What now for Labour? (Part 2)

Phil Hornby wrote:I feel that Corbyn is sincere, polite, interesting and likeable - so are my neighbours but, like them, he isn't electable as Prime Minister.

In which case, why should we pay some phoney twicer to be something else?

PH do not write JC off yet, he has only been in the job a few weeks, and he is no different to anybody else on there first few weeks in a new job. You may be surprised as to what happens in the next few years, I do not think that the people of the UK will allow Davy boys term in office to complete his 5 years, just looking at his policies (tax credits is just one) we all know that since these have been stopped by the H.O.L he will come out with even nastier policies soon.

Redflag - I am not so much writing Corbyn off as I am the British electorate with its willingness to lap up that Tory propaganda.

In a thinking and civilised society the Daily Mail would never have seen the light of day and The Beano would outsell The Sun...

Phil Hornby wrote:Redflag - I am not so much writing Corbyn off as I am the British electorate with its willingness to lap up that Tory propaganda.

This is why we have to fight to change society, like decent people throughout capitalist history.   The whole point of capitalism is to lie to, degrade and destroy humanity.

Phil Hornby wrote:Redflag - I am not so much writing Corbyn off as I am the British electorate with its willingness to lap up that Tory propaganda.

In a thinking and civilised society the Daily Mail would never have seen the light of day and The Beano would outsell The Sun...

PH I suggest to watch some of the programs on the RT channel Max Keiser & Going Underground they also tell us the truth about TTIP and what the Bank of England are doing to help those that put us into this mess in 2008, and are stilling doing it today.

\"Redflag wrote: ....what the Bank of England are doing to help those that put us into this mess in 2008, and are stilling doing it today.

The Credit Crunch of 2008 found a B of E with its trousers round its ankles, baffled by the speed and depth of global failures in the banking field. Since then Bank Rate has been held at one-half of one-percent.  This makes borrowing cheap for the banking community, who therefore don't need deposits from the Public, so interest rates on Savings accounts are derisory.  Meanwhile "cheap" mortgages are trumpeted at between five and ten times multiples of BR with credit-cards charging twenty times that.

Punishment for the reckless acts of Bankers?  Don't be silly.  It's money-men who tell Governments what to do, under threat of taking their bat, ball and playing-field to Switzerland or Asia.

You are spot on OW about the BoE, but they are also up to more than that watch Max Keiser on the RT channel he tells you how all financial sectors are really up too. Your assumption that the financial sector is running most gov'ts around the world is very true, through the RT channel I have decided to vote OUT in the EU referendum in 2017 as I do not believe Farage or Ukip or any of the others that want us to vote to come out of the EU. There is also loads on twitter regarding what Merkel and her cronies are up too that has convinced me to vote OUT of the EU.

Meantime ... Jeremy Corbyn gives the Scottish Labour Party its head, which can only  be a good thing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34680112

Jeremy Corbyn is a welcome antidote to the posh machismo of David Cameron and PMQs

From an article by Ellie Mae O'Hagan:-

In 2014, Hansard published research on PMQs that found the words most commonly associated with it are "noisy", "childish", "over the top" and "pointless". So it is unsurprising that every contemporary political leader, including Cameron, has promised to reform the spectacle, and – given we know how good politicians are with promises – perhaps it is even less surprising that each one has failed miserably.

Corbyn didn't promise to change PMQs, he just went in there and did it. First, he put forward questions from members of the public. It wasn't a totally winning formula, but it did wrong-foot the government benches, because it meant the braying usually employed as a way of disconcerting the opposition leader suddenly didn't work. It looked like a load of posh old men booing ordinary people's concerns.

Corbyn's relentless focus on policy, and his persistent reminders that MPs are debating issues that affect real people, has undermined Cameron rather effectively. The effect of seeing an Old Etonian peacocking away, while his opponent reads out concerns from members of the public transforms Corbyn into a man of the people and Cameron into a member of the elite. And given Cameron's background, it has the effect of watching a mask slip.

