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

1 hour ago, Mudface said:

So Corbyn had showed a massive improvement and was shouldered aside by that Tory lawyer fuck. If it'd stayed on the same trajectory, he would have been polling better than Starmer by now.

 

Edit: Just noticed, who's this Davey fella?

Davey fella?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

 

That’s interesting because it looks at trends. The main things to take are that the country is starting to get wise to Boris Johnson. Going from extremely positive to into the negative is a good sign. Starmer keeping pretty flat over time as the only leader in the positive is decent at the moment, not ideal but to remain positive while the report about Labour and the suspension of Corbyn have happened show he’s got a solid base to build from. It’s good to have a leader polling above the party. I mean, he’s 50 odd points ahead of where Corbyn was, which is wild. The negative impact Corbyn had on the Labour Party at the last election in terms of electability can be understated. It’s going to be an interesting few months. The Corbyn issue needs to be tucked away very quickly. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good article by Paul Embery in The Mail....And sad fact is he’s a 100% right 

 

Labour is now a party almost exclusively for the managerial and professional classes, graduates, social activists and urban liberals ... and the price has been paid in millions of lost working-class votes.”

Labour will never win power until it stops hating the working class! Ex-union official PAUL EMBERY accuses the party of despising its natural supporters for their traditional values and opposition to mass immigration 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8973859/amp/PAUL-EMBERY-Labour-never-win-power-stops-hating-working-class.html?__twitter_impression=true

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "labour abandoned the working class" doesn't hold water IMO, first off, there is no working class, at least in the way that there used to be. No mass unionised blue collar armies, instead there's a disparate array of low paid people, many of whom are struggling or just getting by. 

 

A lot quite like the queen, the military, the yanks, don't really  have much of an opinion on Trident I'd imagine either. 

 

Also, if you're working class and abandoned Labour because they've 'done nothing for you' but then vote Tory, then I'm not sure there's any reasoning with you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What to say about that article... well, it is certainly the correct media outlet for it. I do love chatter about ‘indigenous people’ on a Sunday morning. 
 

Still, facts are facts. 100% right ‘n all. I just find it strange to hear Corbyn’s Labour attacked from the perspective that it was too much of a liberal, cosmopolitan left. Even more interesting that the evidence to back up these facts are to win over the working classes you need to be more Tony Blair and less Jeremy Corbyn. Like, do what? In fact, be more like Boris Johnson, the champion of the working classes.  

 

If anything can be taken from the article it’s that, if you want to win back socially *cough* conservative places who are worried about their culture and the invasion of *cough* non-indigenous people, the way to do it is to placate these mouth breathers on a local level. Because if you start banging the drum needed to win over BNP and UKIP voters on a national scale, you lose almost everyone. 
 

You know, that article seemed more about winning over racists than it did the working classes. What are the working classes these days anyway? There’s very little working class identity like there used to be. That’s because large communities aren’t down the pit or working on production line or factory workers, not like it was. More often it’s a load of disjointed low wage workers that think they’re going to be rich some day. 
 

I think Labour do need to do a better job of representing the working classes, but I don’t think it’s to roll back to social conservatism, to being 1970s Labour. They literally just tried that. I’m not sure Starmer is the answer either, we will have to wait until the manifesto. I think he’s ready to ‘trump’ up patriotism but that’s about it. Labour will need a coalition anyway. Probably with SNP. FFS, what the point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The "labour abandoned the working class" doesn't hold water IMO, first off, there is no working class, at least in the way that there used to be. No mass unionised blue collar armies, instead there's a disparate array of low paid people, many of whom are struggling or just getting by. 

 

A lot quite like the queen, the military, the yanks, don't really  have much of an opinion on Trident I'd imagine either. 

 

Also, if you're working class and abandoned Labour because they've 'done nothing for you' but then vote Tory, then I'm not sure there's any reasoning with you.

