Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?


Sugar Ape
 Share

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?  

218 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?



Recommended Posts

On 1/11/2019 at 3:41 PM, Strontium Dog said:

 

She was democratically elected by her constituents to represent them. Who the hell are you to decide that she has no business representing them? What part of democracy don't you understand?

 

That she's remained in the Labour Party even after it repeatedly failed to warn her of credible threats against her person is remarkable in itself, and speaks volumes for her commitment to the Labour cause. And I suspect she'll still be in Labour when all the zealots have sodded off too.

I’m one of the constituents you complete fucking plank.

 

The part of democracy you refuse to understand because you’re a disengenous snide retard is that when candidates like Tony Blair’s son mate get parachuted into your seat you’ve got no where to go.  It’s anti democratic.  The answer to that is to the let the overwhelmingly Labour supported constituency pick it’s own fucking candidate and when they do the votes shouldn’t be counted in a house where one of the fucking nominations is living at.

 

I don’t know why I’m bothering really because you’re that fucking mentally ill nothing would ever go in.  You’re past educating or listening to anything that doesn’t fit your own thick as fuck, one eyed view of politics and the world in general.

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Captain Howdy said:

Distanced himself from Corbyn till he did ok in the election, then he was back on board 

In fairness, he's probably not alone in that. Part of the narrative before the General Election was "he's a nice bloke with interesting policies, but he's unelectable".  Jones was never rabidly anti-Corbyn and he's consistently supported Corbyn's politics. If he really did "distance himself" I'm assuming it would be because he thought Labour would have a better chance of winning with someone else. 

 

Changing your mind in light of new facts is a good thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Guest said:

I’m one of the constituents you complete fucking plank.

 

The part of democracy you refuse to understand because you’re a disengenous snide retard is that when candidates like Tony Blair’s son mate get parachuted into your seat you’ve got no where to go.  It’s anti democratic.  The answer to that is to the let the overwhelmingly Labour supported constituency pick it’s own fucking candidate and when they do the votes shouldn’t be counted in a house where one of the fucking nominations is living at.

 

I don’t know why I’m bothering really because you’re that fucking mentally ill nothing would ever go in.  You’re past educating or listening to anything that doesn’t fit your own thick as fuck, one eyed view of politics and the world in general.

 

Please stop, my irony meter can only take so much.

 

It's of course highly amusing to be accused of having a one eyed view of politics by someone with, at best, a childlike understanding of the topic, and no real understanding of what other people believe, beyond writing them all off as "Tories" for not worshipping at the feet of St Jeremy.

 

But what would I know about politics. Just because members of my family have been elected to public office on Labour, Conservative and Liberal tickets over more than three quarters of a century, clearly I understand less than someone who has been in the Labour Party for five minutes, who couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. The political memoirs by everyone from Ken Livingstone to Margaret Thatcher on my shelves, with every shade between, are clearly just a ruse to deflect from the fact that I can't understand the arguments within, given how I am "past educating or listening to anything" that doesn't fit my world view. The idea that I understand your risible opinions better than you do, and - gasp! - have found them wanting is evidently beyond your comprehension.

 

What I recall of Luciana Berger's selection is that she was parachuted into the constituency - much as Sir Hartley Shawcross was in St Helens in 1945, where my grandfather was the prospective candidate who had to stand aside - but she still had to be democratically selected by local Labour members. Which she was. And then democratically elected at three general elections by the people of Wavertree.

 

So that's chosen democratically by Labour members, and then chosen democratically by her constituents on three occasions, each time with bigger majorities. But she has no business representing people who have elected her three times? Yeah, I think it's not me who is mentally ill.

 

But you know, I could forgive your rank stupidity if you weren't so thoroughly obnoxious with it. You're comfortably the nastiest shit on this forum. A toxic little shithouse.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

 

Please stop, my irony meter can only take so much.

