Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Jib in lad]

I see the Tories on here are burying their heads in the sand the thing you lot don't get is people trust Corbyn they believe him they believe he cares .

Now name me another Politian who commands that trust.

If we go to the poll's again in the next six months he will win and the Tories know it they are crapping themselves hence the nonsense being spoken on here.

 

[bring the ghost on]

she will be gone before Xmas.

I'd be surprised if she lasts until the end of the month.

 

[hullefc]

I agree with a lot of that post but not the part that some PLP members are begging him to come back nor that they have let the vulnerable down. A more moderate Labour leader probably wins that election against such weak opposition and that's why the Labour MP's had an issue with JC in the first place.

Just because Corbyn did better than expected probably just compounds the issue as they now stay like this until the next GE. It's not a big issue as it should be a short Parliament, it will probably be later this year but could be after brexit talks have finished in 2019. If he loses again then that's 14 years of a conservative government and that is helping who exactly.

Who?

Angela Eagles - well enough said.

Yvette Cooper - again enough said.

Smith - enough said.

The mysteriously missing Hilary? - enough said.

Burnham - again enough said.

Umunna - enough said

Watson - that made me chuckle

There was no-one from the Blairites that could have got anywhere near what happened on Thursday. What they did manage to do was increase the non interest in politics due to be the 'they're exactly like the Tories' - a very common theme. A Blairite at the helm would have crashed Labour to below 200.

The membership sensed the mood in the country and the PLP did not. Why? Because they cocoon themselves in their own bubble and whilst the vulnerable are getting hammered they are more interested in going through the motions than taking a stand against the Tories. The moment Corbyn stood up and said, 'I have a letter from ....' they mocked amongst themselves and with their flunkeys in the media, but the people in the real world took notice.

'If he loses again then 14 years of Tory rule'. There is no way of knowing that, it is a hunch as is my 'crash below 200'. There is a political sea change going on in the country at the moment. In no part due to Corbyn and the others. There is a lot to play for this next two years and beyond due to Brexit negotiations. But there is a lot to play for now by exposing the shenanigans the Tories are getting up to in clutching to power. I doubt very much a Blairite Labour leader would have been that interested actually.

 

[orly]

Who?

Angela Eagles - well enough said.

Yvette Cooper - again enough said.

Smith - enough said.

The mysteriously missing Hilary? - enough said.

Burnham - again enough said.

Umunna - enough said

Watson - that made me chuckle

There was no-one from the Blairites that could have got anywhere near what happened on Thursday. What they did manage to do was increase the non interest in politics due to be the 'they're exactly like the Tories' - a very common theme. A Blairite at the helm would have crashed Labour to below 200.

The membership sensed the mood in the country and the PLP did not. Why? Because they cocoon themselves in their own bubble and whilst the vulnerable are getting hammered they are more interested in going through the motions than taking a stand against the Tories. The moment Corbyn stood up and said, 'I have a letter from ....' they mocked amongst themselves and with their flunkeys in the media, but the people in the real world took notice.

'If he loses again then 14 years of Tory rule'. There is no way of knowing that, it is a hunch as is my 'crash below 200'. There is a political sea change going on in the country at the moment. In no part due to Corbyn and the others. There is a lot to play for this next two years and beyond due to Brexit negotiations. But there is a lot to play for now by exposing the shenanigans the Tories are getting up to in clutching to power. I doubt very much a Blairite Labour leader would have been that interested actually.

It's not a hunch - it was based on historical data.

There's a lot (from the likes of Owen Jones) of 'better than Blair' in terms of statistics, but crucially 262 is not more seats than 418, 412, or 355 - the three elections led by Blair which made Labour the dominant political force in that period. The Tories ended up with sub-200 seats in all of those elections and was by far and away their worst period since the war.

It's an election where no one has really won - but what it has (where Corbyn's Election campaign must be rightly praised) is avoided putting a Government into power that felt austerity and suffering for the lowest 90% of the populous was the right thing to do.

 

[peteblue]

I see the Tories on here are burying their heads in the sand the thing you lot don't get is people trust Corbyn they believe him they believe he cares .

Now name me another Politian who commands that trust.

If we go to the poll's again in the next six months he will win and the Tories know it they are crapping themselves hence the nonsense being spoken on here.

Trust him to do what, manage and grow our economy, defend our people and country, I think not. I trust him to raise taxes, print money and bankrupt the country. There is a world of difference in promising the earth to the gullible and actually having the competence to deliver. Look who he surrounds himself with and who he trusts...Diane Abbott...now go on, be honest, would you really trust her to run the Home Office, the Police and Security Services........

 

[Jib in lad]

Trust him to do what, manage and grow our economy, defend our people and country, I think not. I trust him to raise taxes, print money and bankrupt the country. There is a world of difference in promising the earth to the gullible and actually having the competence to deliver. Look who he surrounds himself with and who he trusts...Diane Abbott...now go on, be honest, would you really trust her to run the Home Office, the Police and Security Services........

More slurs and insults you carry on in the meantime May has just teamed up with the DUP and we all know what they are.

 

[orly]

Trust him to do what, manage and grow our economy, defend our people and country, I think not. I trust him to raise taxes, print money and bankrupt the country. There is a world of difference in promising the earth to the gullible and actually having the competence to deliver. Look who he surrounds himself with and who he trusts...Diane Abbott...now go on, be honest, would you really trust her to run the Home Office, the Police and Security Services........

