Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Bruce Spanner]

1 minute ago, Scooby Dudek said:

If only the left would stop going on about Corbyn, we could all unite and move on.

It’s a pretty big story though in truth.

 

If the funds come from personally signed off, but not fully approved, union funds it puts Len in a really uncomfortable position, which is looking likely.

 

Corbyn  is the side show here.

[Jairzinho]

2 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

It’s a pretty big story though in truth.

 

Only internally.

 

The wider public doesn't fucking care. 

[Bruce Spanner]

10 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

Only internally.

 

The wider public doesn't fucking care. 

Oh, I agree, but would mean the end of Big Len, that’s before the building irregularities hanging over him are fully brought out.

[Jairzinho]

1 minute ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Oh, I agree, but would mean the people be of Big Len, that’s before the building irregularities hanging over him.

Sound.

 

Sack him, chuck him in jail, chuck him in the sea, shoot him in the leg. Labour just needs to stop playing out this tedious fucking circus in public. 

 

Labour MPs spent an inordinate amount of time discussing themselves.

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Seems sketchy. I mean, the idea of politicians relieving money for legal costs from a union, from union members subs, is all a bit greasy anyway. What’s going on with his legal challenge that was going to have Starmer over a barrel? 

[Bruce Spanner]

6 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Seems sketchy. I mean, the idea of politicians relieving money for legal costs from a union, from union members subs, is all a bit greasy anyway. What’s going on with his legal challenge that was going to have Starmer over a barrel? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/01/alleged-leakers-of-labour-antisemitism-report-should-not-be-named-rules-judge

 

No dice.

 

If they were allowed to be named they could sue the individuals for leaking.

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/01/alleged-leakers-of-labour-antisemitism-report-should-not-be-named-rules-judge

 

No dice.

Maybe I’m losing track - there’s quite a few tracks at this point - but I think the one that was supposed to lay bare Starmer’s legal incompetence was the whip removal. 

[Bruce Spanner]

11 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Maybe I’m losing track - there’s quite a few tracks at this point - but I think the one that was supposed to lay bare Starmer’s legal incompetence was the whip removal. 

Oh, no, this was a different one from that where people were suing Labour for claims made against them made around their behaviour last election.

 

So, they were suing Labour now, under Starmer, for things that happened under Corbyn, leading to an odd situation where you had ‘right wing shills’ trying to sue Starmers Labour and making it incredibly difficult so that individuals names could be released so they could then sue them.

 

It was Unison against Unite when it came to funding.

 

Emilie Oldhow is Jonathon Ashworths wife to further muddy the waters. 
 

Classic clusterfuck.

[Numero Veinticinco]

9 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Oh, no, this was a different one from that where people were suing Labour for claims made against them made around their behaviour last election.

 

So, they were suing Labour now, under Starmer, for things that happened under Corbyn, leading to an odd situation where you had ‘right wing shills’ trying to sue Starmers Labour and making a incredibly difficult so that individuals names could be released so they could then due them.

 

It was Unison against Unite when it came to funding.

 

Emilie Oldhow is Jonathon Ashworths wife to further muddy the waters. 
 

Classic clusterfuck.

I wasn’t meaning the one connected with this funding stuff, mate. I probably should have put the comment in a new paragraph. I was legit wondering how all that ‘Starmer Has fucked himself by removing the whip’ stuff was going in addition to this stuff. Last I heard was back in January when the judge refused the documents requested. 
 

Edit: this one. I just wondered if anything further happened or if it was dropped. Some of (to quote Corbyn on his form) his ‘supporters’ on Twitter and on here were quite bullish about it. 
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyn-loses-first-round-of-his-court-battle-with-labour-chiefs/ar-BB1d9Ljx

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

What an absolute joke of a party Labour has become. Investigate Corbyn for not declaring support from a legal costs fund that was set up exclusively for a potential defamation case by John Ware, which hasn't been instigated, so no legal costs have been incurred by Corbyn yet and no "support" with these non-existent costs has been provided by the fund? 

 

And, Lisa Nandy wants Corbyn to apologise to the Jewish community. Again. How many times, Lisa? 

 

Us lefties (I'm not even a hard-core lefty, btw) need to move on from Corbyn though, remember. 

 

What a right laugh. The Labour centre/right seem more concerned with finishing off Corbyn than finishing off a Tory government. 

 

Glad I've nothing to do with the shit show anymore. Weapons. 

