Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I read the below statement humming the old Chaz and Dave song '@ther ain't no pleasing you'

 

 

 

So much for 'everyone's happy'. I assumed the statement would have been cleared with various groups. Obviously not. It was a 'non-retraction retraction' but I assumed it would hd have been okayed already. Ah well, back on the Ferris wheel of hatred for the Labour Party. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

The statement by the Jewish board of deps is a perfect example of the corner the labour party has boxed themselves into.

You think there's a set of circumstances that results in them not saying that?

 

[Section_31]

10 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

It is almost not matter what is done will never be enough. 

No one could have predicted that.

Yep, fair play to Corbyn, they can get fucked.

[Gnasher]

2 minutes ago, Numero said:

You think there's a set of circumstances that results in them not saying that?

 

It's not just them. It was oh so predictable.

[Gnasher]

Ian Austin has interpreted Jeremy Corbyn's statement as 'lm going to join Hamas'

[Gnasher]

Here we go. Haters gonna hate

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

9 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

It's not just them. It was oh so predictable.

But you've been saying that Labour and Starmer have boxed themselves into a corner, and now you're saying this is evidence of it. Okay, fine, but what could they have done that would have stopped this? Suspending Corbyn hasn't started this - fuck, we know that it has been going on way before that - so not suspending him wouldn't have stopped it. Telling them to fuck off and not looking at complaints wouldn't have stopped it. So what would have been the solution to this? What would have been 'not boxing themselves into a corner'. I'm trying to understand what that looks like, because at the moment it's just you saying a thing. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

Here we go. Haters gonna hate

 

 

 

 

I mean, it is true; there is no apology for what was I the EHRC and there was no acceptance or stepping back on his comments about not accepting findings within the EHRC report. I don't agree that it's a continuation of it, but it's also not a step back. That's why I called it a non-retraction retraction. It does seem to be going down like a lead brick, which means it wasn't cleared with these groups previously. I wonder if it was even seen by Labour, or if it's just off his/his legal team's own backs. 

[Anubis]

25 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

It is almost not matter what is done will never be enough. 

No one could have predicted that.

Yes. It’s a shocker isn’t it? 

[Gnasher]

5 minutes ago, Numero said:

But you've been saying that Labour and Starmer have boxed themselves into a corner, and now you're saying this is evidence of it. Okay, fine, but what could they have done that would have stopped this? Suspending Corbyn hasn't started this - fuck, we know that it has been going on way before that - so not suspending him wouldn't have stopped it. Telling them to fuck off and not looking at complaints wouldn't have stopped it. So what would have been the solution to this? What would have been 'not boxing themselves into a corner'. I'm trying to understand what that looks like, because at the moment it's just you saying a thing. 

The decision to suspend Corbyn was ridiculous, it created an unnecessary problem. The statement by Starmer saying people who questioned the scale of anti semitism in the labour party would be punished was also a massive over reaction. It's ok to sound tough but if you set impossible standards then it's going to come back to bite you.

[Stickman]

44 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I read the below statement humming the old Chaz and Dave song '@ther ain't no pleasing you'

 

 

 

 

 

Since when do they speak for the whole Jewish community ?

[Numero Veinticinco]

22 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

The decision to suspend Corbyn was ridiculous, it created an unnecessary problem. The statement by Starmer saying people who questioned the scale of anti semitism in the labour party would be punished was also a massive over reaction. It's ok to sound tough but if you set impossible standards then it's going to come back to bite you.

How, in relation to these comments you're talking about as evidence that they've boxed themselves in, has it come back to bite him and what could have been done to avoid these responses by BOD etc? 

 

Seriously, unless you answer those two questions, it looks like you're just yapping. 

[Strontium]

I suppose we should at least be grateful that Corbyn has finally learned how to refer to the evils of antisemitism without appending the micro-aggression "and all other forms of racism" to it. Baby steps and all that.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

micro-aggression

[Gnasher]

54 minutes ago, Numero said:

How, in relation to these comments you're talking about as evidence that they've boxed themselves in, has it come back to bite him and what could have been done to avoid these responses by BOD etc? 

