Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

43 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Jesus Christ.  26 yrs of service just dismissed and now they are squatters.  

Like Hodgson's 35 years of management. 

 

They hold their seats because people voted Labour.  Those seats are not rightfully theirs. Those voters deserve a chance to elect a Labour MP.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Captain Howdy said:

 

Could the answer be that he’s a bit shit and people don’t want him?

The 2017 General Election disagrees.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

47 minutes ago, Boss said:

If Derek Hatton is re-joining Labour then the hard left takeover is obvious to anyone with even a morsel of a brain.

I can see how someone with a morsel of a brain could believe that one person joining a party of about half a million might amount to a complete takeover. 

[cloggypop]

Tony Blair well ripped Degsy off with the suit thing. 

[Megadrive Man]

To the Labour supporters in here, who do you actually want as party leader?

 

I am a Corbyn supporter, but I don't honestly ever see him becoming prime minister. I actually think he has grown in to the role of leader, I just think that his history and his political beliefs will always stop a big percentage of people voting for him. 

 

The problem is, they will lose a huge amount of support they gained at the last election, unless Corbyn willingly steps down and endorses a new leader. 

[Jose Jones]

Just now, MegadriveMan said:

To the Labour supporters in here, who do you actually want as party leader?

 

I am a Corbyn supporter, but I don't honestly ever see him becoming prime minister. I actually think he has grown in to the role of leader, I just think that his history and his political beliefs will always stop a big percentage of people voting for him. 

 

The problem is, they will lose a huge amount of support they gained at the last election, unless Corbyn willingly steps down and endorses a new leader. 

I agree with that, and I think it'll have to be the next leader who gets Labour in.

Any Labour leader is going to get a whole heap of shit thrown at them by the UK media.  One who espouses some slightly left of centre policies is going to get even more.

 

As you say, Corbyn has through his history both got a lot of easily usable material.  Whilst he seems like a decent fellow, and comes across as such when he actually gets time to express an opinion, someone a bit cleaner would be a less easy target.

 

I think the smear has worked with enough of the general population that he will struggle to beat probably the worst government in memory.  He also has had the problem of being a lifelong party rebel, so that the infrastructure of the party didn't all swing behind him in support.  It's not just down to policy differences.

 

Labour need someone who can appeal policy wise to those people who like Corbyn, but also perform a bit more of a selling job on the floating voters that Labour picked up from 1997 - 2007.  Plus then be able to put out their message through social media, and grass roots campaigning a lot more effectively to counter the right wing press.

 

Not sure who that is, and whoever it is would still have a bloody hard job.

 

 

[Denny Crane]

4 hours ago, Strontium Dog said:

I can't believe the Magnificent Seven don't want to stay in a party with people like Louise...

 

 

Genuine question we know that more examples on social media are not Labour members than are. But if this person was found to be a Labour member what would you consider appropriate action for this type of comment. I think the outcomes seems to be, no action, warning, suspension for x amount of time or permanent expulsion. 

[cloggypop]

Month on a kibbutz 

[Brownie]

1 hour ago, Captain Howdy said:

 

Could the answer be that he’s a bit shit and people don’t want him?

Well his performances during elections (leadership and general) don’t support that. My view is that he’s unelectable because of an organised smear campaign which unfortunately works.

 

If he was more centrist, the smear campaign wouldn’t even exist.

[Jose Jones]

22 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Well his performances during elections (leadership and general) don’t support that. My view is that he’s unelectable because of an organised smear campaign which unfortunately works.

 

If he was more centrist, the smear campaign wouldn’t even exist.

 

I don't think that's entirely true.  There's always a smear campaign.

 

There wouldn't be the same amount of internal politicking against him though if Corbyn was more centrist, I agree there.

[Brownie]

7 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

 

I don't think that's entirely true.  There's always a smear campaign.

 

There wouldn't be the same amount of internal politicking against him though if Corbyn was more centrist, I agree there.

I was including the PLP collusion as part of the smear tbh. It absolutely infuriates me how the PLP talk at complete odds with the membership. I wish more than 7 fucked off to be totally honest with you.

