Jeremy Corbyn

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

until then we're stuck on this course until either May's deal get's voted down or the government falls.

which is precisely why Jez doesn't need to be saying right now that he'd be backing brexit in another GE.

5 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Think you're using confirmation bias regarding what the polls show regarding Brexit.

Nope, the polls show what the polls show.

About a general election, "YouGov asked people how they would vote if Labour, along with the Conservatives, supported going ahead with Brexit. Labour slumps to third place, with 22%, behind the Liberal Democrats, who would jump to 26%."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/20/polls-stay-eu-yougov-brexit-peoples-vote

I'm not really thinking it would turn out exactly like that in a new GE, but what it makes clear is that Labour will not win an election if they still backed brexit at that election as Corbyn has just said he'd like to.

Labour will do better at a future election if they backed remaining.

[Keithy]

21 hours ago, Mr.Tease said:

This is literally fantasy - it's like me saying if I were in charge of glastonbury it would be ten times better! It's a statement that can't be disproved then being used as fact. 

You can see this folly in the brexit debate--after all the recent disaster, the polls still show roughly the same 50/50split - shouldn't remain be 20points ahead? Blair backs it! Why aren't remain 20 points ahead?! See its daft simplification that ignores an interesting and unpredictable era we're currently in politically. 

Looking at electoral indicators at home and abroad, centrism looks like its collapsed, and voters seem to have polarised, favouring anti establishment or anti status quo/orthodoxy.

Essentially in the UK there's a pretty evenly balanced split -  40% conservatives, 40% labour, 10% lib dems 5% ukip, 5% greens. Its a stalemate, and each of the main parties can't take on other parties votes without losing supporters from the other side (eg if they went more pro brexit they'd pick up more ukip votes but would lose current supporters to either the greens or lib dems) To say Blair or any other leader would be leading be x amount is a daft simplification and assumes nothings changed since 1997 when the whole problem is everything's changed since then. What would blairs brexit policy be? His economic policy? How would he won voters without alienating others? 

I voted Corbyn in the first leadership contest and the second, I still support him because I believe in his policies. Since day one supporters of these policies have been dismissed as cultists, idiots etc when really the people who seem most obsessed with him are his critics. When he first became leader austerity was all the rage and any one who opposed it was dismissed as a fantasist. Now no main stream party supports it. He's had a huge impact on shifting the debate. 

I'm not sure what is literally fantasy. The tories in charge now are essentially the same rump of eurosceptic's that were around in 94-05 when the Tory party was just as divided, pushing the same socially divisive policies and pandering to fear and xenophobia. For all his many faults, Blair was skilled at the dispatch box and beating Tories. He won 3 elections against the nut jobs. Corbyn isn't even making a dent in the polls.

No, remain shouldn't be 20 points ahead and I'm not sure why you suggest they should be just because Blair backs it. The country is pretty much split 50/50 on Brexit. I would argue though that Blair would have made a much, much better Remain argument in 2016 than Corbyn did and a strong Remain message from Labour may have tilted the vote towards Remain and we wouldn't be where we are now. It infuriates me when people blame Brexit on the Tories; Corbyn is just as much to blame for the result (though obviously Brexit was the result he wanted)

Yes the country has been pretty much split 40-40 as you say; but the point is, it shouldn't be. Centralist policies haven't collapsed, it's just nobody is representing them. We have a Tory party peddling the same right wing, eurosceptic policies from 97-05 and a labour opposition with a broadly traditional strong left wing. Voters are polarised because the two parties they vote for are polarised. When labour moved to centralist policies under Smith and Blair in 94, they absolutely cleaned up. Arguably the only party representing something close to centralist polices are the SNP and they have cleaned up in Scotland. The elections in this country have always been decided by the electorate who are neither strongly right wing or left wing, the typical swing voter. When both main parties abandon the centre, then the swing vote itself becomes split. Rather than moving as a pack one way or the other, they themselves split 50/50 depending where their stronger ideology leanings fall (left or right). And as a consequence we end up with where we are now. Yes the world has changed a lot since 94 and but voters have and always will vote on 5 key issues  - economy, immigration, NHS, Tax/Welfare, Law and Order. That will never change.

