Current Affairs 2017 General Election

[JonS]

Corbyn doesn't threaten anyone though. I'd be delighted if he did, as it'd mean he was doing his job.

The media just report on his actual incompetence. He's a leader who doesn't know how to lead - that's the definition of incompetence.

Your definition of incompetence , not mine. Just because he isn't alpha male, yah boo sucks at question time etc doesn't make him incompetent to me.

To me true leadership comes from integrity and character and a strong moral compass and he has that more than all the other party leaders and any alternative labour leader candidates that I can think of.

I accept that you and most of the public don't see it my way though

 

[Sarnia Kevin]

It seems to me that the media bend over backwards to give Labour leaders a chance to put their point of view forward, and they immediately put their foot in their mouths. The Tories also put their foot in their mouths , but everyone expects that lol

 

[Sarnia Kevin]

Your definition of incompetence , not mine. Just because he isn't alpha male, yah boo sucks at question time etc doesn't make him incompetent to me.

To me true leadership comes from integrity and character and a strong moral compass and he has that more than all the other party leaders and any alternative labour leader candidates that I can think of.

I accept that you and most of the public don't see it my way though

I would dispute that anyone who has supported terrorists like the IRA and Hamas could be described as having a strong moral compass, but if that's what floats your boat...............................................

 

[Tubey]

Your definition of incompetence , not mine. Just because he isn't alpha male, yah boo sucks at question time etc doesn't make him incompetent to me.

To me true leadership comes from integrity and character and a strong moral compass and he has that more than all the other party leaders and any alternative labour leader candidates that I can think of.

I accept that you and most of the public don't see it my way though

No, not my definition of incompetence - the actual definition of it; as in the inability to do something successfully, which in this case is to lead his party. He has proven to be objectively unable to do that - they hate him, have rebelled constantly and put motions of no confidence in him. He is an objectively incompetent leader.

 

[JonS]

Well I voted for Brexit but here's one for all you remain voters lol

 

[JonS]

I would dispute that anyone who has supported terrorists like the IRA and Hamas could be described as having a strong moral compass, but if that's what floats your boat...............................................

Yes it is mate. I do believe he has a strong moral compass

 

[tsubaki]

No, not my definition of incompetence - the actual definition of it; as in the inability to do something successfully, which in this case is to lead his party. He has proven to be objectively unable to do that - they hate him, have rebelled constantly and put motions of no confidence in him. He is an objectively incompetent leader.

No, they just refuse to follow him. They have signaled they would do that since before he became leader, so it says nothing about his competence in that role.

 

[Milkman]

Given what's on offer, @Tubey, would you prefer a Tory government?

 

[Tubey]

Given what's on offer, @Tubey, would you prefer a Tory government?

Unfortunately, yes.

 

[Tubey]

No, they just refuse to follow him. They have signaled they would do that since before he became leader, so it says nothing about his competence in that role.

Which means he has failed to lead them, yes? He is therefore not competent at leading his party. Thus, he is incompetent.

 

[tsubaki]

Which means he has failed to lead them, yes? He is therefore not competent at leading his party. Thus, he is incompetent.

No, he isn't capable of leading his Parliamentary party, because they (or at least enough of them) refuse to be led by him and have done so before he became leader. Therefore the correct word would be incapable, not incompetent - questions over competency relate to abilities to do a thing, and not whether a thing can be done that is impossible. As an example you wouldn't call someone incompetent because they can't breathe unaided whilst underwater, they are incapable of doing it.

 

[Tubey]

No, he isn't capable of leading his Parliamentary party, because they (or at least enough of them) refuse to be led by him and have done so before he became leader. Therefore the correct word would be incapable, not incompetent - questions over competency relate to abilities to do a thing, and not whether a thing can be done that is impossible. As an example you wouldn't call someone incompetent because they can't breathe unaided whilst underwater, they are incapable of doing it.

But nobody is capable of breathing underwater. That analogy doesn't work.

Corbyn is incompetent, not incapable, because there isn't anything forcing him to not have the capability to lead. He has chose his approach.

 

[tsubaki]

But nobody is capable of breathing underwater. That analogy doesn't work.

Corbyn is incompetent, not incapable, because there isn't anything forcing him to not have the capability to lead. He has chose his approach.

He has chosen to have most of the PLP in revolt against his leadership? Since before he became leader?

For him to be incompetent there would have to be some reasonable likelyhood of him leading and them following; it is abundantly clear that there isn't (and never was) and so to call him an incompetent is misleading at best.

Of course if we are talking about the people who lost to Corbyn, then the word might be more correctly applied.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Interesting to read the comments on this page (96) regarding Corbyn.

I believe the PLP wanted someone as a leader who would be 'safe', in that there would be no threat to them actually having to follow Labour principles, thereby resulting in their fear of losing their seats at a General Election. What the PLP, not the ordinary Labour voters (and there IS a difference), has done is go a long way towards reducing the Party to a shambles. I believe the general public look at the actions of Labour MPs and consider them next to useless. In my opinion, by their actions, THEY have caused the present scenario, and in a perverse way, may find that they are 'hung by their own petard' come the 9th of June...

 

[Kendall's Dream]

Interesting to read the comments on this page (96) regarding Corbyn.

I believe the PLP wanted someone as a leader who would be 'safe', in that there would be no threat to them actually having to follow Labour principles, thereby resulting in their fear of losing their seats at a General Election. What the PLP, not the ordinary Labour voters (and there IS a difference), has done is go a long way towards reducing the Party to a shambles. I believe the general public look at the actions of Labour MPs and consider them next to useless. In my opinion, by their actions, THEY have caused the present scenario, and in a perverse way, may find that they are 'hung by their own petard' come the 9th of June...

If Labour lose this GE embarrassingly which people are adamant will happen, then Corbyn does deserve blame but so do a lot of others in the party. Something that won't happen