An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

Thrugelmir

bobbymotors wrote: »

So, can anyone tell me the answer? Where's the money coming from?

The magic money tree. Where else.

ruggedtoast

Nasqueron wrote: »

Jeremy Corbyn on the PLP:

Its ridiculous that we are having to have another leadership election rather than opposing this dreadful Tory government.

So why did Jeremy try and launch a challenge to the PLP leader not once, not twice but three times - against Kinnock, Smith and Blair?

Corbyn's shown his hypocrisy in other ways such as him voting against the PLP 500+ times and then sacking MPs like Hilary Benn for voting against him

I think Hilary Benn was sacked for repeatedly orchestrating front bench rebellions that made his own position untenable, actually.

I personally find Hilary Benn about as palatable as the other warmongering neoliberal Hilary that they are stuck with in America.

Didn't think he would be missed, and he isn't.

Meanwhile Angela Eagle is still attempting to stir the ordure with a continuation of what now appear to be outright lies about her "victimisation".

The brick through her window was actually through a communal stairwell window in the block she shares with five other companies. The outside is already vandalised with non political graffiti and there is no indication at all that she (or anyone in the building) was a target.

She is now also claiming that she was victimised at a recent meeting of her constituency branch, with bullying and homophobic abuse. Which she blames Jeremy for, like her pretend brick.

Twitter is fairly full of people who were at the meeting claiming that this is outright lies and the Wallasey members are now getting seriously concerned at being slandered as homophobes and bullies.

I believe she is going to be asked to go back to explain herself, which she won't do.

ruggedtoast

Rinoa wrote: »

Corbyn v Smith leadership debate Live

http://order-order.com/#_@/iYROgxb53xlclg

Smith's continual complaints about disunity being scuppered by Corbyn pointing out that he and his 169 Blairite buddies are the root cause of this.

Jeers and boos for Smith. He could try and argue on a platform of socialism but considering he only decided to become one five minutes ago he probably isn't very confident about any of the principles.

DiggerUK

Trotskyists don't sell the Morning Star, what you saw were Stalinists. Trotskyists are the ones with an ice pick in the back of their head..._

kinger101

westernpromise wrote: »

When he takes the railways back into public ownership will the shareholders be compensated, or will they just be robbed by the state?

Of course. They'll be given free accommodation, clothing and food for life. In the re-education camps.

BobQ

@rugged

You really do know how to give Mrs R a good time don't you? You treated her to a JC rally.

I can identify with some of the policies of the great leader but you are still missing the point. Imagine these policies would espoused by the Great Tony Blair (just imagine). You would still not vote for them because Great TB is (insert all the odious phrases you usually utter about him).

You need to realise that the Great JC will never attract the votes of people who agree with all the policies you have posted above. Some will say they are unaffordable, others that JC lacks leadership, others that he is a closet pacifist who would never defend his country whatever the circumstances, and others thathe is a puppet of the unions. Add to that all the people who would never vote Labour whoever the leader was and you have a Labour party that is unelectable.

Twenty years from now you will still be attending his rallies, hanging on to every word of the Great Jeremy, still seeing his halo lit by sunbeams, still wondering why this saintly 87yo is not understood among the common people. Meanwhile, the people he seeks to help will have grown up accustomed to the Conservative Party being in perpetual office and the Labour Party having only 10 MPs.

bobbymotors

BobQ wrote: »

@rugged

You really do know how to give Mrs R a good time don't you? You treated her to a JC rally.

I can identify with some of the policies of the great leader but you are still missing the point. Imagine these policies would espoused by the Great Tony Blair (just imagine). You would still not vote for them because Great TB is (insert all the odious phrases you usually utter about him).

You need to realise that the Great JC will never attract the votes of people who agree with all the policies you have posted above. Some will say they are unaffordable, others that JC lacks leadership, others that he is a closet pacifist who would never defend his country whatever the circumstances, and others thathe is a puppet of the unions. Add to that all the people who would never vote Labour whoever the leader was and you have a Labour party that is unelectable.

Twenty years from now you will still be attending his rallies, hanging on to every word of the Great Jeremy, still seeing his halo lit by sunbeams, still wondering why this saintly 87yo is not understood among the common people. Meanwhile, the people he seeks to help will have grown up accustomed to the Conservative Party being in perpetual office and the Labour Party having only 10 MPs.

Yep, this,all day long. JC is absolutely unelectable as a PM

ruggedtoast

BobQ wrote: »

@rugged

You really do know how to give Mrs R a good time don't you? You treated her to a JC rally.

