|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Jeremy Corbyn out?
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
The PLP is not a set of clones, Blairite or otherwise. Amongst the 172 are a large number who agree with most, or indeed all of his policies. They don't think that he stands any chance of delivering them, because he's just not a very good leader.
However no doubt the membership will help him see off the challenge. What next?
The public won't vote for Corbyn as PM, even if the PLP quieten down. They know his own MPs don't rate him as leader. Why should they?
UKIP and the Lib Dems can't believe their luck.
May vs (Corbyn vs PLP). Hmmm.
I can see post-election Labour needing to change the rules on the number of MPs backing leadership candidates, from numerical necessity.
Goodbye Labour party. You stopped the Tories from having unending rule in the 90s. It's a pity you couldn't do it again.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
Why do you assume that he aims at a socialist utopia or necessarily aims to get there in a single leap? Did you also believe the press when they told you that 'Red Ed' was a communist firebrand?
I assume he aims at a socialist utopia, at least as an end-point, because he describes himself as a socialist.
I assume that his supporters imagine he will get there by a single leap, or at least by a leap that is far more radical than everyone else's leap, because they talk as though he is our only hope against neoliberalism.
Fundamentally the Labour party is Fabian, that is, socialism is to be achieved by a series of incremental steps. If Mr Corbyn is also a Fabian, then I don't see that Ms Eagle or Mr Miliband or even Mr Blair differ from him in principle, and attempts to draw a distinction between them on principled grounds (Corbyn nice, Blair nasty) are misguided. However, AIUI, within Fabianism the size of the step to be taken at any one time is determined by its feasibility. If Ms Eagle's proposed steps* are more electorally palatable than Mr Corbyn's proposed steps, then that would also imply Ms Eagle's steps are more feasible, and the correct Fabian behaviour is to vote for Ms Eagle.
* For the record let me acknowledge that I've no idea what Ms Eagle's proposed steps are either.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
(Corbyn nice, Blair nasty)
(Corbyn consistently against ill-advised rush to war, Blair very keen to the point of utter recklessness to go to war)
Actually, not so misguided after all.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
Yeah, I opened myself up to that one.
In the context of this thread, though, posters are (AIUI) using Blairism to describe what they see as an excessive compromise with neoliberalism. My point is that any attempt to introduce socialism by incremental steps will entail a compromise with neoliberalism.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
(Corbyn nice, Blair nasty)
(Corbyn consistently against ill-advised rush to war, Blair very keen to the point of utter recklessness to go to war)
Actually, not so misguided after all.
Blair, brought peace to Northern Ireland Corbyn, opposed the Anglo-Irish agreement and supported IRA when they were murdering civilians and British soldiers. So, who is nice and who is nasty in this context.
And at least Blair's lapse of judgment occurred when a US President was engaged on a foolhardy course of action against a genocidal tyrant who was a repeated violated of international law. Like the young man torn between joining the Resistance and looking after his aged mother in Sartre's parable, whatever he did would have been wrong. I'm not sure quite what the analogous justification was for Jeremy Corbyn deciding to support the 'armed struggle' of Messrs Kneecap O'Goon and Seamus McSemtex in this context.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
https://edinburgheye.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/on-the-process-of-political-smearing/
Cos your presentation is not biased in any way ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
There is no such thing as an unbiased presentation in these matters. Still, it is a matter of fact that Jeremy Corbyn opposed the Anglo-Irish agreement. It is also a matter of fact that he invited Sinn Fein to address a meeting at the House of Commons, shortly after they had attempted to blow up the British cabinet and your own link demonstrates that he was unable to say that he condemned the IRA bombing campaign without engaging in his usual disingenuous "All Lives Matter" rhetoric. The whole "Jeremy supported the peace process before it was fashionable" line is a load of betty swollocks, frankly. Jeremy supported the IRA when he thought that they were going to win and then spun it as support for the peace process, when it was clear that they had lost and were going to the British government to negotiate their surrender. Given the horrors of the Troubles we can live with Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness living on comfortable sinecures, as a price to be paid for children growing up without the risk of being blown up by some Semtex happy nationalist. I see no reason to consider Mr Corbyn's continuation as Leader of the Opposition in quite the same light.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Well, quite. Callan, I think your position on Corbyn's past activities needs a little recalibrating.