 

It's of course highly amusing to be accused of having a one eyed view of politics by someone with, at best, a childlike understanding of the topic, and no real understanding of what other people believe, beyond writing them all off as "Tories" for not worshipping at the feet of St Jeremy.

 

But what would I know about politics. Just because members of my family have been elected to public office on Labour, Conservative and Liberal tickets over more than three quarters of a century, clearly I understand less than someone who has been in the Labour Party for five minutes, who couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. The political memoirs by everyone from Ken Livingstone to Margaret Thatcher on my shelves, with every shade between, are clearly just a ruse to deflect from the fact that I can't understand the arguments within, given how I am "past educating or listening to anything" that doesn't fit my world view. The idea that I understand your risible opinions better than you do, and - gasp! - have found them wanting is evidently beyond your comprehension.

 

What I recall of Luciana Berger's selection is that she was parachuted into the constituency - much as Sir Hartley Shawcross was in St Helens in 1945, where my grandfather was the prospective candidate who had to stand aside - but she still had to be democratically selected by local Labour members. Which she was. And then democratically elected at three general elections by the people of Wavertree.

 

So that's chosen democratically by Labour members, and then chosen democratically by her constituents on three occasions, each time with bigger majorities. But she has no business representing people who have elected her three times? Yeah, I think it's not me who is mentally ill.

 

But you know, I could forgive your rank stupidity if you weren't so thoroughly obnoxious with it. You're comfortably the nastiest shit on this forum. A toxic little shithouse.

 

Negged for the Woy-esque reference to political memoirs on your shelves. Not a convincing argument. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Also, I still remember the first time I saw "Chavs" in a bookshop and how good it was that someone had actually written a book like that.

I have this book.  "The demonisation of the working class - How the working class changed from being seen as the salt of the earth to being seen as the scum of the earth".

 

Great read.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Strontium Dog said:

 

Please stop, my irony meter can only take so much.

 

It's of course highly amusing to be accused of having a one eyed view of politics by someone with, at best, a childlike understanding of the topic, and no real understanding of what other people believe, beyond writing them all off as "Tories" for not worshipping at the feet of St Jeremy.

 

But what would I know about politics. Just because members of my family have been elected to public office on Labour, Conservative and Liberal tickets over more than three quarters of a century, clearly I understand less than someone who has been in the Labour Party for five minutes, who couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. The political memoirs by everyone from Ken Livingstone to Margaret Thatcher on my shelves, with every shade between, are clearly just a ruse to deflect from the fact that I can't understand the arguments within, given how I am "past educating or listening to anything" that doesn't fit my world view. The idea that I understand your risible opinions better than you do, and - gasp! - have found them wanting is evidently beyond your comprehension.

 

What I recall of Luciana Berger's selection is that she was parachuted into the constituency - much as Sir Hartley Shawcross was in St Helens in 1945, where my grandfather was the prospective candidate who had to stand aside - but she still had to be democratically selected by local Labour members. Which she was. And then democratically elected at three general elections by the people of Wavertree.

 

So that's chosen democratically by Labour members, and then chosen democratically by her constituents on three occasions, each time with bigger majorities. But she has no business representing people who have elected her three times? Yeah, I think it's not me who is mentally ill.

 

But you know, I could forgive your rank stupidity if you weren't so thoroughly obnoxious with it. You're comfortably the nastiest shit on this forum. A toxic little shithouse.

Glad to have rattled you, you Tory lizard.

  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Have you got the Corbyn book that Alex Nunns wrote on that shelf, Stronts?

 

I haven't. I'm not opposed to reading it, but my impression of that book is that it's rather aimed at an audience that is sympathetic to the Corbyn project in the first place.

 

The Corbyn book I have been considering getting is Corbynism: A Critical Approach, which analyses the movement from a Marxist perspective. Good interview with one of the authors here: https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/what-is-corbynism-the-author-of-a-new-book-explains-why-even-some-left-wingers-have-problems-with-it/

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...