DUP though Pete. No defending that.

Hopefully on Monday Abbott will get moved - she won't get Shadow Home Sec again I hope as it's too easy an open goal for the Tories - and those 'leaked emails' from Milne would suggest she knows the game is up.

 

[hullefc]

It's not a hunch - it was based on historical data.

Christ almighty.

According to you 'historical data' shows that when a Labour leader loses an election, it results in 14 years of Tory rule? Harold Wilson lost an election but it didn't result in 14 years of Tory rule.

You really do need to stop seeing a conspiracy in everything. It is not healthy.

 

[orly]

Christ almighty.

According to you 'historical data' shows that when a Labour leader loses an election, it results in 14 years of Tory rule? Harold Wilson lost an election but it didn't result in 14 years of Tory rule.

You really do need to stop seeing a conspiracy in everything. It is not healthy.

hahahah, not even close to what I said at all and you know it.

Because that was the baseline from which they gained a platform to win the next time out - so 1992 - 1997.

When Labour last got 209, it took them 14 years. It really isn't complicated, but you see about five words a post and start posting your tripe, every time.

They got 262. Didn't win the election unfortunately, but a big narrowing of the gap.

Tell us more about the 'state controlled BBC' mate, you tin-foil hat wearing angry man.

You were a big Martinez fan weren't you, I remember now.

 

[roydo]

DUP though Pete. No defending that.

Hopefully on Monday Abbott will get moved - she won't get Shadow Home Sec again I hope as it's too easy an open goal for the Tories - and those 'leaked emails' from Milne would suggest she knows the game is up.

The DUP thing is a hold your nose attempt to get a QS through. Totally different than when Major wouldnt talk to them cos his majority was wiped out during a Parliament.

She, May, either does that, or Corbyn will be invited to try a minority Government.

Chaos basically. (Not a slight at Corbyn, just the likely outcome.)

Once a QS is through, May et al can then legitimately talk to the EU. Which is what this farce was all about in the first place.

 

[The binman chronicles]

There are a few on here that fail to realise a loss is a loss. It wasn't so close that a repeat would automatically lead to a Labour victory. The swing for that to happen could easily go the Tory way and they get a decent majority.

What we have here is an experiment if true socialism is applicable in modern Britain. The first attempt hasn't worked, it's rare that a leader gets two bites at the cherry but he will get that. Lets see what happens, it could go 1 of 3 ways, a small Corbyn majority, (which is hardly a ringing endorsement) a hung parliament again or a comfortable Tory majority. All this talk of sea change in the mood of the country is way too soon, i saw little evidence of this around where i live and there are plenty more safe Tory seats like that down south.

It's actually difficult to say for sure what people were voting for due to brexit, May going AWOL, the UKIP and SNP votes going to other parties masking the true position.

 

[orly]

The DUP thing is a hold your nose attempt to get a QS through. Totally different than when Major wouldnt talk to them cos his majority was wiped out during a Parliament.

She, May, either does that, or Corbyn will be invited to try a minority Government.

Chaos basically. (Not a slight at Corbyn, just the likely outcome.)

Once a QS is through, May et al can then legitimately talk to the EU. Which is what this farce was all about in the first place.

Not for me though Roydo. It's like putting snakes down your trousers, good chance you're going to get bitten in the bad places.

Don't forget, Corbyn had also committed to 'no deals, no compromises' - so instantly aligning himself with Lib Dems / Greens / a drastically reduced SNP wouldn't have been that attractive to his base and also, would have represented a substantial u-turn.

May has got rid of her human shield advisers, making a binding coalition with the DUP who's 10 MPs have some of the most archaic views going (creationism?!?) and is the laughing stock of Europe. QS or not, it's a compromise too far.

 

[The binman chronicles]

'If he loses again then 14 years of Tory rule'.

Just clarify what meant by this was 2010 to 2024. (if the upcoming election is after brexit talks in 2019)

 

[hullefc]

hahahah, not even close to what I said at all and you know it.

Tell us more about the 'state controlled BBC' mate, you tin-foil hat wearing angry man.

You were a big Martinez fan weren't you, I remember now.

Oh dear. Off topic with the Martinez reference, yet again. But that is standard practice for you when you are caught out. Go to the Martinez thread for that.

It was what you said and you know it. You respond with this, 'It's not a hunch - it was based on historical data' to me. Based on me saying to another poster that it was a 'hunch' that Corbyn not getting elected would lead to 14 years of Tory rule. You said it was based on 'historical data'. Not quite correct as Harold Wilson lost an election and it didn't result in 14 years of Tory rule.

You decided to shift the goalpost by mentioning the BBC. The state controlling the BBC is not hard to understand, even for you. Then on to Martinez, which is your usual response when I have challenged you on what you have wrote. If you don't like it when someone shows that what you said, was not correct based on 'historical data' then don't respond to anything I say. It is quite simple, even for you.

 

[roydo]

Don't forget, Corbyn had also committed to 'no deals, no compromises' - so instantly aligning himself with Lib Dems / Greens / a drastically reduced SNP wouldn't have been that attractive to his base and also, would have represented a substantial u-turn.

Think you are missing my point. Corbyn could not get a majority with all the other parties combined.

Its not a point of principle, (unfortunately), its purely a mechanism to get a rubber stamp allowing someone, anyone, to talk to the EU.

My understanding is that if the HOC votes against a QS, then yet another GE is immediately called. We simply do not have the time for that to happen.