 

 

 

I think most of these things can be true at the same time. The "traditional" working class was greatly diminished when we stopped making stuff as a country decades ago. That worker then moved to an admin job or carphone warehouse. Or worse, the likes of Amazon. So, for the first time, politicians could actually convince that person about their social class. For a decade or so of the transition (let's say about 1995 - 2005) it didn't matter enough to Labour because the numbers they lost were still small and they were convincing volvo man that Labour could be for them as well. As you say, the lack of any real collectivism meant a lot of people could be easily convinced that the social stuff was more important than the economic and/or simply lied to about economics anyway.

 

By the late 2000s, enough people who certainly would have been considered working class two decades prior, whether they were in the late 2000s or not, had either started voting SNP in Scotland, UKIP in England, a few to the Greens, loads not bothering at all, and sadly a few to Tory. It's why, for me, that period under Blair both had a shelf life and ensured that for the next few decades Labour were fucked. 

 

The gap between the destruction of unions and the prominence of social media has been really dangerous, in my opinion. Decades of collectivism, followed by one or two of soul searching, followed by feeling part of something on social media. Same in the US. And of course, we're very much in a post fact world now. So someone like Boris Johnson can appear like a "lad" and the reality of his character and values just gets lost.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/11/2020 at 16:41, Strontium Dog™ said:

I love how that article repeats Corbyn's claim that he wasn't involved in any wreath-laying, then the pictures show him holding a big fuck-off wreath.

I'd hazard a guess that this meeting of men of peace may result in a few more wreaths being laid in months to come.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-55042055

 

 

Edit. Mike Pompeu, Mo bin Salman and Bibi together in a room. Good gawd 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Isn't peace a good thing? I'm confused. 

Yep it is. Unfortunately for the poor Palestinians, they wont see ay until the israeli war machine has finished bumming their heads in. But you know.... let's not criticise that. Oh and.... Yemen. Again... don't mention facts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could all lay a wreath in the shape of a bone saw or something. Call me a i cynic  but with Trump clinging on by his fingernails and the paris environmental agreement plus the Iranian nuclear disarmament accord possibly being re signed you get ths feeling based on the three countries record of dropping bombs and firing rockets around the globe that peace and love wont be top of the list with Yanky Mike, Bibi and Bin Sulaman. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/19/us-supplied-bomb-that-killed-40-children-school-bus-yemen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And then everyone clapped..."

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/jeremy-corbyn-rihanna-glastonbury-tommy-b1760226.html

 

Quote

Jeremy Corbyn’s son Tommy mocked for Rihanna tweet

 

Former Labour leader’s son claimed his father drew bigger festival crowd than singer

A tweet posted by Jeremy Corbyn’s son, Tommy, has raised eyebrows, after he repeated a claim that his father drew a bigger crowd at Glastonbury than Rihanna.

 

Sharing the former Labour leader’s speech at the 2017 event, he wrote: “One of the proudest moments of my life was watching this speech.
 

Afterwards one of the Glastonbury staff tapped me on the shoulder and said, ‘You know he just got a bigger crowd than Rihanna.’”

 

Given that Rihanna has never actually played the festival, many Twitter users have mocked Corbyn’s son for the boast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/11/2020 at 10:41, Numero said:

What to say about that article... well, it is certainly the correct media outlet for it. I do love chatter about ‘indigenous people’ on a Sunday morning. 
 

Still, facts are facts. 100% right ‘n all. I just find it strange to hear Corbyn’s Labour attacked from the perspective that it was too much of a liberal, cosmopolitan left. Even more interesting that the evidence to back up these facts are to win over the working classes you need to be more Tony Blair and less Jeremy Corbyn. Like, do what? In fact, be more like Boris Johnson, the champion of the working classes.  

 

If anything can be taken from the article it’s that, if you want to win back socially *cough* conservative places who are worried about their culture and the invasion of *cough* non-indigenous people, the way to do it is to placate these mouth breathers on a local level. Because if you start banging the drum needed to win over BNP and UKIP voters on a national scale, you lose almost everyone. 
 