As for austerity...it's still happening. And will continue to happen whilst we have a Tory government. If anything, Brexit is now going to lead to austerity that will make 2012-2018 seem like a era of prosperity. Yes Corbyn has brought the debate to the fore but, and this is the really crucial part, he has absolutely no power whatsoever to make a real change. The Tories are politically savvy enough to see that public acceptance of austerity was falling away and made some fop policies to change but fundamentally nothing has changed. Universal credit is still being rolled out, public services are still woefully underfunded, local councils are going bankrupt. But yeah, tell yourself Corbyn has had a huge impact.

I never mentioned that Blair would be leading by x amount so the daft simplifications are yours. I'm saying Blair (/or a more competent leader) would be doing a much better job of beating the Tories and would have presented a more coherent Remain policy than Corbyn is doing. I want a labour government so they can bring about lasting change. I voted for Corbyn both times too though more because the alternative wasn't even remotely palatable but I didn't make my X with any conviction partly because his policies seem so fluid.

Quote

At the end of the day if Corbyn is so awful why are the tories so shit scared of an election? 

Probably for the same reason that Corbyn won't call for a no confidence vote in the government. The numbers for winning a majority are not there.

The Tories aren't scared of losing to Corbyn, they're scared of losing their slim majority because of how shit they are. The know they probably won't have the numbers for a majority in a General Election and if they lose a few more seats then the 10 DUP seats become irrelevant and they'll be forced into minority government territory

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tl;dr - Corbyn is pro Brexit and implicitly propping up a shambolic Tory government by failing to provide effective opposition.

Edited December 24, 2018 by Keithy

[bamber]

Brexiters, Mogg, Davis and Redmond, supporting a second vote. LyingTwats.

 

Edited December 24, 2018 by bamber

[kingbadger]

A pro-Brexit GE campaign from Corbyn will die on its arse. He rallied the youth in 2017 when Labour's position was ambiguous, suggesting they were still pro-remain with the potential of a second referendum. There's no way he gets the same level of support, and fanatical publicity, from the youth electorate if he's coming out stating he would plough on with Brexit. A lot of my friends, myself included, were very pro-Corbyn back then but have become majorly disillusioned since with his bullshit Brexit stance and clear failure to listen to the views of the membership. Whilst the cult or Corbyn has clearly taken the reins that's not to say he's going to attract anywhere near the same level of support from young voters nationwide like he did in 2017.

[danbailey80]

2 minutes ago, kingbadger said:

A pro-Brexit GE campaign from Corbyn will die on its arse. He rallied the youth in 2017 when Labour's position was ambiguous, suggesting they were still pro-remain with the potential of a second referendum. There's no way he gets the same level of support, and fanatical publicity, from the youth electorate if he's coming out stating he would plough on with Brexit. A lot of my friends, myself included, were very pro-Corbyn back then but have become majorly disillusioned since with his bullshit Brexit stance and clear failure to listen to the views of the membership. Whilst the cult or Corbyn has clearly taken the reins that's not to say he's going to attract anywhere near the same level of support from young voters nationwide like he did in 2017.

Exactly, sadly the first time in recent history the youth came out to vote and he's let them down. Yes I know he's not actually lied but he has been deliberately ambiguous to lead them on. There's no way he would have got that supportive crowd at the Pyramid now as most that were there assumed he would be more proactive in remaining. 

There is no doubt that Labour would have far more support if someone clearly pro-remain and, yes, more centre, like Chuka was leader. 

[Mr.Tease]

4 minutes ago, danbailey80 said:

Exactly, sadly the first time in recent history the youth came out to vote and he's let them down. Yes I know he's not actually lied but he has been deliberately ambiguous to lead them on. There's no way he would have got that supportive crowd at the Pyramid now as most that were there assumed he would be more proactive in remaining. 