 

I know that you are going to have disagreements within a political party and different values on certain topics but i’ve never really understood this whole “broad church” point. If you’re a political party that puts itself on a certain part of the spectrum then how can you expect to have people with polar opposite views on key policies? You either stand for something or you don’t.

 

This isn’t the Lib Dems.

[Jose Jones]

6 minutes ago, Brownie said:

I was including the PLP collusion as part of the smear tbh. It absolutely infuriates me how the PLP talk at complete odds with the membership. I wish more than 7 fucked off to be totally honest with you.

 

I know that you are going to have disagreements within a political party and different values on certain topics but i’ve never really understood this whole “broad church” point. If you’re a political party that puts itself on a certain part of the spectrum then how can you expect to have people with polar opposite views on key policies? You either stand for something or you don’t.

 

This isn’t the Lib Dems.

 

Well, I'm not sure there really are that many polar opposite views on key policies are there? 

Apart from Brexit... 

[Boss]

The membership hate a Labour leader who was in power for 13 years, won almost double the amount of seats as Corbyn in his first election, increased the minimum wage, signed the Good Friday Agreement, invested massively in the NHS (lowest waiting lists ever), presided over the longest period of uninterrupted growth in UK history, lowest unemployment rates in 50 years, lowest inflation figures, lowest debt in decades (2nd lowest in G8 2007).

 

The membership love a Labour leader who had a no confidence vote filed against him and lost it 172 to 40. Who was saved by the membership and then had to sack the shadow cabinet because they had no faith in him. Who is lionised for losing a general election by a lesser margin than Ed fucking Milliband.

[Captain Howdy]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The 2017 General Election disagrees.

You don’t have to win to be a winner but he is a winner

[Jose Jones]

35 minutes ago, Boss said:

The membership hate a Labour leader who was in power for 13 years, won almost double the amount of seats as Corbyn in his first election, increased the minimum wage, signed the Good Friday Agreement, invested massively in the NHS (lowest waiting lists ever), presided over the longest period of uninterrupted growth in UK history, lowest unemployment rates in 50 years, lowest inflation figures, lowest debt in decades (2nd lowest in G8 2007).

 

The membership love a Labour leader who had a no confidence vote filed against him and lost it 172 to 40. Who was saved by the membership and then had to sack the shadow cabinet because they had no faith in him. Who is lionised for losing a general election by a lesser margin than Ed fucking Milliband.

Do the Labour membership hate Blair?

There's probably a fair amount who do, but I would be interested to see if you had any numbers supporting that?

 

If Blair hadn't gone for the war in Iraq the Labour membership would see him in a much more appealing light.  In fact he would probably have gone down as one of the best Prime Ministers in British History had he not done that.

 

There is also the minor matters of a bit too much laissez-faire capitalism, but then everyone has a different line on where they think market control should go.  It's easy to move it a bit and have people generally agree with the direction.

 

You also, Boss, seem to be doing that weird thing again, where you think that a political party should not be made up of members.

 

[Red Phoenix]

Interesting how almost everyone just piles on a woman who mentions Israel now. I guess that's "New anti-Semitism" for you. Israeli gov must be laughing their tits off.

 

"Stop the hypocrisy! Anti-Zionism is the new antisemitism"

 

Indeed. Let's hope there's still room to criticise Israel and their actions properly as this goes on, for the sake of the Palestinians.

[Boss]

1 hour ago, Jose Jones said:

Do the Labour membership hate Blair?

There's probably a fair amount who do, but I would be interested to see if you had any numbers supporting that?

 

If Blair hadn't gone for the war in Iraq the Labour membership would see him in a much more appealing light.  In fact he would probably have gone down as one of the best Prime Ministers in British History had he not done that.

 

There is also the minor matters of a bit too much laissez-faire capitalism, but then everyone has a different line on where they think market control should go.  It's easy to move it a bit and have people generally agree with the direction.

 

You also, Boss, seem to be doing that weird thing again, where you think that a political party should not be made up of members.