 

Seriously, unless you answer those two questions, it looks like you're just yapping. 

I've answered. The decision to suspend Corbyn was the labour party's alone, it took almost everyone by surprise. Still you reap what you sow and all that and unfortunately it's a sour harvest.

 

As for the responses by the usual suspects I agree the responses were predictable which is why I found Starmer going so far out to appease them a little strange. 

 

The bottom line is Corbyn was gone, the report seemed to appease the freinds of Israel faction so the aftermath seemed unnecessary bluster. I couldn't understand it. People said at the time it would prove an own goal and that's the way its turning out.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Gnasher said:

I've answered. The decision to suspend Corbyn was the labour party's alone, it took almost everyone by surprise. Still you reap what you sow and all that and unfortunately it's a sour harvest.

 

As for the responses by the usual suspects I agree the responses were predictable which is why I found Starmer going so far out to appease them a little strange. 

 

The bottom line is Corbyn was gone, the report seemed to appease the freinds of Israel faction so the aftermath seemed unnecessary bluster. I couldn't understand it. People said at the time it would prove an own goal and that's the way its turning out.

You saying Labour suspended Corbyn isn't explaining how it boxed them into a corner with this as evidence? These things were happening before Starmer came, before the report, before Corbyn responded, after what he responded with, before Starmer's response, after his response, and after Corbyn was suspended. The idea that if Labour didn't suspend Corbyn this would all be fine and Bod wouldn't have been foaming at the mouth every day since Corbyn's response, and it was the decision to suspend him that boxed him into a corner rather than inheriting a fucking SHITSHOW is patently ridiculous in my view. 

 

 

[Gnasher]

8 minutes ago, Numero said:

You saying Labour suspended Corbyn isn't explaining how it boxed them into a corner with this as evidence? These things were happening before Starmer came, before the report, before Corbyn responded, after what he responded with, before Starmer's response, after his response, and after Corbyn was suspended. The idea that if Labour didn't suspend Corbyn this would all be fine and Bod wouldn't have been foaming at the mouth every day since Corbyn's response, and it was the decision to suspend him that boxed him into a corner rather than inheriting a fucking SHITSHOW is patently ridiculous in my view. 

 

 

I'm not sure, most factions seemed ok with the report, of course some will never be happy, I thought Starmer would reasure the doubters which he seemed to be doing, then Labour holds its hands up and moves on. The aftermath is where the mistakes were made, Starners speech was fine until he threw in the preposterous exaggeration caveat, it created an unnecessary line which proved impossible not to cross.

[Numero Veinticinco]

18 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I'm not sure, most factions seemed ok with the report, of course some will never be happy, I thought Starmer would reasure the doubters which he seemed to be doing, then Labour holds its hands up and moves on. The aftermath is where the mistakes were made, Starners speech was fine until he threw in the preposterous exaggeration caveat, it created an unnecessary line which proved impossible not to cross.

I guess that’s just another point of disagreement. 

[Section_31]

The Starmer and Corbyn threads should be cast into the fires of Mount Doom from whence they came. 

 

[Strontium]

29 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The Starmer and Corbyn threads should be cast into the fires of Mount Doom from whence they came. 

 

Following which, Corbyn will lay a wreath for them.

[A Red]

Why doesn't Corbyn just retire? He's 71 and got a few quid, he should take a leaf from Skinners book who always said he would retire the same as working men do to free up a job for someone else, unlike the old twats in the house of lords.......oh hang on

[Captain Howdy]

He’s back!!!

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Just now, Captain Howdy said:

He’s back!!!

That's the whispers doing the rounds. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

It looks official now. 

 

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

5 hours ago, Gnasher said:

Here we go. Haters gonna hate

 

 

 

 

She'll be happy again now. She'll get a bit more tele work out of today's news. Louise Ellman will be dusting off her best jacket as we speak too.