There is no doubt that Labour would have far more support if someone clearly pro-remain and, yes, more centre, like Chuka was leader. 

Pure fantasy - how would Labour be more pro remain without alienating the Labour voters who also voted leave? At the last election we agreed on a compromise - a soft brexit, its the fairest position,where everyone compromises and at the same time it acknowledges that leave won. 

Labour's election position last time was soft brexit, it was pretty clear so I don't get how you feel duped. If they'd come out and said 'we're going to ignore the referendum', they likely would have gotten hammered (even Chukka said at the time we had to respect the referendum and didn't want another one). 

If you stand back and let May balls this up, you have a much better chance of stopping brexit because then labour can't be accused of 'thwarting brexit'. Once May's ballsed it up she'll have eliminated so many options remain becomes much more likely. Strategically I think it makes much more sense than a premature remain campaign. 

 

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, danbailey80 said:

most that were there assumed he would be more proactive in remaining. 

that was always a bad assumption of with life-long anti-EU views. When that fact was pointed out it was rejected and called a slur made by Corbyn-haters.

Maybe there's never been those haters? Maybe there's only ever been people who've got to know Jeremy better than the public have?

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

Pure fantasy - how would Labour be more pro remain without alienating the Labour voters who also voted leave?

In there's a GE, Labour have to come out one way or the other, and whichever way they jump they'll lose some support.

So that becomes a fake excuse for doing nothing, because if there's any point to the Labour Party at all they'll have to do something.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

it makes much more sense than a premature remain campaign. 

that's not the problem right now.

The problem is Jezza's premature brexit campaign. 

The way things are going he'll be the last man standing even after Rees Mogg has given it up.

[mashedonmud]

22 hours ago, Ommadawn said:

I think it's the blatant lying about afterwards that's more telling. It seems to be his default position when caught out.

A politician telling fibs! Never. I can't believe that any politician from any party would lie to their country. Next you'll be trying to tell me they'd consider fiddling expenses, or using insider information to bolster their personal earnings.  Anyhow I'm off to write Santa a letter as need some realism in my life.?

[Keithy]

14 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

If you stand back and let May balls this up, you have a much better chance of stopping brexit because then labour can't be accused of 'thwarting brexit'. Once May's ballsed it up she'll have eliminated so many options remain becomes much more likely. Strategically I think it makes much more sense than a premature remain campaign. 

I think May will probably get her deal through though it will be tight. She doesn't need the support of the house, she just needs the support of her party and the DUP. I think Johnson, Rees-Mogg, etc will fall into line (parroting some lines along they're happy they have reassurances about the backstop and the future trading agreement has yet to be defined) and her non confidence vote win gives her a bit of clout in the party again. The DUP will eventually compromise. A few tories like Soubry might rebel but there will be enough labour votes reluctantly supporting it to compensate (as Corbyn doesn't have a hope in hell of whipping the party). Given the timeframes, if she does lose the vote then we're leaving with no deal. She knows the vote will be tight but no deal preparations are well underway (and have been for some time)

Sadly, Corbyn has missed the last opportunity to stop Brexit. The last chance saloon was when she pulled the vote; May and the Tories were divided and on their knees, Brexit support was wavering....at that point Labour should have pushed for a second referendum, called the vote of no confidence in the government and hammered home that May has lost her ability to govern, had failed to secure a good Brexit deal and that we needed to go back to the people. It may have come to nothing but at least they would have tried to do something.

Sadly he passed all that up and I fear it's now too late. 'Stand back and let May balls this up' is an astonishing position for the opposition to take on such an issue. The opposition is there to try and stop the balls up, to be the sane voice of reason. Not to stand by and watch the country to go over the cliff edge. Labour might as well pack up and cease to exist as a party of if that's the case. Do something not fecking nothing, standing by and watching.

