Not happy with the decision?

[The Red Baron]

I don't particularly have a dog in this fight, but having listened to both recently I struggle to see either Owen Smith or Angela Eagle as an upgrade on Corbyn.

[Copps is Magic]

Well Eagle has just dropped out. I don't like personality politics but that is definitely the correct decision. Genuinely interested what alternative vision Owen Jones now puts forward.

[BobG]

Well, I've just paid my 25 quid. I shall be voting - though I really don't think it's going to make a blind bit of difference. Politics has to be about DOING something. Doing something, or at least having a prospect of doing something. It's not about posturing and having no propsect whatever of achieving anything, ever. It's not about sitting there all righteous saying 'We've been let down by the oiks out there' - which is what happened in the 1980's and will happen again soon after the next general election.

Corbyn said today that he wouldn't press the nuclear trigger. Bravo. But tactically inept even if you agree with him. Now everybody on the planet knows they can safely disregard him, and us, if push ever comes to shove. f**king idiot. Just wait til the press start in on him. You'll be able to tell when the next election is coming before anybody makes any announcements. Just watch the press. Once the attacks start in earnest, then you'll know.

BobG

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bob. Nail. Head.

The biggest issue with the Corbyn/McDonnell axis is the baggage that the right wing press will use against them if Labour looks remotely close to power.

Corbyn has on his record calling Hamas and Hezbollah "friends". 

McDonnell said publicly that he wished he could go back to the 80s to assassinate Thatcher. When Labour colleagues on the GLC refused to attend a meeting with Sinn Fein shortly after the Brighton bombing he called them "gutless wimps" and said "kneecapping might change their mind."

Their long-time political ally and fellow gobshite Livingston said that the 7/7 bombers "gave their lives".

And YES there is context. And YES, (I hope) some of those were jokes. But it won't matter. If Labour are close to power, it'll be "Do you want the terrorists' friend in power". If Labour are not close to power, it'll be "How can this party ever be electable again when it is led by terrorists' friends."

THAT is what the leadership issue is all about. It's about appearing like someone who could be trusted to run the country. Not someone who either does a shit line in really tasteless jokes, or occasionally lets their guard down to reveal beliefs that 90% of the country would revile.

There's an issue that I keep saying, and Copps seems to think I'm "reactionary" for it (we're going through the whole gamut of 1980's abuse here - I'm enjoying the reminiscing. Wonder when "ideologically unsound" will come up. That was always a good discussion closer...)

The issue is that it doesn't matter how many left-of-Labour people you convince to follow you, if you are hated by all those to the right of Labour. And there is no way on earth that those two, with that baggage will ever convince the electorate that the country would be safe in their hands. Whether that is a fair judgement or not is irrelevant. It's a fact and it is so because they have given their opponents too many hostages to fortune to be used whenever is suitable.

[i_ateallthepies]

And despite laying it out in irrefutably clear factual logic BST, they will still come back on here refusing to acknowledge the truth of what you've said.

[BobG]

I'm stunned by just how dim these people must be. I'm an idealist. I'm a Utopian. I'd love to live a life where everybody has equality of opportunity, where there's no greed, no corruption, no tax havens. But it's pie in the sky. Even if there were a total and utter revolution and the whole world began again, we would quickly develop widespread examples of those self same things. The haves and the have nots are here to stay whatever anybody says about it. It's human nature. The job of the Labour Party is to do its level best to minimise the differences between those two sides of the human coin. Apart from the odd mad interlude like this now, it's done a pretty fair job. What's fascinating though is just how utterly ineffective the Labour Party has been whenever it's lurched to the left. These fools don't even know their own history. They obviously don't know how the Labour Party actually gets to make things happen. That alone makes Corbyn unfit to be leader never mind everything else.

Here's a question: every single Labour government there's ever been - were they left of centre, centre or right of centre? And if there are left of centre ones in your list how did they fare?