You know, that article seemed more about winning over racists than it did the working classes. What are the working classes these days anyway? There’s very little working class identity like there used to be. That’s because large communities aren’t down the pit or working on production line or factory workers, not like it was. More often it’s a load of disjointed low wage workers that think they’re going to be rich some day. 
 

I think Labour do need to do a better job of representing the working classes, but I don’t think it’s to roll back to social conservatism, to being 1970s Labour. They literally just tried that. I’m not sure Starmer is the answer either, we will have to wait until the manifesto. I think he’s ready to ‘trump’ up patriotism but that’s about it. Labour will need a coalition anyway. Probably with SNP. FFS, what the point. 

Some of the stuff you write is becoming more and more unhinged by the day.  It’s genuinely baffling.  When Corbyn was the leader you used to say you didn’t agree with his policies after he wrote a big fat economically left wing manifesto with the help of the membership of the party but you would still describe yourself as left wing.  Starmer faked that he was going to go along with these policies to get himself elected leader and now suddenly you’re all for those policies whilst now misrepresenting Corbyn completely.  Maybe it’s because like every other centrist (right wing in all but name) cunt you know full well none of them will ever get enacted if Labour by some miracle gets elected in.

 

I find it funny that these same people incessantly went on about how Labour couldn’t propose economically left wing policies because it would make them unelectable.  They would rather give the public a load of Tory economic policies despite the party haemorrhaging votes for years because of them.  Now it’s laid out as a fact that being massively pro immigration is making them unelectable they couldn’t possibly move on that issue.  It doesn’t matter if that puts Boris Johnson in number 10 for another 5 years and murders thousands of people and completely destroys sections of our society.  We need to stick to that specific value.

 

The last paragraph about being socially conservative and that “they literally just tried that” is possibly the funniest thing you’ve ever written.  I can visualise the steam coming out of your ears every time you read an actual left wing opinion and the offence it must cause your conscience.  The party gained votes for its first time in decades due to actual left wing policies and daring to offer even mild one socially conservative policy of not offering a second referendum.  The blatant fact of changing this policy to offering one completely destroying the party in a general election being ignored by you is the classic “centrists” nonsense of the decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Guest said:

Some of the stuff you write is becoming more and more unhinged by the day.  It’s genuinely baffling.  When Corbyn was the leader you used to say you didn’t agree with his policies after he wrote a big fat economically left wing manifesto with the help of the membership of the party but you would still describe yourself as left wing.  Starmer faked that he was going to go along with these policies to get himself elected leader and now suddenly you’re all for those policies whilst now misrepresenting Corbyn completely.  Maybe it’s because like every other centrist (right wing in all but name) cunt you know full well none of them will ever get enacted if Labour by some miracle gets elected in.

 

I find it funny that these same people incessantly went on about how Labour couldn’t propose economically left wing policies because it would make them unelectable.  They would rather give the public a load of Tory economic policies despite the party haemorrhaging votes for years because of them.  Now it’s laid out as a fact that being massively pro immigration is making them unelectable they couldn’t possibly move on that issue.  It doesn’t matter if that puts Boris Johnson in number 10 for another 5 years and murders thousands of people and completely destroys sections of our society.  We need to stick to that specific value.

 

The last paragraph about being socially conservative and that “they literally just tried that” is possibly the funniest thing you’ve ever written.  I can visualise the steam coming out of your ears every time you read an actual left wing opinion and the offence it must cause your conscience.  The party gained votes for its first time in decades due to actual left wing policies and daring to offer even mild one socially conservative policy of not offering a second referendum.  The blatant fact of changing this policy to offering one completely destroying the party in a general election being ignored by you is the classic “centrists” nonsense of the decade.