Blair did a great number of good things, but helping instigate a war (admittedly against a terrible human being) using deliberately underhand tactics to convince both parliament and public, and in which over 150,000 Iraqi civilians subsequently died, and set the dominoes falling for the rest of the Middle East, rather overshadows everything else.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
..
The public won't vote for Corbyn as PM, even if the PLP quieten down. They know his own MPs don't rate him as leader. Why should they?
...
The assumption that the public will follow the lead of the Labour MP's in not voting for Corbyn is based on what? Polls?
I'm curious because more then one election campaign around the world has seen switches in public favour that the political chattering classes did not anticipate.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
To a certain extent the plp are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy - spending weeks yelling our leader is crap is not going to inspire confidence on the part of the general public.
A more subtle, and more effective approach - were he actually self-evidently crap - would be to launch a leadership challenge backing another left winger (who is convinced to do it cos they have noticed he's crap) - and then go full on for policy detail and head to head debates (as that tends to be what they say he's crap at).
If your guy is better, he should win. And if he loses, you haven't spent months telling the public that your leader is crap.
(Which would be one of my issues with Angela Eagle's campaign.)
At the moment they are indulging in a kind of mutually assured destruction. Though notably, Corbyn is not yelling the plp are crap to everyone who will listen. Those around him are suggesting they are disloyal rather than incompetent.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
...the 'armed struggle' of Messrs Kneecap O'Goon and Seamus McSemtex in this context.
Very entertaining writing for a certain section of the population I'm sure but comes across as a little off to me. You must think me very humourless but it doesn't seem like a great joke for an Englander.
(And by the way it wasn't Satre's choice for Blair. One choice was illegal war with 150k direct deaths and many more indirect deaths, ISIS, the Syrian refugee crisis and a general destablization of the Middle-East and Islamic world. The other choice of leaving bad-guy Saddam in charge would have done Blair's legacy as much harm as leaving Assad, Khatami and Kim Jong-il in charge.)
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
So Blair's legacy is sycophantic capitulation to a short-sighted puppet with daddy issues. And genocidal, you say Callan? Yeah, like the toxic twins gave a shit about genocide where there was no oil.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
The Labour MPs have lost confidence in Jeremy Corbyn. That's a fact. Not a tactic. I've read the wording of the rules. Viewed in isolation they seem to be very clear that the current leader does not have to be nominated by 20% of MPs and MEPs. So Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly win a court case if the NEC said otherwise and he appealed the ruling. I don't think the NEC will want this to go to court. That would truly be a grotesque spectacle, putting into the shade any Militant Tendency grotesque spectacles of the past.
But if Jeremy wins this battle he will lose the war. In a representative democracy, the hearts and minds of the elected MPs are not under the control of the elected leader. They are not the delegates of the Labour Party members. He can only govern them with their consent. Which he clearly does not have.
Jeremy Corbyn cannot survive this impasse just because the rule book says he can. If that rule book is in conflict with the principle of representative democracy in the UK then that rule book is wrong. It has been argued that the MPs have acted unconstitutionally in accordance with Labour Party constitutional rules. But they have not done so in accordance with the wider guidelines governing representative democracies.
I wonder who will blink first in this stand-off? As things stand, the parliamentary opposition provided by the second biggest party in the House of Commons is a pathetic joke. And will continue to be so until either Jeremy resigns or the majority of those 172 MPs are replaced by Corbynistas. Who should fall on their sword do you think? The one or the many? It has to be one or the other. Things have gone too far for any other solution.
[ 12. July 2016, 06:58: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
He didn't lose it, he never had it.
If they want Corbyn to lose and not split the party, they need to let him stand, put another left wing candidate on the ballot and then make a convincing argument.
The challenger would have the advantage of not being bound by the current policy platform.
So for example, if I were running, I would produce a proposed election manifesto + Brexit negotiating position. Running with that level of detail would attract much more support. (I might also include a draft leader's job plan about how I planned to use my time, and engage with other labour MPs.)