[Bruce Spanner]

7 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I wasn’t meaning the one connected with this funding stuff, mate. I probably should have put the comment in a new paragraph. I was legit wondering how all that ‘Starmer Has fucked himself by removing the whip’ stuff was going in addition to this stuff. Last I heard was back in January when the judge refused the documents requested. 
 

Edit: this one. I just wondered if anything further happened or if it was dropped. Some of (to quote Corbyn on his form) his ‘supporters’ on Twitter and on here were quite bullish about it. 
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyn-loses-first-round-of-his-court-battle-with-labour-chiefs/ar-BB1d9Ljx

 

No idea, sorry.
 

Both Nandy and Abbot have being speaking about it recently, so I assume it’s about to come to a head again...

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/reinstate-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-mp-plan-conference_uk_60acaf27e4b0a2568316f945/

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/lisa-nandy-jeremy-corbyn-shouldnt-be-a-labour-mp-until-he-apologises-to-jewish-c/

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

No idea, sorry.
 

Both Nandy and Abbot have being speaking about it recently, so I assume it’s about to come to a head again...

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/reinstate-jeremy-corbyn-as-labour-mp-plan-conference_uk_60acaf27e4b0a2568316f945/

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/lisa-nandy-jeremy-corbyn-shouldnt-be-a-labour-mp-until-he-apologises-to-jewish-c/

The stuff in the first link is something I don’t think has been spoken about on here. Seems like a dodgy idea aimed at little more than forcing the hand on the Corbyn issue rather than making solid policy decisions. 
 

Labour is so shit at the moment (and for a fucking long time). They’re the gift that keeps on giving. 

[Gnasher]

 

Translation;

 

Ignore all this bad stuff about the government darlings, can we pleeasse get back to blaming that ghastly socialist Jeremy Corbyn for everything. Now where's the butler with my fucking sherry?

[Jairzinho]

44 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Translation;

 

Ignore all this bad stuff about the government darlings, can we pleeasse get back to blaming that ghastly socialist Jeremy Corbyn for everything. Now where's the butler with my fucking sherry?

Translation - "I've been drinking port and calpol all morning, again"

[Gnasher]

The Labour hierarchy has spent more energy this past year trying to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn than it has trying to rid the country of Matt Hancock. When Hancock was under immense political pressure over nurses lack of PPE both shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth and  Labour leader Keir Starmer refused to ask for Hancocks resignation.

 

Labour sometimes makes itself difficult to support.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Both things can be true. The Corbyn years clearly damaged the electability of Labour, especially when it comes to Brexit. So much so that areas of the country that once would have never thought about voting Tory are now voting the embodiment of the Tories. No matter how much shit, how many dead, how useless, they voted Tory last time out and they’re onboard. It was clearly never going to be fixed overnight, but Labour at the moment is not only not fixing it, it’s worsening the issues. 

[Section_31]

7 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Both things can be true. The Corbyn years clearly damaged the electability of Labour, especially when it comes to Brexit. So much so that areas of the country that aren’t nice would have never thought about voting Tory are now voting the embodiment of the Tories. No matter how much shit, how many dead, how useless, they voted Tory last time out and they’re onboard. It was clearly never going to be fixed overnight, but Labour at the moment is not only not fixing it, it’s worsening the issues. 

I think the media and the general zeitgeist setting are a big part of it. 

 

If you had a media and TV industry that spent time and dollars talking about the royals being parasites, or about the shamelessness of the class system, of did shows about famous tax dodgers, and reiterated simple news lines like "snouts in the trough" over and over, we'd have a left wing revolution within two years.

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Section_31 said:

I think the media and the general zeitgeist setting are a big part of it. 

 

If you had a media and TV industry that spent time and dollars talking about the royals being parasites, or about the shamelessness of the class system, of did shows about famous tax dodgers, and reiterated simple news lines like "snouts in the trough" over and over, we'd have a left wing revolution within two years.

 

Yeah, totally agree. The media is an absolute disgrace and doesn’t effectively do its job of informing the public. 

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Both things can be true. The Corbyn years clearly damaged the electability of Labour, especially when it comes to Brexit. So much so that areas of the country that aren’t nice would have never thought about voting Tory are now voting the embodiment of the Tories. No matter how much shit, how many dead, how useless, they voted Tory last time out and they’re onboard. It was clearly never going to be fixed overnight, but Labour at the moment is not only not fixing it, it’s worsening the issues. 