You've done it now...3. 2. 1....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Guest said:

Some of the stuff you write is becoming more and more unhinged by the day.  It’s genuinely baffling.  When Corbyn was the leader you used to say you didn’t agree with his policies after he wrote a big fat economically left wing manifesto with the help of the membership of the party but you would still describe yourself as left wing.  Starmer faked that he was going to go along with these policies to get himself elected leader and now suddenly you’re all for those policies whilst now misrepresenting Corbyn completely.  Maybe it’s because like every other centrist (right wing in all but name) cunt you know full well none of them will ever get enacted if Labour by some miracle gets elected in.

 

I find it funny that these same people incessantly went on about how Labour couldn’t propose economically left wing policies because it would make them unelectable.  They would rather give the public a load of Tory economic policies despite the party haemorrhaging votes for years because of them.  Now it’s laid out as a fact that being massively pro immigration is making them unelectable they couldn’t possibly move on that issue.  It doesn’t matter if that puts Boris Johnson in number 10 for another 5 years and murders thousands of people and completely destroys sections of our society.  We need to stick to that specific value.

 

The last paragraph about being socially conservative and that “they literally just tried that” is possibly the funniest thing you’ve ever written.  I can visualise the steam coming out of your ears every time you read an actual left wing opinion and the offence it must cause your conscience.  The party gained votes for its first time in decades due to actual left wing policies and daring to offer even mild one socially conservative policy of not offering a second referendum.  The blatant fact of changing this policy to offering one completely destroying the party in a general election being ignored by you is the classic “centrists” nonsense of the decade.

What policies has Starmer faked and changed? 

 

I mean, I've tried looking for policies and apart from an interpretation of party unity, that Corbyn didn't appear to realise existed when appearing on Sky News TV right before his boss was going to respond to the EHRC report, I'm damned if I can find a manifesto where Starmer has put down policies that are at odds to those pledges he stood on in the leadership campaign. Can you clarify these please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

So long as he doesn't have to go under cross-examination.

 

 

 

The scale of antisemitism in Labour was still dramatically overstated for political reasons. I don't think the court case would revolve around "what dodgy contacts can we dig up from Jezza's past." The focus should be on Corbyn's treatment after what he said and whether or not it was fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that when the rightwing whats apps were leaked it was disgusting lack of privacy and the present leader suggested finding the culprit was the main thrust of the investigation he ordered , but when a private disciplinary letter is leaked by his own chief whip then it is fine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Interesting that when the rightwing whats apps were leaked it was disgusting lack of privacy and the present leader suggested finding the culprit was the main thrust of the investigation he ordered , but when a private disciplinary letter is leaked by his own chief whip then it is fine.

 

What right wing WhatsApps? Genuinely, I’m starting to think people done know why right wing actually means. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Interesting that when the rightwing whats apps were leaked it was disgusting lack of privacy and the present leader suggested finding the culprit was the main thrust of the investigation he ordered , but when a private disciplinary letter is leaked by his own chief whip then it is fine.

Or the NEC stuff. Almost like there aren't any standards at all when it comes to this sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Numero said:

What right wing WhatsApps? 

I assume @sir roger means Right wing, as in right wing of the party and Whats Apps as in the Whats Apps messages and emails that were showing the coordination of wanting to lose the 2017 election, plus attacks on members and the joy at losing. 

 

Whilst many were outraged at the thought of senior party officials working against the party in a general election Keir called for an investigation into how it was leaked also;

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-report-leak-keir-starmer-investigation-angela-rayner-antisemitism-a9462881.html

 

 

A massive cache of leaked WhatsApp messages and emails detailed in the 860 page report also suggest that anti-Corbyn officials worked to lose the 2017 general election in the hope that that a defeat would force a change of leader – a revelation which has sparked anger among MPs and members.

“We will therefore commission an urgent independent investigation into this matter. This investigation will be instructed to look at three areas. First, the background and circumstances in which the report was commissioned and the process involved. Second, the contents and wider culture and practices referred to in the report. Third, the circumstances in which the report was put into the public domain.

 

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...