Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Gnasher]

Caroline Lucas is fucking great, watching her debating trident. The Labour women are a vacume of tepid air.

[Jairzinho]

Caroline Lucas is fucking great, watching her debating trident. The Labour women are a vacume of tepid air.

 

Cat Smith and Kate Osamor seem decent.

[VladimirIlyich]

Caroline Lucas is fucking great, watching her debating trident. The Labour women are a vacume of tepid air.

Absolutely.

A Corbyn/Lucas ticket would be brilliant. Shes also the only woman I'd willingly back to be PM.

[Boss]

If it was a case of voting for Corbyn and splitting the party in two, causing both parties to take votes off each other and thus consigning us to Tory rule for the next 20 years, or alternatively voting for Benn and keeping the labour party together and possibly ousting the Tories in 2020...it'd be tempted in that scenario to vote for Benn.

[Jairzinho]

If it was a case of voting for Corbyn and splitting the party in two, causing both parties to take votes off each other and thus consigning us to Tory rule for the next 20 years, or alternatively voting for Benn and keeping the labour party together and possibly ousting the Tories in 2020...it'd be a very tough decision to make.

 

Strange conclusion to make.

[Gnasher]

Take a look at @CarolineLucas's Tweet: https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/755064041190588416?s=09

[Moctezuma]

Ever noticed when the BBC and other media outlets talk about trident they show the submarines or the missiles and test runs of those launching but never the cataclismic destruction they would cause. I wonder if it's to protect little Timmy from having an upset stomack when he watches the 6 o'clock news when eating his chicken nuggets.

[Jairzinho]

Ever noticed when the BBC and other media outlets talk about trident they show the submarines or the missiles and test runs of those launching but never the cataclismic destruction they would cause. I wonder if it's to protect little Timmy from having an upset stomack when he watches the 6 o'clock news when eating his chicken nuggets.

 

Nuclear weapons make me feel all warm and cuddly. The last thing I want to see is what would happen if they were used.

[Boss]

Strange conclusion to make.

 

Maybe so, that was a bit random. I just can't see a split party winning an election for the foreseeable.

[Jairzinho]

Maybe so, that was a bit random. I just can't see a split party winning an election for the foreseeable.

 

A split could lead to the two parties getting more votes between them than they were previously as one party. Green and non voters to Lab Left, A few Lib Dems and slightly less hateful Tories to Lab Right. It could lead to the Tories not getting a majority. It could lead to the calls for PR becoming louder. Who knows. I think making predictions beyond the end of the week are tricky at the moment, making one for the next couple of decades is impossible.

[Section_31]

Anyone wondering why you need nuclear weapons should compare Iraq and Libya with North Korea.

 

I for one wouldn't fancy Russian tanks on the doorstep with only Caroline Lucas's good intentions and the territorial army to stop them.

[Jairzinho]

More chance of Kelly Brook turning up on the door step.

[TheBitch]

[Boss]

A split could lead to the two parties getting more votes between them than they were previously as one party. Green and non voters to Lab Left, A few Lib Dems and slightly less hateful Tories to Lab Right. It could lead to the Tories not getting a majority. It could lead to the calls for PR becoming louder. Who knows. I think making predictions beyond the end of the week are tricky at the moment, making one for the next couple of decades is impossible.

 

But wouldn't the Tories just form a coalition with the Lib Dems again or UKIP? 

 

Not trying to map out the next 4 years of politics here, just thinking out loud. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

John McD hitting the nail on the head.  Again.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Nuclear weapons make me feel all warm and cuddly. The last thing I want to see is what would happen if they were used.

When the Wind Blows should be mandatory viewing at primary schools.

 

Kids have got to learn.

[Strontium]

I think the idea behind nuclear weapons is that you don't have to see the damage they cause, because you squashed the other buggers with them first, or at least stopped them from using them in the first place.

[Anubis]

Ever noticed when the BBC and other media outlets talk about trident they show the submarines or the missiles and test runs of those launching but never the cataclismic destruction they would cause. I wonder if it's to protect little Timmy from having an upset stomack when he watches the 6 o'clock news when eating his chicken nuggets.

It also never shows somebody ringing the Americans and asking if we can have the launch/targeting codes.

 

The reality is that if somone detonated a nuke, or several, on British soil, we aren't retaliating against anyone the US don't want us to.

[Jairzinho]

I think the idea behind nuclear weapons is that you don't have to see the damage they cause, because you squashed the other buggers with them first, or at least stopped them from using them in the first place.

 

So you would have to see the damage they cause then.

[RoboRiise]

When the Wind Blows should be mandatory viewing at primary schools.

 

Kids have got to learn.

 

Yeah and follow it up with a bit of this:

 

 

I was 13 when I watched that - the full thing used to be on youtube but I can't find it now.  Absolutely fucking terrifying.  It still amazes me some days that I grew up in a time when a nuclear war seemed entirely possible.

[Strontium]

It also never shows somebody ringing the Americans and asking if we can have the launch/targeting codes.

 

The reality is that if somone detonated a nuke, or several, on British soil, we aren't retaliating against anyone the US don't want us to.

 

 

I don't think that's the case at all. Anyone claiming one way or the other whether our nuclear weapons are operationally independent is essentially guessing, though given that they would be pointless if they weren't, I know which side of the fence I fall.

[Jairzinho]

But wouldn't the Tories just form a coalition with the Lib Dems again or UKIP? 

 

Not trying to map out the next 4 years of politics here, just thinking out loud. 

 

Maybe, maybe not.

 

Personally, I think Farron has got a bit more about him than Clegg. I couldn't see him working with the Tories.

 

UKIP might hold the key, because I think they could get anywhere between about 0-100 seats at the next election (I've probably exaggerated a little). All it would require is a coherent immigration policy from any of the parties and UKIP could become obsolete.

[Anubis]

I don't think that's the case at all. Anyone claiming one way or the other whether our nuclear weapons are operationally independent is essentially guessing, though given that they would be pointless if they weren't, I know which side of the fence I fall.

You really think the US are going to hand us a weapon of mass destruction we could, in theory, turn on them without any failsafes?

[Bobby Hundreds]

Nuclear weapons are a political tool. You don't get poked by other nation states when you have them. People are less eager to go to war. I do unfortunately see the sense in having them even though they are never to be used. I don't see the sense in trident which is essentially us paying a fortune to the US for something we couldn't use without their consent anyway.

 

I'd love for the entire planet too abandon nukes. Won't happen though.

[magicrat]

We've done plenty of printing money, but sadly we didn't use any of it to actually build infrastructure. The debt is increasing in no small part down to the few at the top not paying tax, and lots at the bottom earning so little that they don't. 6m people on poverty wages in the UK, plus the million or so that don't have a job at all, and obviously this has to be subsidised.

 

Cutting our way out of debt won't work, it's basically what we're attempting (pretending) to do now.

 

I don't want to see a "radical" party at all. I want to see a centre-left party rather than a centrist one. But for that to happen the narrative must be challenged, you don't appear to want to see even an attempt to do this.

 

Growth and inflation are the usual ways debt is reduced . With that off the agenda printing money remains, 

I think there is general consensus that money should not be given to banks to strengthen their balance sheets but pumped into the real economy . I think we agree on that principle. 

 

If the narrative you want is that new money created should be used to improve life chances of young people and help the poorest in society then we also agree, Where I think we disagree is testing the Labour party to destruction over Corbyns leadership. I think if that happens what could well emerge will not be a centre left party but one of the hard left ,