But as Ian Dunt, editor of politics.co.uk, puts it: "The public don't watch PMQs. The only extent to which it matters is how it influences the journalists who do, but they are all – almost to a man –hostile to Corbyn and will continue to be whatever he does. Corbyn is not going to win a general election through PMQs."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/jeremy-corbyn-welcome-antidote-posh-machismo-david-cameron-pmqs-1527200

If as stated by the journalist, people don't watch PMQs, it may be worthwhile people in the Labour party showing it on the internet. Or perhaps begging a left-leaning newspaper to have a weekly feature.

The more people that see the brashness & discourtesy of this government, the better.

It could also possibly be worthwhile to boycott the whole farce anyway.

Today, the Prime Minister didn't actually answer a single question.

I do like the way that Corbyn refuses to continue with a question until the ignorant and puerile Tory braying subsides, and the way he looks disapprovingly but calmly at the morons opposite in the manner of a headmaster about to admonish errant members of the Remove...

From today's PMQs (with subtitles)......  


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CS_egh_VEAAdxkp.jpg

IVAN I would say it sounded like a SHOWER OF BRAYING DONKEY'S but Jermy Corbyn showed the gentleman that he is unlike this gov't of NASTY BACSTUDS.

Corbyn is excellent in PMQ's. The tories are clearly rattled.

It's refreshing to have a real opposition.

The tone of his voice and that death stare are really effective. It all just shows the Tories up as completely out of touch.

I'm pleased with the way things are going under this current leadership. It's different, it's a lot more grassroots and the people are given much more say which is why the likes of the 'moderates' are so unhappy. The status quo is being challenged and that can only be good.

It is to be hoped that our Mr Corbyn in Parliament will have a similar effect on British politics as an irritating grain of sand has inside the oyster.

This week, it seems they tried a different weapon - the booing and hissing and drowning him out weapon - at PMQ's.
Did seem to be spiking his guns a bit - hopefully he has another strategy ready

I don't see that there's a problem. Jeremy Corbyn, just like a sensible schoolteacher, doesn't try to talk over noise. He just stops and waits for Bercow to tell the Tory louts to shut up.

We see Cameron attacking Corbyn and now his advisers - which is a bit rich from the man who took Andy Coulson into Downing Street. However, I accept, as Ian Dunt said, that most of the public don't watch PMQs. Nevertheless, the message which goes out is that the Tories are trying to silence Corbyn, and sometimes they laugh when he's reading out questions and genuine concerns from the general public - the voters. It could backfire on them if they persist with that tactic.

Sort of hoping you're right

I did not vote for Jermy Corbyn but have found him a "Breath of Fresh Air" , its a shame more people do not watch PMQs because then they would see a Gentleman (JC) taking on a Tory LOUT.

QUOTE: ".... its a shame more people do not watch PMQs"....

Indeed it is, Redflag, and equally shameful that so many are apparently prepared to cast their vote according to what the Murdoch Press tells 'em.

Nevertheless, there is a small comfort from seeing how the snippets on TV do Cameron no favours at all in the eyes of people who might previously have thought of him as a Gentleman.

Mr Corbyn however has emerged from their encounters as much better qualified for that description.

If those that are angry took there anger out on the Murdoch press would be a good start OW, why do some within the Labour party not give JC a fair crack of the whip instead of back-biting against JC. We have a By-Election coming up soon and EVERY Labour MP and members have to get behind the Labour candidate or do they want Ukip to win the seat which in reality would just be another Tory because the Ukip MP Douglas Carswell votes with the Tories.

There is also Elections in Wales & Scotland plus local & a Mayoral Election in May 2016, I think if the entire Labour party MPs & members get behind JC I think we could let the Tories know there on there last legs as far as gov't in the UK.

The discussion about ‘shoot to kill’ has been moved to a thread where that issue has been discussed previously:-

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t296-does-it-worry-you-that-police-officers-in-the-uk-are-increasingly-carrying-firearms

Thank you, Ivan

Nevertheless, the message which goes out is that the Tories are trying to silence Corbyn, and sometimes they laugh when he's reading out questions and genuine concerns from the general public - the voters. It could backfire on them if they persist with that tactic

Why on earth would they try to silence Corbyn?  Everything he says enhances their prospects of another term. The general suspicion was, at first, that he was deliberately playing stupid but his stupidity is the genuine article. I agree that laughing at someone's disability is unkind but it is very hard to keep a straight face when you have someone so completely out of his depth, twittering rubbish that would shame an infant. Yes, he disgraces British politics but the amusement he causes provides some light relief. We must thank whatever gods there be that he has nothing to do with protecting us from terrorists.