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
(I might also include a draft leader's job plan about how I planned to use my time, and engage with other labour MPs.)
that in itself is a symbol of quite how much of a mess the party is in. It just shouldn't be necessary to do that, because pretty near every leader in every party ever (in the UK) has been able to assume that their MPs would take that bit on trust.* The way the Labour party is currently operating (and I use the term charitably) is genuinely uncharted water in UK politics.
About the only leader I can think of who survived despite his party wandering off is Labour's Ramsay Mac - and a) he was propped up by Baldwin's Tories, and b) it didn't end well for him.
*It has been said that the best regiments and ships in the British forces are those with the fewest rules, because everyone knows how to behave. If you have to spell out exactly how you're going to run your relationships with other people then you've already lost.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Aye Doublethink.
Our fact is that.
The PLP could never lose what it, collectively, never had.
Heart.
Soul.
Loyalty.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I wonder who will blink first in this stand-off? As things stand, the parliamentary opposition provided by the second biggest party in the House of Commons is a pathetic joke. And will continue to be so until either Jeremy resigns or the majority of those 172 MPs are replaced by Corbynistas. Who should fall on their sword do you think? The one or the many? It has to be one or the other. Things have gone too far for any other solution.
The party can win with a different group of MPs (you'd probably only need to replace the ringleaders of the chickencoup, a lot of the 172 have no confidence because there's a minority who can't bring themselves to stop undermining the leadership, and that's not a situation that can continue), I'm not sure it can find a different membership and it can't win without the members. What needs to happen is that, when Corbyn wins, the PLP need to take a deep breath, stand in fron of a mirror and recite the words "the commitment and drive that Jeremy Corbyn has shown in these last weeks and months has convinced me that he does in fact have the metal to be Labour leader and Prime Minister. I've been involved in a number of discussions with him and we are now certain we can work together towards the Labour government this country desperately needs" until they can say it convincingly in public, and then they need to get to work for a Labour victory when the next election comes, including helping Corbyn avoid making too many unforced errors. Yes, that means Corbyn getting them to vet speeches for things that people will twist to attack him (assuming they can demonstrate they'll do so without leaking), and helping him refine his tactics at PMQs.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I wonder who will blink first in this stand-off? As things stand, the parliamentary opposition provided by the second biggest party in the House of Commons is a pathetic joke. And will continue to be so until either Jeremy resigns or the majority of those 172 MPs are replaced by Corbynistas. Who should fall on their sword do you think? The one or the many? It has to be one or the other. Things have gone too far for any other solution.
The party can win with a different group of MPs (you'd probably only need to replace the ringleaders of the chickencoup, a lot of the 172 have no confidence because there's a minority who can't bring themselves to stop undermining the leadership, and that's not a situation that can continue), I'm not sure it can find a different membership and it can't win without the members. What needs to happen is that, when Corbyn wins, the PLP need to take a deep breath, stand in fron of a mirror and recite the words "the commitment and drive that Jeremy Corbyn has shown in these last weeks and months has convinced me that he does in fact have the metal to be Labour leader and Prime Minister. I've been involved in a number of discussions with him and we are now certain we can work together towards the Labour government this country desperately needs" until they can say it convincingly in public, and then they need to get to work for a Labour victory when the next election comes, including helping Corbyn avoid making too many unforced errors. Yes, that means Corbyn getting them to vet speeches for things that people will twist to attack him (assuming they can demonstrate they'll do so without leaking), and helping him refine his tactics at PMQs.
I appreciate that you won't agree with me, and I'm not a Labour supporter, but I'm feeling increasingly sorry for the PLP.
At the moment their Spidey Senses (TM) seem to be telling them that your proposal could be paraphrased as standing in front of the mirror and convincing themselves that they're going to be led to oblivion and it's their duty to make the leader feel better about this by following him to it.
Meanwhile, for all the chaos raging round them, the Tories can't believe their luck.* If I was May, I'd actually call a snap election (FTPA notwithstanding) and see what I could do with a majority of 100+...
