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

Corbyn knows if he goes to the high court he will be crucified by the British establishment and media even if the judgement goes his way. Look at Megan Markle winning a court case against the Mail. For Corbyn it'll be ten times as venomous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gnasher said:

Corbyn knows if he goes to the high court he will be crucified by the British establishment and media even if the judgement goes his way. Look at Megan Markle winning a court case against the Mail. For Corbyn it'll be ten times as venomous.

But he was willing to go to court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Corbyn knows if he goes to the high court he will be crucified by the British establishment and media even if the judgement goes his way. Look at Megan Markle winning a court case against the Mail. For Corbyn it'll be ten times as venomous.

I imagine the allegations would be front page & main headline on 6 o'clock bbc news. The verdict buried on page 8 or reported at 2 a.m. on the news channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

Well the only conclusion to be drawn then is that he fears the evidence?

 

For any defamation action to be successful, you need to show that the statement was false and that it caused or could cause serious harm to your reputation. Also, if the statement is an honestly held belief, then that's a valid defence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Strontium said:

 

For any defamation action to be successful, you need to show that the statement was false and that it caused or could cause serious harm to your reputation. Also, if the statement is an honestly held belief, then that's a valid defence.

So in short he's up against it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Also...

 

In the televised leaders' debates in 2019 he had plenty of opportunities to cunt Johnson in the bastard over his incessant lying and complete lack of integrity, but he was just too polite.

I was fuming with him over that. 

 

I was also pissed off with him in 2017 when him and May were given prime slots on the One Show. May and her husband played happy families, but although his wife and lads wanted to come on with him and show him as a normal husband and dad, he wouldn’t let them and ended up waffling on about collecting manhole covers.Knowing how shallow the UK electorate is I think it was a massive mistake, exacerbated by the ensuing close result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sir roger said:

I know he espouses the ‘ we go high ‘ process, but letting these gangsters away with shit like this without resorting to the law makes me feel Corbyn is as much to blame as them.

In hindsight he should have took the 1st one to call him an anti semite to the cleaners.

However he probally never expected it to get so big or the British public to be so gullible.

School boy error right there

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, sir roger said:

I was fuming with him over that. 

 

I was also pissed off with him in 2017 when him and May were given prime slots on the One Show. May and her husband played happy families, but although his wife and lads wanted to come on with him and show him as a normal husband and dad, he wouldn’t let them and ended up waffling on about collecting manhole covers.Knowing how shallow the UK electorate is I think it was a massive mistake, exacerbated by the ensuing close result.

I think his fatal flaw was assuming johnson was a decent politician/human being.

It was the same over that appearance on the Andrew Neil show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

In hindsight he should have took the 1st one to call him an anti semite to the cleaners.

However he probally never expected it to get so big or the British public to be so gullible.

School boy error right there

 

He probably figured there was a good chance he wouldn't succeed. It would have been a big risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Strontium said:

 

He probably figured there was a good chance he wouldn't succeed. It would have been a big risk.

If someone calls you out in print as a anti semite..surely they would have to provide nailed on evidence?

As gnasher said though even going through the legal process is not going to shed you in a completely different light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, sir roger said:

He wasn’t a great leader, but hardly an abysmal politician.

He was, as others have alluded to he had plenty of opportunities to turn the screw and never did . Shit politician that cost yet more Conservative years. Great at waving flags, at making any meaningful political change, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems okay at being an Islington MP. That's about as far as that should have ever gone. Very bad at politics at a national or international level. Achieved virtually nothing of note despite being a career politician. Seems to care about people, seems a bit of a hippy. The idea that he was deemed suitable to be leader of the labour party is on those around him and those who voted for him, but he had a fair crack in 2017. He should have gone after that, or at least when it became really bad and so obvious that him standing in the election was going to hand the Tories a big win. That's what I really have an issue with when it comes to the man himself. His rabid supporters who have lifted him to this cult like figure are mostly wankers who just have no real clue. The bloke himself seems far nicer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

Seems okay at being an Islington MP. That's about as far as that should have ever gone. Very bad at politics at a national or international level. Achieved virtually nothing of note despite being a career politician. Seems to care about people, seems a bit of a hippy. The idea that he was deemed suitable to be leader of the labour party is on those around him and those who voted for him, but he had a fair crack in 2017. He should have gone after that, or at least when it became really bad and so obvious that him standing in the election was going to hand the Tories a big win. That's what I really have an issue with when it comes to the man himself. His rabid supporters who have lifted him to this cult like figure are mostly wankers who just have no real clue. The bloke himself seems far nicer. 

In 2017,didn't he get more votes than milliband,Brown and Blairs 3rd election?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

For fucks sake, lock the thread, leaving it open just let's the usual fucking suspects have yet another pointless fucking jab at a decent man, and a fucking good MP!

 

Lock the thread, and starve the right wing bellends of the tainted oxygen they crave!

Warra tit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

If someone calls you out in print as a anti semite..surely they would have to provide nailed on evidence?

 

No, because that's not how defamation works. There's no law against simply saying something that the target believes isn't true. People are allowed to have honestly held opinions. Which is why you're quite safe calling Boris Johnson a lying, racist, sexist, inept, corrupt callous buffoon, as you did in January, for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strontium said:

 

No, because that's not how defamation works. There's no law against simply saying something that the target believes isn't true. People are allowed to have honestly held opinions.

You would have to back those opinions up with something credible though Shirley 

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...