Any Leader of the Labour Party who can't or won't see the implications of these two key components of Party history is not competant to be its leader. And even worse, any leader who can't or won't see that logic is condemning the entire sodding country to a generation of Tory rule. As a politician the bloke is a total and utter joke. He is as full of dogma as ever was Thatcher, Tebbitt and the rest of that gang. And Ed Milliband gets a special mention too as the lunatic who created the circumstance under which juveniles like Corbyn could be elected.

Bob

PS What is it with these left wing leaders? Is there some self righteous disease peculiar to them or soemthing? Just cast your mind back to Arthur Scargill. What idiot would ever think of announcing you're going to have a strike months in advance of actually doing so, then failing to hold a vote of your members and so splitting the organisation in two and then, to top it all, starting the bloody strike at the beginning of SUMMER!

I remember going past Didcot power station on the train on a daily basis, in the months before the strike began, watching the stockpiles of coal growing and growing and growing.... I sometimes wonder if these completely ineffective charlatans of the left are blinded by their own self righteousness?

[Copps is Magic]

Didn't Corbyn suspend Livingstone and order an investigation?

Take it the links I posted weren't read.

[Copps is Magic]

It must be a great luxury and peculiar point in life to have concluded that those who don't share your opinion are dim even before you have made your point. I hope I never reach that point because I have genuine wonder about the world and the people in it.

Kind of begs the question - what is really the point of taking this 'discussion' forward?

[BobG]

No. Post hoc ergo propter hoc mate.

BobG

[Copps is Magic]

Sorry Bob, I only went to a state comprehensive and did 1 year of Spanish and 3 years of French. Generally I communicate in English when I know both individuals speak that language.

See, I think the difference between me and thee is I see that £25 you've spent as you exercising one of your democratic rights. That is great, should be encouraged, and I would be open to your views if they didn't so frequently start with an insult. However, deep down, in your heart of hearts, and in your's and BST's closed views on the subject, you must know that those spending £25 to vote in the opposite direction have not quite been treated in the same manner.

As you were saying, inequality will always exist and is it any wonder why.

[The Red Baron]

Well Eagle has just dropped out. I don't like personality politics but that is definitely the correct decision. Genuinely interested what alternative vision Owen Jones now puts forward.

Owen Jones? Bit of a Freudian slip there!

[RobTheRover]

I agree with you, Copps.  I think Corbyn has something quite intangible; an honesty that has been bereft of mainstream politicians for some time.  What he is inspiring isn't "politics" as we've come to know it over the past 20 or 30 years.  Its a movement for change.  It is bringing together those sick of the phoney war that happens at PMQs, sick of the defenceless being victimised by the state, sick of an austerity that is a political choice rather than a financial necessity.  This is why the Labour Party has seen hundreds of thousands of members join in the past 6 months.  People are seeing sense in what Corbyn says (when the right wing media allow it to be heard).  The establishment is scared.  The PLP fears its gravy train will be derailed.  Corbyn might not be the man to take this to its logical conclusion but he certainly is the man who is getting the ball rolling.

[The Red Baron]

There's a bigger problem for Labour anyway. Now that UKIP have got the Brexit vote and Farage has stepped down they are choosing a new leader. It is probably going to be Paul Nuttall or Steven Woolfe, both of whom are northerners and will target white working class voters in Labour's old heartlands. Labour simply HAS to offer something better to those voters than it is currently doing.

[Copps is Magic]

Well Eagle has just dropped out. I don't like personality politics but that is definitely the correct decision. Genuinely interested what alternative vision Owen Jones now puts forward.

Owen Jones? Bit of a Freudian slip there!

haha, good spot! For the record, I do occasionally read what Owen Jones has to say but I also find him a bit irritable at times.

[BobG]

Corbyn IS honest Rob. Very honest. And given the human condition it's a major, major weakness mp m,ayyer now much we all want the world to be like that. The world isn't. He doesn't fit.

And Copps: I appreciate you only had a lower class sort of education, but surely even you can work out how to use google? If you don't understand the sort of stuff that educated people do, it's easy enough to work it out.

See? Two can play at the insulting game.

Cheers

Bob

[albie]

There is a very basic confusion in play here, fellas.

