Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Mistermeaner

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34366569

Similar to above.

To appear financially responsible McDonnell is going to support getting to a surplus by 2020, although as he is not in power he has no way to support this or influence over it.

At the bottom he says how he would accomplish this and it doesn't effect anyone on benefits, low or middle incomes.

Clear as mud.

Are the electorate intelligent enough to see through the substanceless 'the Tories are the evil party for the rich, we are the party of the people and also financially savvy'

Labour conference should be fun as well; policy determined by committee or everybody including the unions. Nice

Generali

Mr Corbyn's fellow travellers really do seem to be a thoroughly unpleasant bunch:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11893986/Jeremy-Corbyns-top-team-encouraged-street-riots.html

Mr McDonnell, who in the past has praised the IRA, was a controversial choice as shadow chancellor but the Telegraph investigation will stoke fears he is far too radical for such a crucial post.

At least three times between 2010 and 2012, he called for “insurrection” to “bring down” the government.

I'm sure that Mr Corbyn's apologists will find some sort of positive spin to put on this, after all if you can support people that cheer on murderers then you can probably reconcile yourself to pretty much anything that this ridiculous bunch have said. They aren't fit to run a whelk stall let alone the UK.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

Mr Corbyn's fellow travellers really do seem to be a thoroughly unpleasant bunch:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11893986/Jeremy-Corbyns-top-team-encouraged-street-riots.html



I'm sure that Mr Corbyn's apologists will find some sort of positive spin to put on this, after all if you can support people that cheer on murderers then you can probably reconcile yourself to pretty much anything that this ridiculous bunch have said. They aren't fit to run a whelk stall let alone the UK.

I'm not sure that will matter to the committed


Many are too young to know anything about the IRA and many won't know what 9/11 refers to.


Plus the true acolytes (see several on this board) will make excuses for any behaviour.

Generali

More good news for the Comrades. Corbyn is set to return labour relations to the 1970s:

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-3cc2-Labour-Party-conference-Legalise-solidarity-strikes,-say-CLPs

As an aside, I find it very interesting that the Tories aren't attacking Mr Corbyn directly. They are very careful to present this madness as Labour policy not Mr Corbyn's policy. I fear that this will not end well one way or another.

Mistermeaner

Generali wrote: »

More good news for the Comrades. Corbyn is set to return labour relations to the 1970s:

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-3cc2-Labour-Party-conference-Legalise-solidarity-strikes,-say-CLPs

As an aside, I find it very interesting that the Tories aren't attacking Mr Corbyn directly. They are very careful to present this madness as Labour policy not Mr Corbyn's policy. I fear that this will not end well one way or another.

'Well' depends on your point of view.

Not attacking Corbyn the individual is IMO a good move as it discredits labour in the wider sense; the more his lunacy is seen as the 'Labour' way rather than the 'corbyn' way the longer the party will be in the wilderness and the more likely the moderates will be to break ranks.

Generali

Mistermeaner wrote: »

'Well' depends on your point of view.

Not attacking Corbyn the individual is IMO a good move as it discredits labour in the wider sense; the more his lunacy is seen as the 'Labour' way rather than the 'corbyn' way the longer the party will be in the wilderness and the more likely the moderates will be to break ranks.

IMHO in a democracy you need a strong opposition and whilst I'd rather see a party other than Labour to be HM's Loyal Opposition for better or worse they are. For the UK to function well I believe a strong Labour party is desirable.

kinger101

Generali wrote: »

IMHO in a democracy you need a strong opposition and whilst I'd rather see a party other than Labour to be HM's Loyal Opposition for better or worse they are. For the UK to function well I believe a strong Labour party is desirable.

We wouldn't have had a strong opposition under Kendall, Cooper or Burnham to be fair. For one, Kendall is a Tory. Cooper just argues for the sake of argument without putting forward any alternative ideas. Burnham was only mildly better the Miliband (which is like complimenting a midget for being taller than a dwarf).

michaels

Imagine the polls had been correct and we now had a lab/snp coalition.

Then imagine Ed Milliband had had to step down for some reason, for example poor health or a scandal.

We would now have a Corbyn govt. I wonder in that case if those who had voted labour would all be pleased about the govt they had?

michaels

It would seem to be that the Corbyn team are already engaging in political triangulation. In this case floating the most extreme policy positions so that when they eventually decide on something slightly less left wing they can present it as the moderate option. As usual the press are lapping it up as there is nothing like hysteria for click bait.

gadgetmind

Generali wrote: »

I believe a strong Labour party is desirable.

Yes, but not too strong. We don't want them in power again!