Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[sir roger]

I think his 'problem' is that he actually thinks about what he is saying and this is construed as 'dithering' in a world where endlessly parroting banal cliches is the accepted modus operandi.

 

i do think it might be getting the point where he may get fed up with all the bollocks ( I believe he was originally planning to retire after the next election  before he became leader ) & if he can get the NEC to back a reduction in the votes needed for a leadership election he may start looking to mentor a successor from the left.

[Anubis]

Absolutely. Labour should make it standard practice when they make a major policy announcement that they want to lead the news, they won't answer any unrelated questions at the press conference, or maybe even none at all but grant one to one interviews to a few journalists afterwards. Then they can have a weekly or fortnightly open presser where journos can ask them anything they want. At the moment they keep allowing their message to be overshadowed through avoidable mistakes.

The last time (a couple of months ago) he gave a speech and refused to answer an off-topic question, the news focussed on his unwillingness to answer and overshadowed the message. He was criticised in here for ducking the question.

 

Even if Labour did what you suggest the off-topic questions would still be asked, and we'd be back to the above.

 

Damned if he doesn't, damned if he does. It doesn't help the McNicol and Watson are deliberately withholding Labour HQ resources from the Leader's office. If they were all on the same page there would be more people 'lunching' the press to get them onside.

[Neil G]

The last time (a couple of months ago) he gave a speech and refused to answer an off-topic question, the news focussed on his unwillingness to answer and overshadowed the message. He was criticised in here for ducking the question.

Even if Labour did what you suggest the off-topic questions would still be asked, and we'd be back to the above.

Damned if he doesn't, damned if he does. It doesn't help the McNicol and Watson are deliberately withholding Labour HQ resources from the Leader's office. If they were all on the same page there would be more people 'lunching' the press to get them onside.

Then don't allow questions at all in that case. Don't give them any chance to overshadow the message, but give regular interviews and hold open press conferences where they can ask what they want.

 

Do you really think any amount of personal networking could persuade the press to be more sympathetic while Corbyn is leader? I'm sceptical.

[magicrat]

The last time (a couple of months ago) he gave a speech and refused to answer an off-topic question, the news focussed on his unwillingness to answer and overshadowed the message. He was criticised in here for ducking the question.

 

Even if Labour did what you suggest the off-topic questions would still be asked, and we'd be back to the above.

 

Damned if he doesn't, damned if he does. It doesn't help the McNicol and Watson are deliberately withholding Labour HQ resources from the Leader's office. If they were all on the same page there would be more people 'lunching' the press to get them onside.

 

He's damned because its open season on Corbyn . The hacks have sussed he doesn't bite back or play their game so its like shooting fish in a barrel, Problem is he doesn't address the agenda most people are preoccupied with; namely immigration and calamitous fall out if we leave the single market,  yes I care about trains but footballers earning big bucks is something to rant about in the pub after the overpaid cunts have let you down yet again. May should be an easy target right now, Zero plans for Brexit, splits in the Tory Party and a a handful of complete loons deciding the future of the country cheered on by utter scumbags like Farage, IDS, Rees-Mogg and Leadsom, All dancing to Murdochs  tune. Normal politics is largely suspended for the moment and we need a leader that will take the fight to the Government over Brexit, That ain't Corbyn  

[Anubis]

Then don't allow questions at all in that case. Don't give them any chance to overshadow the message, but give regular interviews and hold open press conferences where they can ask what they want.

 

Do you really think any amount of personal networking could persuade the press to be more sympathetic while Corbyn is leader? I'm sceptical.

I think it's easier for the press to get stuck into him knowing half his party will encourage it and brief against him. I think there would be a change in attitude towards a united party.

[Neil G]

I think it's easier for the press to get stuck into him knowing half his party will encourage it and brief against him. I think there would be a change in attitude towards a united party.

Not to excuse Labour MPs and officials who are stirring the pot, but I honestly don't think it would make much difference. The right wing press would still throw everything they've got at him regardless, just like they did with Miliband who had a mostly united party behind him. The Beeb and the Graun would continue to make mischief because it generates headlines and hits, which is their main priority.

 

Clearer, more forceful and more disciplined messaging from Corbyn's team is the best way to tackle the problem.

[Strontium]

Did very well at PM'Q's today, although you are best trying to find it online as don't expect the Beeb to report it later...

 

It's on the front page of BBC News.

[VladimirIlyich]

Of course no one starves to death under communism.

To be fair,maybe if these Communist states were allowed to stew in their own juices without outside influences then we could make a real decision on the merits of Communism. The fact that democratically elected Socialist governments don't even get that chance shows you what horrible bastards make this world so disfunctional.

[Rico1304]

To be fair,maybe if these Communist states were allowed to stew in their own juices without outside influences then we could make a real decision on the merits of Communism. The fact that democratically elected Socialist governments don't even get that chance shows you what horrible bastards make this world so disfunctional.

I was thinking more about Stalin starving people to death.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Oh, it's really quite simple. When I wrote:

 

"the teachers spent most of their time trying to bring the thickos up to speed and neglected the rest of us"

 

you clearly thought that when I wrote "rest of us", I meant "just me" rather than, er, the rest of the class.