The numbers game has changed, and so must the calculations about the possible and the probable. The past is no longer an anchor point.
 
Is the goal for Labour to become the next government outright, or is it to prevent another Tory success?

In an ideal world, Labour would be looking to secure an overall UK majority, and return to power as the largest party in 2020.

To do so they need to revive traditional support in Scotland, arrest the progress of UKIP in the north, and capture Con/Lab marginals in the SE.  A revival of Lib Dem support in the SW is essential where they are the second party.

The figures suggest that this is beyond reach, unless the Tories implode (over Brexit terms?) before 2020. Under the likely boundary changes, the Conservatives will be able to retain their majority with around 36 per cent of the vote. Labour Party documents say that they would need a 9.5% UK swing (including in Scotland) for a UK majority.

Labour will need to gain 53 seats to be able to govern in some sort of partnership with the SNP (and this would exclude any seats won from the Nationalists themselves).

A much more accessible target is to defeat any Tory majority, working in strategic partnership with SNP, Plaid and Lib Dems where appropriate. This means agreeing certain policy compromises in advance, and not standing candidates against the most likely opponent to the Tories.

Assuming Scotland to be out of range for a Labour recovery, if the Lib Dems and Labour were each able to make gains in England, in seats where they face the Conservatives, and achieved a swing of around 6.5 points this would be sufficient for them to achieve a combined majority in England (Labour would gain around 55 seats; and the Lib Dems 16).

This suggests that it is strongly in Labour’s interests for the Lib Dems to stage a recovery in those parts of England where Labour is not competitive, such as the South West.

It also means that the political landscape under the current system involves the probability of Conservative government for the future, until the opposition parties can agree to work together to secure electoral change.

[Sammy Chung was King]

Labour haven't the time to regain the votes lost, in the time that is left. Without a real leader suddenly emerging from the mist, they face years of being out of government, and having ukip and even the liberals chipping away more of they're support.
The tories are at they're weakest for some time, but it's like a football side getting a bye into the next round, they lead without any opposition of note, very sad.

[The Red Baron]

Albie

I see your thinking, but I don't see any evidence that Labour is pursuing such a strategy.

They might be giving the Lib Dems a bit of a leg up, but only by haemorrhaging support to them from their own centre-right.

[albie]

TRB

That is my point, Labour is still addressing the old political dynamic of a binary choice. It is simply no longer relevant.

Whatever policy set Labour adopts, there is a potential loss of support at the margin, either to Lib Dem on the centre right, or to UKIP in the north. Many UKIP supporters are actually Labour based, excluding the misleading immigration question.

The greater gains for Labour may be in drawing back into the political debate those who have chosen not to vote, an increasing proportion of the eligible electorate.

Discussions about the leadership of Labour are a distraction IMO. The important point is the definition of an attainable goal and the measures taken to achieve it. People are deliberately avoiding talking about the elephant in the room.

[wesisback]

Corbyn IS honest Rob. Very honest. And given the human condition it's a major, major weakness mp m,ayyer now much we all want the world to be like that. The world isn't. He doesn't fit.

And Copps: I appreciate you only had a lower class sort of education, but surely even you can work out how to use google? If you don't understand the sort of stuff that educated people do, it's easy enough to work it out.

See? Two can play at the insulting game.

Cheers

Bob

You are aware that it's attitudes like that displayed by yourselves and the contemptible behaviour of  the bulk of the PLP that has created this situation in the first place. They say that you're more left wing in your teenage years yet I've never felt further left than I do now, nor have I held more anger for the majority of our Labour MPs. I normally wouldn't have paid the 'let's exclude the poor from voting and ensure they stay in their place' tax on principle but it feels bloody brilliant to know I've nullified yours.

[RedJ]

Labour haven't the time to regain the votes lost, in the time that is left.

What, in four years?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wesley mate.

I once knew someone, lets call him "W", who idolised the person in charge of his organisation.

Now, as it happens, a lot of people who had been around the block a few more times than W were wondering whether the bloke in charge was all he was cracked up to be. He did a great job of thumping the tub and getting some people to view him as a God. But there were concerns when you looked beyond the hero-worship and into the detail.

