Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[Tangled up in Blue]

This article in the Independent sums him up even better.

Independent

I guess this is also a hatchet job because it dares to expose the truth, and shows KL to be either a liar or just plain stupid.

This article in today's Guardian is the most balanced I've seen recently.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/04/ken-livingstone-interview

 

[londonblue]

This article in today's Guardian is the most balance I've seen recently.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/04/ken-livingstone-interview

It's an interview with KL himself, so it's just his opinion, again. To me that is irrelevant. I'll stick with the two independent opinions I linked.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

It's an interview with KL himself, so it's just his opinion, again. To me that is irrelevant. I'll stick with the two independent opinions I linked.

It's precisely because it is an interview that it is balanced-compared with most of the rubbish printed about him.

 

[londonblue]

It's precisely because it is an interview that it is balanced-compared with most of the rubbish printed about him.

No, it's his opinion of himself.

 

[londonblue]

Unlike you *** I'm not an interventionist, though I'm no pacifist,either.

I was impressed by Ken Livingstone on QT last night, who argued the case for ground troops from nations such as China,Russia and India as well as Western countries etc, under the auspices of the UN.That makes sense to me.

Cameron's argument seems to be that we should bomb Syria just because the US,France and our other allies are.

It's obvious that without ground troops and a peace plan there will be no solution to the crisis in Syria.

KL also made the point that if we hadn't embarked on an illegal war in Iraq, (with Blair lying to the country about the existence of WMD's), then the London bombings in 7/7 would never have happened.He's right.What's more if we bomb Syria without UN backing, then we can expect more of the same in the future.

He's wrong. The people you blame for terrorism are the terrorists. Plain and simple.

You might do something to upset people, and they may use that as their excuse, but that is all it is, an excuse. People should take responsibility for their own actions, and not blame it on others. Making excuses like that on their behalf is even worse.

We live in a democratic society. If these people want to oppose government policy, then they're perfectly entitled to do so, in a peaceful way. There is simply no excuse for terrorism.

I see that idiot Livingstone is getting it wrong on a major scale yet again:

BBC

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

YouGov/Times Voting intention
** Labour ahead **
CON 33%,
LAB 34%,
LDEM 6%,
UKIP 16%


17th March


Westminster voting intention:
CON: 36% (-3)
LAB: 36% (+4)
UKIP: 11% (-)
LDEM: 8% (+1)
GRN: 3% (-1)
(via ICM)


14th March

 

[callan]

YouGov/Times Voting intention
** Labour ahead **
CON 33%,
LAB 34%,
LDEM 6%,
UKIP 16%


17th March


Westminster voting intention:
CON: 36% (-3)
LAB: 36% (+4)
UKIP: 11% (-)
LDEM: 8% (+1)
GRN: 3% (-1)
(via ICM)


14th March

Will you be making an allowance for the silent vote?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Will you be making an allowance for the silent vote?

Perhaps not many of the "silent vote" will have been impressed by the Education Minister on last night's Question Time.Or the government's reaction to her comments on disability cuts.Shameful.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35839282

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Will you be making an allowance for the silent vote?

I didn't run the poll or factor anything in or out, just put it up in case of interest.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Perhaps not many of the "silent vote" will have been impressed by the Education Minister on last night's Question Time.Or the government's reaction to her comments on disability cuts.Shameful.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35839282

They are making a habit of announcing policies that then become things they may do rather than will do - no conviction.

 

[callan]

Perhaps not many of the "silent vote" will have been impressed by the Education Minister on last night's Question Time.Or the government's reaction to her comments on disability cuts.Shameful.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35839282

Morgan is absolutely woeful, sadly for Labour she was only up against Thornberry who is equally abysmal.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Morgan is absolutely woeful, sadly for Labour she was only up against Thornberry who is equally abysmal.[/QUOTE[

Thornberry made some good points,epecially considering that neither education nor disability benefits are part of her brief as Shadow Defence Secretary.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

See Corbyn has made a utter mess of the unbelievable own goal that was left on his plate. Arguably Cameron's worst week as PM and instead of having him squirming in his seat, Corbyn instead lets him rule the roost. End result, House of Commons in fits of laughter (on all sides) mocking the opposition leader.
If he can't take advantage of a opportunity like that then perhaps he needs to step aside for the sake of his party.

 

[Bearded Shrimper]

See Corbyn has made a utter mess of the unbelievable own goal that was left on his plate. Arguably Cameron's worst week as PM and instead of having him squirming in his seat, Corbyn instead lets him rule the roost. End result, House of Commons in fits of laughter (on all sides) mocking the opposition leader.
If he can't take advantage of a opportunity like that then perhaps he needs to step aside for the sake of his party.

yep, if the Tories are having a bad week all they have to do is turn up to Parliament and they look better by comparison.
if they manage to put the EU splits behind them they could rule forever.

it's not just about having a go at the Tories, the whole basis of our democracy is based on an opposition party keeping the government on its toes but under Corbyn we are not even close.

and yet he keeps his base supporters happy so he'll stay and it'll just get worse

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

See Corbyn has made a utter mess of the unbelievable own goal that was left on his plate. Arguably Cameron's worst week as PM and instead of having him squirming in his seat, Corbyn instead lets him rule the roost. End result, House of Commons in fits of laughter (on all sides) mocking the opposition leader.
If he can't take advantage of a opportunity like that then perhaps he needs to step aside for the sake of his party.