 

And that, even after I explained that the aforementioned "thickos" comprised 20% of the class, meaning that, by simple deduction, "rest of us" incorporated 80% of the class (that is to say, 24 pupils out of 30), you compounded your error by insisting that I was still calling everyone else I went to school with a thicko.

 

Now admittedly I haven't studied mathematics since I was 14 years of age, but I feel I am on safe ground in pointing out that you are wrong by a factor of 24.

 

As to the rest of your post, you don't know the first thing about the children I went to school with. Most of them were sound, but some of them were genuinely menacing, and well on the fast track to prison.

 

Hell, my best friend in senior school when I was 12 ended up behind bars, and he's a gifted fellow who went to grammar school. Is it really such a leap of logic for you to suppose that maybe, just maybe, not everyone in schools in some of the poorest postcodes in the country in the 1980s turned out to be squeaky clean?

 

I remember one lad - "Jaffa" - being arrested right outside my house. And he can't have been any older than 13 or 14 at the time.

Excellent backtracking, Boy Wonder.

 

You do realise, don't you,that the bullshit you wrote is still there for everyone to see?

[VladimirIlyich]

I was thinking more about Stalin starving people to death.

That wasnt Communism,it was a dictatorship. The horseshoe theory at its finest.

[Rico1304]

That wasnt Communism,it was a dictatorship. The horseshoe theory at its finest.

Oh right, when did The communism start?

[Strontium]

Excellent backtracking, Boy Wonder.

 

You do realise, don't you,that the bullshit you wrote is still there for everyone to see?

Hahaha. Truly we are in post-truth times.

 

There isn't a shred of backtracking, and I just quoted everything I wrote, because it amply supports my interpretation, not your bizarre twisting.

[setreal]

Oh right, when did The communism start?

 

Never.

[Strontium]

Never.

If there's never been a "proper" far left regime, why do the far left invest so much time and energy in defending Cuba, Venezuela etc?

[setreal]

If there's never been a "proper" far left regime, why do the far left invest so much time and energy in defending Cuba, Venezuela etc?

 

Because not all of the left do that. For many these are dictatorships with some socialist ideas implemented.

[Stickman]

It's on the front page of BBC News.[/quoted]

 

Actually it's not it's about The Southern Rail strike that's going to the Supreme Court and that Corbyn also backs the striking train drivers....

Oh and Rolf Harris gropes women in public.....unfortunately for Kussenberg Jeremy has an alibi for that.

[Strontium]

Actually it's not it's about The Southern Rail strike that's going to the Supreme Court and that Corbyn also backs the striking train drivers....

Oh and Rolf Harris gropes women in public.....unfortunately for Kussenberg Jeremy has an alibi for that.

 

When I posted that message, there was a story about Corbyn challenging May over the NHS at PMQs on the front page of BBC News website.

 

I almost screenshotted it because I thought the Corbyn conspiracy bunch wouldn't believe it, but I stopped myself as I thought that would be silly. Ha.

[VladimirIlyich]

Oh right, when did The communism start?

In the classrooms,dormitories and lecture theatres,where it has mainly stayed. 

[Mook]

When I posted that message, there was a story about Corbyn challenging May over the NHS at PMQs on the front page of BBC News website.

 

I almost screenshotted it because I thought the Corbyn conspiracy bunch wouldn't believe it, but I stopped myself as I thought that would be silly. Ha.

In you defence, I saw it too and to be honest was quite surprised by it.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Hahaha. Truly we are in post-truth times.

 

There isn't a shred of backtracking, and I just quoted everything I wrote, because it amply supports my interpretation, not your bizarre twisting.

No. You added some nonsense about how it was only a minority of children (children, remember) you were dehumanising and dismissing as feral thickos.

 

I genuinely hope the reason you still have it in for these kids is that you were bullied. You deserve to have been bullied.

[Rico1304]

No. You added some nonsense about how it was only a minority of children (children, remember) you were dehumanising and dismissing as feral thickos.

 

I genuinely hope the reason you still have it in for these kids is that you were bullied. You deserve to have been bullied.

Are you saying there weren't any kids at your primary school who you knew were complete cunts and or thick as fuck?

[VladimirIlyich]

Are you saying there weren't any kids at your primary school who you knew were complete cunts and or thick as fuck?

As an adult now,I'd like to think we can put into context some of the behaviour that we and others performed. I'm pretty sure a few of these 'thicko' kids did ok for themselves in later life,not all but some. Just writing kids off as thickos is stupid given what you come to understand in later years as an adult.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Are you saying there weren't any kids at your primary school who you knew were complete cunts and or thick as fuck?

At primary school?

 

Obviously, there were some I didn't take to. But that's not the same as writing them off as irredeemably inferior beings. And whatever opinions I'd formed before the age of 10, I don't necessarily hold on to them as an adult. I grew up.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

No. You added some nonsense about how it was only a minority of children (children, remember) you were dehumanising and dismissing as feral thickos.

 

I genuinely hope the reason you still have it in for these kids is that you were bullied. You deserve to have been bullied.

I've thought this through.

 

"Deserve" is a bit much and I don't really mean it. Nobody deserves to be bullied.

 

If you had been bullied, your attitudes towards children would be understandable; not justifiable, but understandable.

 

If you weren't bullied, then you're just a cunt.