But W didn't worry too much about that. He knew his man was the real deal and he wasn't listening to any counter arguments. In fact,he was certain that people who disagreed with him had hidden agendas. He railed against them in a regular basis. He didn't bother to stop and listen to their reasoning. Why would you listen to a Judas?


I wonder how THAT story ended?

And I'm thinking the old quote is wrong. Second time round is FAR more serious.  History is repeating itself, first as farce and then as tragedy.

[wesisback]

The problem with that is that they absolutely do have hidden agendas. You can smell the desperation of the PLP as they desperately try and cling onto their jobs. Angela being told to step aside so there's a sole candidate and yet because of the surge for Corbyn for the last leadership, as long as they stump up their 'common man revulsion' tax he should still wipe the floor.
The majority of councils back Corbyn, including all three Doncaster wards, the Unions back Corbyn, the membership back Corbyn.
The people commenting against Corbyn on here has probably cemented by views on why it's the right thing not the opposite. Though I note it's liked by the biggest champagne socialist on here though.

[Sad-Rovers]

I agree with you, Copps.  I think Corbyn has something quite intangible; an honesty that has been bereft of mainstream politicians for some time.  What he is inspiring isn't "politics" as we've come to know it over the past 20 or 30 years.  Its a movement for change.  It is bringing together those sick of the phoney war that happens at PMQs, sick of the defenceless being victimised by the state, sick of an austerity that is a political choice rather than a financial necessity.  This is why the Labour Party has seen hundreds of thousands of members join in the past 6 months.  People are seeing sense in what Corbyn says (when the right wing media allow it to be heard).  The establishment is scared.  The PLP fears its gravy train will be derailed.  Corbyn might not be the man to take this to its logical conclusion but he certainly is the man who is getting the ball rolling.

BobG thinks you're dim.

[Copps is Magic]

It is bringing together those sick of the phoney war that happens at PMQs,

Further example of that today. Corbyn asked questions about Orgreave, child poverty and the Tories economic plan. He got roundly ignored on some questions and got ridiculed back on others. The press who follow this, both mainstream and on twitter, have declared May a round success without her even offering anything remotely of substance. I think a growing number now see through this.

[Copps is Magic]

And Here's the elephant in the room raising its head again

The right launch an electability crusade and then refuse to put forward their most talented candidates. But the greatest irony is a much bigger one - bereft of ideas, Labour’s centrists just aren’t electable at all.

I haven't received a suitable answer to this yet, I raised it a few weeks ago.

[Iberian Red]

You clearly don't understand the numbers.

Places like Bristol have a much larger percentage of foreign born nationals than places like Doncaster. In fact, Doncaster has a much lower percentage of foreign born nationals compared to the national average. The pattern will be broadly similar for all cases; Larger cities have much higher percentage of foreign born nationals in comparison to smaller towns.

I could have put  'Outraged of Altrincham' or 'Outraged of Reading' just as much.

The point remains.

Would it be impolite to ask you not to send anymore unsolicited PMS?
I really have no f**king interest in that.

[Copps is Magic]

Seems I've got a few minutes I'll point out the ironies of the two things I posted above.

If a Corbyn supporter abuses someone within labour movement (half of which are fantasies concocted and exaggerated by the media) they are labelled a violent, loony-left, Johnny come lately, sixth-form politics, cosmopolitan, university town, prick. If the prime minister of the country does the same they are labelled a hero and a great leader.

The irony of the second point is that those who oppose Corbyn oppose him on the basis he is un-electable when the forces they 'support' in opposition are even more unelectable! And that leaves anti-Corbyn protesters as exactly that, anti-Corbyn. The grand intellectual bearers of history want to let us know that Corbyn is doomed for failure and in his place create an even bigger failure to prove they were right.

[Sad-Rovers]

unsolicited PMS?

My lass gets that every month.

[Iberian Red]

unsolicited PMS?

My lass gets that every month.

Thanks for the tips on trolling!
I've taken them on board.