 

I doubt all of them do, but i'd say Momentum unanimously see him in a very disparaging way. The general consensus is "Tory with a red tie on" and "war criminal". No-one cares to point out that the man steamrollered through the Tories in his time. And domestically was fantastic for the country, both socially and economically.

 

I think Labour should be made up of members, but the important decisions should be left to the party. Giving the reigns of power to the members - who, for all their bluster, don't seem to have a clue what the wider public want - is a mistake, and i'm totally transparent about that. The members seem to think there's an appetite for a hard left socialist party and there really isn't. 

[Jose Jones]

18 minutes ago, Boss said:

I doubt all of them do, but i'd say Momentum unanimously see him in a very disparaging way. The general consensus is "Tory with a red tie on" and "war criminal". No-one cares to point out that the man steamrollered through the Tories in his time. And domestically was fantastic for the country, both socially and economically.

 

I think Labour should be made up of members, but the important decisions should be left to the party. Giving the reigns of power to the members - who, for all their bluster, don't seem to have a clue what the wider public want - is a mistake, and i'm totally transparent about that. The members seem to think there's an appetite for a hard left socialist party and there really isn't. 

I am sure AoT will be along sometime in the morning to correct you on the notion that Labour members want a hard left socialist party. 

However I also think that's wrong - there's very little disagreement within Labour on the policies that Labour took to the last election.  When these were presented to the public they proved popular, and the Tories even nicked some of them.  

 

The problem is, of course, that the current Labour leadership has in the past taken up some more dubious ideas and had links with people easily categorised as hard left socialists.  So they are both easily smeared generally, plus having been party antagonists in the past, they don't have the political capital internally to get the rest of the party's MPs to support them.

 

 

Anyway, I found this from before the last election.  It turns out that both the general public and Labour voters preferred Corbyn to Blair.  No numbers for Labour members though, but it would seem that if Labour members do hate Blair, then they are in tune with both their own voters and the wider public!

 

Tony Blair is more unpopular with voters than Jeremy Corbyn, according to an opinion poll for The Independent.

While one in three people (33 per cent) has a favourable opinion of Mr Corbyn, and 60 per cent an unfavourable one, Mr Blair’s ratings are even more bleak, at 21 per cent and 72 per cent respectively.

 

The survey of 2,006 adults by ORB found that 60 per cent of people who voted Labour at the 2015 election have a favourable view of Mr Corbyn, and 35 per cent an unfavourable one. Mr Blair is much less popular among them; only 37 per cent have a favourable opinion of him, while 56 per cent do not.

[Section_31]

5 hours ago, MegadriveMan said:

To the Labour supporters in here, who do you actually want as party leader?

 

I am a Corbyn supporter, but I don't honestly ever see him becoming prime minister. I actually think he has grown in to the role of leader, I just think that his history and his political beliefs will always stop a big percentage of people voting for him. 

 

The problem is, they will lose a huge amount of support they gained at the last election, unless Corbyn willingly steps down and endorses a new leader. 

I quite like Thornbury and Starmer.  It'll probably have to be a woman next though.

[Section_31]

3 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

Do the Labour membership hate Blair?

There's probably a fair amount who do, but I would be interested to see if you had any numbers supporting that?

 

If Blair hadn't gone for the war in Iraq the Labour membership would see him in a much more appealing light.  In fact he would probably have gone down as one of the best Prime Ministers in British History had he not done that.

 

There is also the minor matters of a bit too much laissez-faire capitalism, but then everyone has a different line on where they think market control should go.  It's easy to move it a bit and have people generally agree with the direction.

 

You also, Boss, seem to be doing that weird thing again, where you think that a political party should not be made up of members.

 

I think it's become trendy to say you hate Blair if you're young and in the Labour party. Much like it was trendy to say you hate Thatcher (even if you weren't born) or say you support Palestine.

 

There's so many different facets to what's going on at the moment it's hard to see through it. The media does stoke a lot, as does the aspect of our society that fears a grassroots political movement.