I can identify with some of the policies of the great leader but you are still missing the point. Imagine these policies would espoused by the Great Tony Blair (just imagine). You would still not vote for them because Great TB is (insert all the odious phrases you usually utter about him).

You need to realise that the Great JC will never attract the votes of people who agree with all the policies you have posted above. Some will say they are unaffordable, others that JC lacks leadership, others that he is a closet pacifist who would never defend his country whatever the circumstances, and others thathe is a puppet of the unions. Add to that all the people who would never vote Labour whoever the leader was and you have a Labour party that is unelectable.

Twenty years from now you will still be attending his rallies, hanging on to every word of the Great Jeremy, still seeing his halo lit by sunbeams, still wondering why this saintly 87yo is not understood among the common people. Meanwhile, the people he seeks to help will have grown up accustomed to the Conservative Party being in perpetual office and the Labour Party having only 10 MPs.

Or, alternatively we have a political party beloved of a group of people the youngest of whom is 52, versus a zeitgeist gaining momentum among people the oldest of whom is early 40s.

You do the math.

And Mrs RT is just grateful I'm not a member of the Libdems any more. Vince Cable has a lot to say and you always miss the last train.

TrickyTree83

You get the impression of a vast following because you're surrounded by people who think the same way.

Out here in middle England, I'm surrounded by people who dislike JC and think he's a joke.

Labour will not win a GE, they may win the odd by-election and council seats, probably in spite of JC.

If on the slimmest of chances JC gets in, if he raises taxes to pay for programmes for the poor I'll use the opportunity to rent my house out and emigrate to Australia or the US for 5 years. Always wanted to try that. I suspect a lot of other people would feel the same way.

westernpromise

The brick through her window was actually through a communal stairwell window in the block she shares with five other companies. The outside is already vandalised with non political graffiti

So that's all right, then.

we have a political party beloved of a group of people the youngest of whom is 52, versus a zeitgeist gaining momentum among people the oldest of whom is early 40s.

Once they grow up, however, they tend to grow out of voting Labour. Voting to rob other people looks like a great idea until you become one of the robb-ees rather than being a robb-er. And the younger you are the less likely you are to vote.

The thing is, once Khorbiyn wins again, the PLP has nowhere much to go. It has now been established that as long as he doesn't resign, Khorbiyn's on the ballot. There is no reason to assume he'll resign when he loses at the GE. Foot quit because he had caused a catastrophe, but Kinnochio waited till he had lost two, Broon wasn't even going to resign as PM initially and only did so because he'd already been PM. So this gentlemanly practice of quitting when you lose a GE really dates back only as far as Ted Miliband last year! And if Khorbiyn's on the ballot then he'll win again, because he's the kind of nutter the nutty members vote for.

The 170 sensible MPs will either be deselected and replaced by Stepford clones, or they will quit politics. Yvette Cooper could probably get quite a good job in an economic consultancy somewhere (husband Eddie Balls losing his seat may well have been a blessing in disguise, because he was the first into the jobs market with a lookalike New Labour CV). Why would she waste her time in this Labour Party?

Labour loses about 20 seats to the boundary changes anyway which takes them down to 210 or so. Under Yeremiy's glorious leadership, probably 60 more will lose their seats and those MPs left will be either deadbeats or barking loonies. So that's 2025 in the bag as well.

The only way for the PLP to head this off is to split now so they at least get some Short money to fund a new party. They're going to lose in 2020 and 2025 anyway but maybe they can become the come-home party for disaffected Labouroids in 2030, although they'll struggle to come up with a credible leader; they would be in effect where the Liberals were in about 1974.

The model for what they need to do is what Cameron did vis-a-vis UKIP. He essentially used the rise of UKIP as a way to detoxify the Conservative party. All its most obnoxious elements - the sexists, the racists, the homophobes, the fiddlers - were all on that wing anyway, so by getting the likes of Neil Hamilton to leave the Tories and join UKIP, he has made sure that they're out of his party. And he then went out of his way to distance his party from UKIP by insulting them at every opportunity. UKIPpers' foaming hatred of Cameron made it impossible for Labour to claim that Con = UKIP.

As a result you simply don't get those kind of scandals any more. And as the only criticism that even Blair found to make of the Tories was "sleaze" - the hypocrisy of which is staggering today - that left Labour with nothing to say. The pitch for election from the party that wrecked the economy again was that they would do a better job of fixing it!

So a split Labour Party, where you had Loony Labour and Legacy Labour, looks like the best bet, with Legacy insulting Loony at every turn to drive home the message that these nutters are nothing to do with Legacy.

Of course you'd then have four leftist parties splitting the vote, but it's a start.