogs' of Labour atm) who's actually got some charisma, a less spotty past and a less hypocritical voting record within Labour? Brown is better than this, Ed is better, they're all better. Corbyn is stuck in some protest march he attended in 1972 and he can't get out. He can't put critisism of him to bed because he's done exactly the same this pretty much all previous Leaders since he's been collecting his overgrown wages in Parliament. He claims to be balanced, but is extremely partial, he claims to be tolerant but keeps stepping in the salad by associating with !"#!"#s like Chris Williamson and Derek Hatton. When is enough, enough?

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, bickster said:

He has actively perpetuated this danger, he's as guilty of aiding the Billionaires as anyone. Which is why I don't understand your contrary view on him. 

• you tell us, Brexit is all about tax avoidance for the very rich
• you tell us they are trying to sell off the NHS
• I think you may even have told us all about the environmental issues associated here

I agree wholeheartedly. What I don't understand is why you want to support the numpty who has been helping the billionaires get away with it. It seems like you feel sorry for him because he's been bullied by the right wing media.

I just don't get it

At the end of this election campaign (assuming it happens, which seems almost certain) there will be a government, and that government will be led by either the Labour party or the Tory party. You (general, not specific) don't need to 'support' Corbyn personally for that to be true. If that doesn't affect people's personal calculations, that's fine. However, it certainly affects mine. 

[Chindie]

Giving quite a good speech at the moment.

In fairness the start might have been nonsense, I came in halfway through.

[Xann]

26 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

When is enough, enough?

Hmmm... Not weeks before a potential no deal Brexit, perhaps?

Given the size and lead times of the current problems, securing the property is the priority.

Close scrutiny of the housekeeping would usually be a precedence, obviously.

These are unusual times.

[blandy]

3 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

At the end of this election campaign (assuming it happens, which seems almost certain) there will be a government, and that government will be led by either the Labour party or the Tory party. You (general, not specific) don't need to 'support' Corbyn personally for that to be true. If that doesn't affect people's personal calculations, that's fine. However, it certainly affects mine. 

I wonder a bit about this.

The tories, it seems are going for a "UKIP" look. Anyone non-UKIPy will be purged. To me that doesn't bode well for their election prospects.

Also, Labour is still, currently, "a Leave party", though a mightlily confused one, at that. They say that they want to do a negotiation with the EU, reach a new "softer" deal, then hold a referendum on that deal - Labour Brexit v Remain. Would they support their own deal, or would they support remain? Well they're not going to oppose their own negotiated deal...so they are still heading down an avenue that is "Leave".

I know FPTP, but you can't but wonder that even if they abandon their ludicrous position and go with what their members and vast majority of their voter s want and  change to "Remain", whether they will be trusted.

There's a huge gap in the market for genuine remain parties. A fractured Tory party, a Labour party with a befuddled, non-credible policy on the key issue of the election being called - the outcome of the election could be both the tories and Labour getting a shoeing, and the more minor parties gaining a fair bit, resulting in a minority government, much smaller minority than now, Johnson gone, Corbyn gone, throbbers gone and a sort of vote by vote basis alignment of smaller parties and a new labour leader. Because if Labour's vote share and number of MPs goes down, he'd have to go.

Counting on Corbyn is and always has been (IMO) utter folly. But each to their own, etc. we all see things differently.

[hippo]

13 minutes ago, blandy said:

I wonder a bit about this.

The tories, it seems are going for a "UKIP" look. Anyone non-UKIPy will be purged. To me that doesn't bode well for their election prospects.

Also, Labour is still, currently, "a Leave party", though a mightlily confused one, at that. They say that they want to do a negotiation with the EU, reach a new "softer" deal, then hold a referendum on that deal - Labour Brexit v Remain. Would they support their own deal, or would they support remain? Well they're not going to oppose their own negotiated deal...so they are still heading down an avenue that is "Leave".

I know FPTP, but you can't but wonder that even if they abandon their ludicrous position and go with what their members and vast majority of their voter s want and  change to "Remain", whether they will be trusted.

There's a huge gap in the market for genuine remain parties. A fractured Tory party, a Labour party with a befuddled, non-credible policy on the key issue of the election being called - the outcome of the election could be both the tories and Labour getting a shoeing, and the more minor parties gaining a fair bit, resulting in a minority government, much smaller minority than now, Johnson gone, Corbyn gone, throbbers gone and a sort of vote by vote basis alignment of smaller parties and a new labour leader. Because if Labour's vote share and number of MPs goes down, he'd have to go.

Counting on Corbyn is and always has been (IMO) utter folly. But each to their own, etc. we all see things differently.

Agree with first part - not the 2nd - I think a big Tory victory is well on the cards.