Clearly a politician who confines his comments to what he believes to be the truth, is likely to be outnumbered in the Houses of Parliament.

Clearly a politician who confines his comments to what he believes to be the truth, is likely to be outnumbered in the Houses of Parliament.

Well, one man will obviously be "outnumbered", oftenwrong. We all love infants but surely we don't want one as a national leader, even if he believes his babbling to be Truth.

Jeremy Corbyn ahead ....

understandable since the man is so pathetic that hoi polloi shower pity on him. Hardly qualifications for a person to lead a country! We'd be better off with Bugs Bunny. It won't happen, thankfully, so let's enjoy the comedy.

I can visualise some 'comedy' arising on here in the not-too-distant future... 

The mystery is what, if Mr Corbyn is apparently unsuitable, incoherent and unelectable, so terrifies the right-wing about him.

marcolucco wrote:Jeremy Corbyn ahead  ....

understandable since the man is so pathetic that hoi polloi shower pity on him. Hardly qualifications for a person to lead a country! We'd be better off with Bugs Bunny. It won't happen, thankfully, so let's enjoy the comedy.

I should read OW post marcolucco, I suppose your one of them that want a Tory LITE Labour leader where the Labour party are out of office for years while the sick disabled & low paid are made to pay for the rich getting richer. As for qualifications on running this country the A**E HOLE we have at the moment could not maange a "P**S UP IN A BREWERY"

oftenwrong wrote:The mystery is what, if Mr Corbyn is apparently unsuitable, incoherent and unelectable, so terrifies the right-wing about him.

That is the most import question OW, and maybe the reason is the rich & wealthy would have to pay there CORRECT AMOUNT of TAX, or it could be that the tories do not want the people of the Uk to find out what they have really being doing for the last five & half years.

"The mystery is what, if Mr Corbyn is apparently unsuitable, incoherent and unelectable, so terrifies the right-wing about him."

I think Jeremy coheres all right. He is unelectable because almost all Labour MPs recognise his shortcomings. It is a mystery to me why you think the right are terrified of him - some of them played an active part in putting him in position. The people who are terrified are the sane majority who would have to live in a country overseen by this poor soul. He's not bad - he's just incompetent and pathetic.

Thank you, redflag, for sharing what seems to be your thoughts. I see you are a keen student of grammar. If I am correct in my translation of your post it troubles you that Mr. Cameron would be unable to organise some festivity in a brewery. Since he will never be required to demonstrate this skill you should stop fretting.
Have you considered letting "the people of the UK" know what you know about the machinations of the "rich and wealthy"?  Perhaps if you write a letter to Jeremy he will raise the matter at PM's Question Time, and don't forget to mention " the sick disabled".

Corbyn certainly polarises opinion.

Wouldn't it be terrible for Cameron and his disgusting Tories if people actually started to like him and saw in him a decency, honesty and lack of reliance upon the Daily Mail's vomit-inducing  fawning which is so conspicuously lacking in our Prime Minister and his hateful entourage...?

Pardon me while I check my spelling and punctuation - I think a reincarnation of somebody wearing brown boots has just pushed open the door.

Only this one may have read a book once...     

Corbyn certainly comes across as honest which appeals to people. Honesty isn't a top requirement in politics. Cameron speaks well but lacks the charisma of Blair and the fireside wisdom of Wilson.

As for your puerility: why wouldn't you check your spelling and punctuation? It is a courtesy to those who are reading what you write. I commented on grammar because the horrible solecisms there are easily corrected if forum rules are applied. If you write like an 8-year-old and I wish to reply, I will quickly let you know, regardless of what colour of shoes I am wearing. You give the impression that there is something shameful in requiring folk to express themselves intelligibly.

Hmm. Accustomed though we are to the Bullingdon grade of snobbery from our elected Government, intellectual snobbery also competes for attention. We know that whilst the Chancellor is willing to sell us what already belonged to us, he still wouldn't let us past his front door at any price.