[Ommadawn]

25 minutes ago, mashedonmud said:

A politician telling fibs! Never. I can't believe that any politician from any party would lie to their country. Next you'll be trying to tell me they'd consider fiddling expenses, or using insider information to bolster their personal earnings.  Anyhow I'm off to write Santa a letter as need some realism in my life.?

All politicians tell lies of course. They don't usually continue after they've been caught out. That takes a special kind of stupid.

[Mr.Tease]

12 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I think May will probably get her deal through though it will be tight. She doesn't need the support of the house, she just needs the support of her party and the DUP. I think Johnson, Rees-Mogg, etc will fall into line (parroting some lines along they're happy they have reassurances about the backstop and the future trading agreement has yet to be defined) and her non confidence vote win gives her a bit of clout in the party again. The DUP will eventually compromise. A few tories like Soubry might rebel but there will be enough labour votes reluctantly supporting it to compensate (as Corbyn doesn't have a hope in hell of whipping the party). Given the timeframes, if she does lose the vote then we're leaving with no deal. She knows the vote will be tight but no deal preparations are well underway (and have been for some time)

Sadly, Corbyn has missed the last opportunity to stop Brexit. The last chance saloon was when she pulled the vote; May and the Tories were divided and on their knees, Brexit support was wavering....at that point Labour should have pushed for a second referendum, called the vote of no confidence in the government and hammered home that May has lost her ability to govern, had failed to secure a good Brexit deal and that we needed to go back to the people. It may have come to nothing but at least they would have tried to do something.

 

Again, fantasy--DUP have said they will continue to support the government while May pretends to try to change her deal, so a no confidence vote would have failed. Even if Labour backed a second referendum (which leave could easily win) they have zero power to make May call one. Parliament doesn't either until May holds her vote on her deal. Why does calling for a second referendum now rather than after May's deal gets defeated make any sense? What do you gain other than p-ing off leavers and allowing may to rally the troops around 'Labour are trying to thwart brexit'. 

Nothing can happen until May has a vote on her deal. 

[shuttlep]

on one hand i like him , on the other he is against the worst Conservative party ever, they are falling apart and arguing with each other . He seems to have done nothing. A strong leader would have taken them apart by now

[Keithy]

1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

Nothing can happen until May has a vote on her deal. 

Which she will get through I believe and then there's nothing he or anyone can do. The chance was before a vote not after. It's a bit late then.

[Armourman]

My take on Brexit is this. I was desperate for Scotland to vote for independence but had a YES vote won the day but the transition of it would have come at the same cost as Brexit is I'd have accepted reverting back to save my country from chaos and looked to see what changes could be made with less impact.  It would have devastated me but common sense is required with change. Its not a 2nd vote we need it's leaders saying it just cannot be done 

[Vanderlyle]

On 12/23/2018 at 1:36 PM, zero000 said:

Corbyn has always been pro-Brexit and he continues to show his true colours with his tepid opposition and recent statements about renegotiating with the EU, against the will of party members.

He should be backing a second referendum, instead he's been complicit in plunging the country into crisis.

 

I quite like him as a person and agree with most of his policies.

Unfortunately he thinks it's all about him and his group of hype-men from Momentum and elsewhere. He can't listen or move with the times. It's what makes him more likeable in some ways, but also so much less effective than Blair.

 

The saddest thing is the UK is going through its biggest crisis in decades and he's completely toothless as the leader of the 'opposition'. Just like he was useless during the referendum. There's an argument to say that he's the biggest single factor in causing this shit-show.

[Vanderlyle]

4 hours ago, danbailey80 said:

Exactly, sadly the first time in recent history the youth came out to vote and he's let them down. Yes I know he's not actually lied but he has been deliberately ambiguous to lead them on. There's no way he would have got that supportive crowd at the Pyramid now as most that were there assumed he would be more proactive in remaining. 

There is no doubt that Labour would have far more support if someone clearly pro-remain and, yes, more centre, like Chuka was leader. 

Bingo.