What are you basing that on?


Corbyn and McDonnell were asking the right questions in Parliament and the right questions in the press - for the government to justify the attacks on the disabled, where they were going to fill the new black hole, that the Chancellor is not fit for the job. If you watch footage of the budget being passed then you will see a couple of back benchers virtually giving themselves a hernia in their enthusiasm to back the Chancellor (I believe it's called overcompensating) and that side of the house making as much noise as possible while McDonnell in particular was all about calm delivery.


Snap polls have indicated that Osborne's chances of ever being PM are now minimal. The government have had to shy away from welfare cuts.


Bearing in mind many people would not vote for a Muslim - if Sadiq Khan becomes London Mayor then maybe people will start to recognise that the Labour Party is not as unelectable as the Murdoch press would like us to believe.


The government side of the house were braying support of a Chancellor who has had to drop major sections of his budget which now doesn't balance - and he was calmly asked to justify this but over the noise got away with not doing so. In terms of how that looked on TV I can't see the government approach to that being the vote winner.


Strange conclusion after the last week to see it as a chance to criticise the opposition - have I missed something?

 

[londonblue]

What are you basing that on?


Corbyn and McDonnell were asking the right questions in Parliament and the right questions in the press - for the government to justify the attacks on the disabled, where they were going to fill the new black hole, that the Chancellor is not fit for the job. If you watch footage of the budget being passed then you will see a couple of back benchers virtually giving themselves a hernia in their enthusiasm to back the Chancellor (I believe it's called overcompensating) and that side of the house making as much noise as possible while McDonnell in particular was all about calm delivery.


Snap polls have indicated that Osborne's chances of ever being PM are now minimal. The government have had to shy away from welfare cuts.


Bearing in mind many people would not vote for a Muslim - if Sadiq Khan becomes London Mayor then maybe people will start to recognise that the Labour Party is not as unelectable as the Murdoch press would like us to believe.

The government side of the house were braying support of a Chancellor who has had to drop major sections of his budget which now doesn't balance - and he was calmly asked to justify this but over the noise got away with not doing so. In terms of how that looked on TV I can't see the government approach to that being the vote winner.


Strange conclusion after the last week to see it as a chance to criticise the opposition - have I missed something?

It's beyond me why anyone thinks the London Mayoral election is a barometer for the rest of the country. It simply isn't. After all, London is usually predominantly Labour, and yet it has voted in a tory mayor in the last 2 elections. Even under Thatcher we had that idiot Ken Livingstone as leader of the GLC.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

The reason that there are not that many Corbyn supporters actually in the PLP, is quite simply that in 13 years under Blair/Brown, the leader controlled the A list of parliamentary candidates to make sure that no genuine left-wingers were selected in winnable seats.

This changed under Miliband, who relaxed the controls after 2010.Hence there was an increase in the number of Labour left-wingers in the Commons,for the first time in a generation,after last year's GE.

It will be interesting to see what happens in this respect over the next 4 years.

 

[MK Shrimper]

It's beyond me why anyone thinks the London Mayoral election is a barometer for the rest of the country. It simply isn't. After all, London is usually predominantly Labour, and yet it has voted in a tory mayor in the last 2 elections. Even under Thatcher we had that idiot Ken Livingstone as leader of the GLC.

Come on, London has changed dramatically since Ken lead the GLC. Areas of working class votes like Stratford have been gentrified up the wazoo. You're more likely to get a Tory voting city trader living in Bow or Islington than a Labour voting dustman.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

It's beyond me why anyone thinks the London Mayoral election is a barometer for the rest of the country. It simply isn't. After all, London is usually predominantly Labour, and yet it has voted in a tory mayor in the last 2 elections. Even under Thatcher we had that idiot Ken Livingstone as leader of the GLC.

If you think Kl's an "idiot" (which's he's not btw) then what on earth do you think of Boris?

Interesting, when KL lost as Mayor for the second time in 2012, it was widely suggested in the Tory press that Ed Miliband would be replaced as leader.He wasn't because Labour did exceptionally well in the rest of the country.

 

[londonblue]

Come on, London has changed dramatically since Ken lead the GLC. Areas of working class votes like Stratford have been gentrified up the wazoo. You're more likely to get a Tory voting city trader living in Bow or Islington than a Labour voting dustman.

I'm not arguing whether or not London has changed, I'm just pointing out London has its own politics which doesn't always bare any resemblance to the rest of the country, and to try and use any potential win on a London Mayoral election as evidence of how well Corduroy is doing doesn't make any sense.

There'll be better and more accurate occasions in the future...