Boss

I've had enough of swimming against the tide on here anyway.

Non of those things are lies.

Corbyn might be a good man, but what he represents - nationalisations of various industries at the taxpayers expense, doling out money to people on benefits, going after equity stakes in private businesses, championing the IRA in NI over the Unionists, increasing taxes across the board, preaching the virtues of Venezuelan socialist policies, vilifying our strategic allies like America, his pacifism sending the message to other countries that they can push the envelope with us militarily. Yeah, i'm not surprised he gets the press he gets.

The reason is simple, because they are ideologically opposed to him, his policies, and what he represents. It's no different with the way you're ideologically opposed to certain Tories. You probably don't mind Ken Clarke now because you're a Remainer and you're both on the same side, but I bet when he was voting through the bedroom tax, or the benefit cuts of the coalition government, I presume you weren't so much in favour of him then.

True. Rohm was a National Socialist. He took the workers side in trade disputes and supported pickets. He wanted a second revolution based on the redistribution of wealth. That was the original plan. The SA was filled with socialist worker types. Rohm wanted to take over the German army which had 100,000 soldiers. I think the SA had something like 2,000,000 members. Hitler liked Rohm, and he was one of the only people who could call him Adolf, but he was too revolutionary. He was hated by the German Army. Hitler did pardon him initially but ended up killing him. It was a National Socialist movement up until 1934 though.

He had socialists locked up and killed because he hated Marxism, but a lot of the entrants into Nazism in the 20's and early 30's were formerly radical leftists. The name National Socialist Workers Party was not ironic. They did see themselves as Nationalist Socialists.

Should've bought Depay in the summer. He would've been perfect backup to Mane and Bobby.

A lot of socialists place their principles on a pedestal above their ability to create real tangible change. They'd rather lose with their principles intact, than win by compromising those principles. I'm not saying a Labour leader shouldn't have principles. I'm saying, at what point do you prioritise winning over your principles?

How are you going to change the direction of the country if you can't win an election? No good having principles if you can't get into a position to implement them.

African Robben that lad.

If Corbyn loses the next election what's the consensus from his supporters? Should he still be backed or should someone else take over?

Tidy body on Jade there.

It was from a speech that Hitler gave pre-war.

He has the power of oratory. He has the legacy of his father. He's not as left wing as Corbyn, granted, but that's not a bad thing. The media won't attack him as vociferously.

Your best bet is Hilary Benn.