Add me and a bunch of my friends to this bucket. Corbyn over the past year has been one of my biggest  disappointments I can remember. Not quite as bad as the last years of Blair... but at least Blair had brought about a huge amount of change before that point.

[Blisterpack]

3 hours ago, Vanderlyle said:

Bingo.

Add me and a bunch of my friends to this bucket. Corbyn over the past year has been one of my biggest  disappointments I can remember. Not quite as bad as the last years of Blair... but at least Blair had brought about a huge amount of change before that point.

Despite arguments around PFI funding (and I know of some very good PFI projects) more new school buildings went up in the 13 yrs 97 2010 than at any other 13 year period on the history of this nation. More hospitals and schools were built in that period than in the totality of Tory post-war government. There were many,many changes that a centre left voter would have hoped for. We didn’t renationalise anything though which probably explains why Corbyn voted against the Labour Government more times between 1997 and 2005 than the Tories did. He is a serial opposer. Not a leader. 

[guypjfreak]

There all as bad as one an other... The end. 

Happy Christmas 

[DeanoL]

On 12/24/2018 at 9:32 AM, caballosblancos said:

May’s deal is pretty soft, do you support that? Why would Jeremy’s be more appealing at this late late hour? I can barely think of two worse people than May and Corbyn negotiating the most important political decision in this generation. 

No no no no no no.

May’s deal is not a soft Brexit. Two years ago it would have been considered the hardest option on the table. But the hard line Brexiteers have, in some brilliant political maneuvering, constantly pushed back what “hard” and “soft” mean by denying that anything other than a hard Brexit isn’t really a Brexit at all. And that crashing out without a deal is “hard Brexit” and not plain insanity.

Soft Brexit isn’t May’s deal or Norway. Soft Brexit is leaving the EU while keeping freedom of movement and remaining on the single market. Which is seen as a crazy fantasy now!

[whitehorses]

@DeanoLI said “pretty soft”, but no not as soft as what once have been considered soft (which was probably always fantasy tbh). Otherwise, agree with your analysis.

[Martin Ashford]

I'm still 100% behind Corbyn. I think he's played a blinder given the constant sniping and abuse her gets from so many vested interests. The fact is that nobody can read him which makes him a constantly moving target. He is now on the verge of sweeping into Number 10. That's not my thoughts - that's the Sunday Times which has tried as hard as it can to undermine and smear Corbyn on a weekly basis. We have to face facts - the Establishment are absolutely shit scared of him and what he represents. They have resorted to everything and most lately a campaign of disinformation that Labour supporters have  turned against him. NOT TRUE. They are terrified of having a real socialist in Government. Even worse, Corbyn is a man with a concience - who will think twice before selling arms to despotic regimes and would probably prefer not to sell arms to ANYBODY. That is someone I can get behind. Unfortunately, Corbyn is so radical that he is a threat to people within Labour who are perfectly happy to be tied to the Establishment and especially the Pro - Israel Lobby. Corbyn is obviously not the Messiah but if he gets into power it will represent  a paradigm shift on a massive scale. Achieving this is more important than halting Brexit and i know that's a tough one to swallow but he's steering a carefully balanced course and alienating a huge swathe of core Labour voters is never going to help.

[Keithy]

17 minutes ago, Martin Ashford said:

He is now on the verge of sweeping into Number 10. That's not my thoughts - that's the Sunday Times which has tried as hard as it can to undermine and smear Corbyn on a weekly basis. 

He’s not on the verge of sweeping into No 10, not by a long shot on the current polling. As the polls stand now (approx 38% each) Tories would still be the largest party but short of a majority by about 27. Labour still need a big swing to get a majority. They need to be hitting the mid to high 40’s and the Tory vote to fall further.

At best, Labour might be able to be the largest party but an outright majority is still miles away.

[bamber]

The man is no Fake, he is all real. He lacks all the social nuances though.

* Life long Leaver *

Edited December 26, 2018 by bamber