 

It's worth noting that before the war ordinary people died of TB in squalid back to backs and their kids had no shoes. After the war - When they country was utterly bankrupt - they were provided with indoor sanitation, vaccines, medical care and, quite often, jobs.

 

I'm sure this had nothing at all to do with the fact there were a lot of disgruntled men around who now knew how to use guns.

 

Corbyn is about more than whether one man should lead the Labour party, the project was an attempt to provide ordinary people with a say in how their party is run, and just look at the havoc it's wrought? I have never in my lifetime seen a political movement, from its leader right down to ordinary members, subjected to such relentless attacks. One wonders why that is?

 

Also bear in mind, the reason the British empire was so successful is that it didn't subjugate people with force. It did it by buying off their leaders and using them to keep people in line. You could argue this is exactly what happened with the Labour leadership.

 

We're in the middle of a push for 'regime change'. Because the poor people of the Labour party are being 'badly let down' by Jeremy Corbyn and his slavering a hordes of posh trots antisemites. Obviously this is only when he's not down the allotment of photographing manhole covers.

[Jairzinho]

6 hours ago, MegadriveMan said:

To the Labour supporters in here, who do you actually want as party leader?

 

I am a Corbyn supporter, but I don't honestly ever see him becoming prime minister. I actually think he has grown in to the role of leader, I just think that his history and his political beliefs will always stop a big percentage of people voting for him. 

 

The problem is, they will lose a huge amount of support they gained at the last election, unless Corbyn willingly steps down and endorses a new leader. 

Agreed, with everything. Actually, I may even be slightly less positive on Corbyn's performance as leader.

 

I want the next leader to be on the left. So, Burgon, Lewis, whoever. But on the fucking left. 

 

 

[Creator Supreme]

What makes me laugh is, Corbyn isn't even hard left. In any other decent 1st world country he's a democratic socialist!

 

But not in this right wing shithole, oh no! Well all you freaks who I've got on ignore will get your wish soon I've no doubt. The man doesn't need that kind of shit at his age and he'll walk away to the back benches, and back to his allotment, his jam and his manhole covers!

 

And you'll have cunts like Watson and Owen Smith running the party, and the seven shithouses will come crawling back! And they still won't win an election, but still they'll be more palatable to the LFI and Murdoch and his ilk!

 

And the perpetual neo-con hell will go on and fucking on!

 

Pass me the fucking paraquat!

[Sugar Ape]

8 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

It invalidates your moronic innuendo, trying to imply that anti-Semitic tropes are typical of Labour.

 

Last time anyone took a serious look (the Parliamentary report thing in 2016) it found that anti-Semitism was no more prevalent in Labour than in any other party.  Since then, Labour has (despite the best efforts of some of the twats who are now squatting in seats won by Labour) done a lot to combat anti-Semitism in the party.  What have any other parties done in that time?

 

Was that report about Labour voters or members? Only asking because most people who say it seem to be saying there is an antisemitism problem with Labour members, but most reports I’ve seen talk about Labour voters in general and not the membership in particular which are two completely different things.

[moof]

8 hours ago, Boss said:

If Derek Hatton is re-joining Labour then the hard left takeover is obvious to anyone with even a morsel of a brain.

You’re a fucking idiot. Seriously 

[Section_31]

22 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

What makes me laugh is, Corbyn isn't even hard left. In any other decent 1st world country he's a democratic socialist!

 

But not in this right wing shithole, oh no! Well all you freaks who I've got on ignore will get your wish soon I've no doubt. The man doesn't need that kind of shit at his age and he'll walk away to the back benches, and back to his allotment, his jam and his manhole covers!

 

And you'll have cunts like Watson and Owen Smith running the party, and the seven shithouses will come crawling back! And they still won't win an election, but still they'll be more palatable to the LFI and Murdoch and his ilk!

 

And the perpetual neo-con hell will go on and fucking on!

 

Pass me the fucking paraquat!

Bear in mind they called Ed Miliband 'red ed'. He was about as radical as an egg and cress sandwich.