Labour was in a no win situation regarding Brexit. Their strategy of sitting back and watching the Tories tear shreds off each other was imo the only plausible line to take and was working until the liberals forced the election. If Labour would have went full remain the red wall would have crumbled and if they went full out the Plp would have caused mayhem. 

 

On the subject of Hancock he was a goat asking to be kicked, unless Starmer thought it a better long term strategy to keep him there I fail to see why Labour didn't demand his resignation.

[Gnasher]

9 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

I think the media and the general zeitgeist setting are a big part of it. 

 

If you had a media and TV industry that spent time and dollars talking about the royals being parasites, or about the shamelessness of the class system, of did shows about famous tax dodgers, and reiterated simple news lines like "snouts in the trough" over and over, we'd have a left wing revolution within two years.

 

Sad but true. The way the BBC disguised Cummings mentioning Kuenssbergs name yesterday in real time was masterful. The video of which is on the BBC thread.

 

 

Here it is, they're good, 

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by Gnasher

[Numero Veinticinco]

2 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Labour was in a no win situation regarding Brexit. Their strategy of sitting back and watching the Tories tear shreds off each other was imo the only plausible line to take and was working until the liberals forced the election. If Labour would have went full remain the red wall would have crumbled and if they went full out the Plp would have caused mayhem. 

 

On the subject of Hancock he was a goat asking to be kicked, unless Starmer thought it a better long term strategy to keep him there I fail to see why Labour didn't demand his resignation.

It would have been seen to be opportunistic. Simple as that really. Losing an election in the way they did has made Labour utterly impotent in parliament, so not making mistakes is the current name of the game. Calling for the resignation of Hancock would have looked like they were taking advantage of a national crisis. 

[Section_31]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

Sad but true. The way the BBC disguised Cummings mentioning Kuenssbergs name yesterday in real time was masterful. The video of which is on the BBC thread.

 

There is a science to it. Britain still rates number one in the world for 'soft power' in terms of the influence of its culture and media.

 

Most if not all of that culture and media is middle and upper class with a very rigid view of British society, what is right and proper. Clsss stratification is a huge part of it, as is taking your lumps and accepting your lot. Certain things aren't for you, there's nothing you can do about it - no use worrying, time to move on.

 

I noticed they were starting to do it a bit with the Scottish referendum stuff. If that's shot down from London it won't be done with aggressive tactics, it'll be done with three word slogans and one sided coverage.

[Gnasher]

3 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

It would have been seen to be opportunistic. Simple as that really. Losing an election in the way they did has made Labour utterly impotent in parliament, so not making mistakes is the current name of the game. Calling for the resignation of Hancock would have looked like they were taking advantage of a national crisis. 

Yeah I think that was it.

[Kepler-186]

20 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

 

There is a science to it. Britain still rates number one in the world for 'soft power' in terms of the influence of its culture and media.

 

Most if not all of that culture and media is middle and upper class with a very rigid view of British society, what is right and proper. Clsss stratification is a huge part of it, as is taking your lumps and accepting your lot. Certain things aren't for you, there's nothing you can do about it - no use worrying, time to move on.

 

I noticed they were starting to do it a bit with the Scottish referendum stuff. If that's shot down from London it won't be done with aggressive tactics, it'll be done with three word slogans and one sided coverage.

Yeah and the mancs get BBC Salford, Manctopia, Cold bloody feet about angst ridden lawyers in Didsbury and we get Liverpool Narcos. The game is rigged, yo.  

[Gnasher]

21 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

 

There is a science to it. Britain still rates number one in the world for 'soft power' in terms of the influence of its culture and media.

 

Most if not all of that culture and media is middle and upper class with a very rigid view of British society, what is right and proper. Clsss stratification is a huge part of it, as is taking your lumps and accepting your lot. Certain things aren't for you, there's nothing you can do about it - no use worrying, time to move on.

 

I noticed they were starting to do it a bit with the Scottish referendum stuff. If that's shot down from London it won't be done with aggressive tactics, it'll be done with three word slogans and one sided coverage.

Yeah like the latest one,  'be, back, better; or was it ', back, better, build?  or it might have been  'grow  better back'  or 'better back grow' or "build back better'

 

Senseless, not even fucking coherent, load of shit. I think the Conservatives have got me writing their slogans now,  I'd go for 'build better backs" at least mine actually makes some kind of sense.