Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

By the time all this has washed out, Labour will need an entirely new front bench.

Isn't that why the old front bench effectively walked out.......

They will want their jobs back. Now they've time to reformulate their ideas.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

He won't get a fair hearing anywhere else.

No one has listened to him for the past 30 odd years. So what's changed? His views certainly haven't. However the world we live in certainly has. With him will die the ideals of a generation that sadly is not in touch with the majority of people. .

Generali

ruggedtoast wrote: »

As well as the Left - Right split over Corbyn there is also a generational shift. Younger people see Corbyn as offering something new, older people see him as offering a return to the 3 day week.

Younger people can be accused of ignoring why older people are worried about this. Older people can also be accused of overlooking why younger people are interested in his politics, and rejecting theirs.

In any case, as someone who is mostly pro Corbyn as he is now (his politics are different and need time to bed in, Labour supporters demonstrably dont want another Tony Blair), and not ashamed to be so, I am starting to understand how you Scottish Nationalists felt in the run up to the referendum on independence.

I am even using MSM as an acronym, as I am getting rather tired of endless MSM saucer eyed predictions of doom if I dare to vote the wrong way in the next election, interspersed with ranting oxymoronic monologues as to how stupid I am for not agreeing with them.

It has pretty much galvanised me into voting Labour four years in advance of any campaigning they might want to do.

Without wishing to be tedious, is there any actual polling data to support the idea that younger voters support Mr Corbyn? I could easily imagine that his base is older people reliving the battles of their youth.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No one has listened to him for the past 30 odd years. So what's changed? His views certainly haven't. However the world we live in certainly has. With him will die the ideals of a generation that sadly is not in touch with the majority of people. .

He's just been elected Labour Party Leader... with a massive landslide and the other 3 candidates nowhere ? I guess that's what's changed. People will have to listen to him now. Like what he has to say or not, he leads the Labour party. He's now 'news'.

But he won't get a fair go at it. If it had been Corbyn with a pig 'incident' he'd still be getting doorstepped now. And would be facing calls to resign left, right and center. It certainly wouldn't have been dismissed as 'university high jinks'. Miliband faced worse than Cameron just with the MSM constantly headlining a bad pic of him eating a bacon sandwich...

However, when trying to draw clear water between themselves and the Tories ( and Blairites or whatever you want to call it )...

John McDonnell, the new shadow chancellor, will tell the Labour conference that Britain must always live within its means as he announces that the party will vote in favour of a new fiscal charter proposed by George Osborne.

...To the possible surprise of some on the left, McDonnell will announce that Labour MPs will be expected later this autumn to vote for the chancellor’s fiscal charter unveiled in the budget in July.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/25/john-mcdonnell-labour-will-match-osborne-and-live-within-our-means

Mabye McDonnell needs to 'reframe' that slighty. 'I agree with George' might not be the best way of going about things. Most that voted Corbyn in.... don't.

Moby

chewmylegoff wrote: »

The desperate apologism for Mcdonnell in this thread is pathetic.

No its just to show how hypocrital some individuals on here are.

Moby

Generali wrote: »

It isn't as simple as that.

If you are PM or a senior cabinet minister then you can meaningfully hold peace talks with a terrorist. If you are a back bench extremist claiming that your Government is an occupying power and apparently supporting that terrorist group then you are an apologist for those terrorists.

That is the difference between what Mr Blair and Mr Corbyn did.

It certainly isnt as simple as the line you are trying to draw. Fact is Government ministers used other non Govmt politicians all the time to enable them to keep some distance from negotiations in case they went wrong.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

It certainly isnt as simple as the line you are trying to draw. Fact is Government ministers used other non Govmt politicians all the time to enable them to keep some distance from negotiations in case they went wrong.

So who asked Tweedledum and Tweedledee to intervene?

gadgetmind

Generali wrote: »

So who asked Tweedledum and Tweedledee to intervene?

Tom and Jerry.

gadgetmind

Under Corbyn, funding for Britain's opposition in question

"The guy lives in the past, the whole world has finished with communism," said Allam, who runs a business which produces generators and is worth 340 million pounds according to a rich list published by the Sunday Times newspaper.
"Do I back a dead horse? Would you back a dead horse?"

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/09/26/uk-britain-politics-corbyn-donors-idUKKCN0RQ04R20150926

Mistermeaner

Unions have always been the biggest donors I think? (Genuine question I'm not claiming to know for sure)