I'm not sure at the moment anything can save Labour - I certainly can't see a solution where they can both be a credible party *and* have Jeremy in charge.
Political movement or political party looks like their choice.
Time to make it.
*yesterday's polls, *pre* May becoming leader and taken in a febrile atmosphere of post-Brexit chaos in the Tory party, have the Tories on 38, Labour on 30, and the LibDems down in single figures.
You'd have to expect May is going to get some sort of bounce on that - what price 40+ in a week or two?
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
A party at war with itself never looks good, and the chickencoupers have only become more open in their warfare in the last 2 weeks. Frankly I think it's a good sign that Labour's holding at 30 given the total mess it's in right now. May will get a bounce while this nonsense continues, but once Eagle is given her marching orders things will settle down and we'll have to start dealing with the fact that the tories have no damn clue what they're doing with regard to Brexit negotiations, no economic plan, and are going to have to face up to either crashing the economy completely, admitting they screwed up and trying to back-out of Brexit, or following all the EU rules and paying the same amount in but not having any MEPs or commissioners or any say at all as members of the EFTA. I think you're underestimating how screwing the entire country will impact on the tories' electoral chances.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
Meanwhile, Angela Eagle is forced to cancel an engagement in Luton after the hotel whereat she would have stayed received death threats, a brick id chucked through the window of her constituency office, and her staff have stopped answering the phone due to the level of abuse. But, of course, Mr Corbyn's leadership skills shouldn't be taken to imply leadership of his own supporters.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Helen-Eva
Shipmate
# 15025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Meanwhile, Angela Eagle is forced to cancel an engagement in Luton after the hotel whereat she would have stayed received death threats,
Seems to be open season on female Labour MPs this summer. *depressed*
--------------------
I thought the radio 3 announcer said "Weber" but it turned out to be Webern. Story of my life.
Posts: 637 | From: London, hopefully in a theatre or concert hall, more likely at work | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
From what we know of Theresa May she's pragmatic and deceptively ruthless. For all the public denials of a snap election, she must surely be considering it. The disarray on the opposition benches is too good a chance to pass up.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
A party at war with itself never looks good, and the chickencoupers have only become more open in their warfare in the last 2 weeks. Frankly I think it's a good sign that Labour's holding at 30 given the total mess it's in right now. May will get a bounce while this nonsense continues, but once Eagle is given her marching orders things will settle down and we'll have to start dealing with the fact that the tories have no damn clue what they're doing with regard to Brexit negotiations, no economic plan, and are going to have to face up to either crashing the economy completely, admitting they screwed up and trying to back-out of Brexit, or following all the EU rules and paying the same amount in but not having any MEPs or commissioners or any say at all as members of the EFTA. I think you're underestimating how screwing the entire country will impact on the tories' electoral chances.
And what plans does Corbyn have, what plans has he articulated?
What is going on now in he Labour party was inevitable when the rules were amended so that selection of the leader of the PLP was so wide open. The chosen method would be valid for selection of the leader of the party as a whole.
From the start, Corbyn managed to obtain the support of only one more member of the parliamentary than the minimum to gain a place on the ballot paper. Assuming. he has retained those 36 voters and now giving him the support of all but 4 of those who did not declare support for any one candidate before the election, he has, at the most, barely a quarter of the PLP behind him. Sadly, the result in 2020 will be a disastrous loss for Labour and a further 5 years of Tory government.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Ray Collins who chaired the review of election rules, made it clear in the WATO today that the intention of the rules was that all candidates (and the sitting leader becomes a potential candidate once there is a challenge) needed to get the threshold PLP support before their name could go forward. He claimed the rule was unambiguous about this (personally I disagree), but observed that there was no intention to take away the traditional and initial PLP role in selection of candidates.
Well, here's a carry on. I have now got no idea which way the NEC will jump. It looks as though Jeremy and his supporters are relying on a legal interpretation of the words, rather than the intention of the reform. That really doesn't look good.
Here is Ray Collins' background. He doesn't sound like the kind of man who would reinvent the past for the sake of the present.
[ 12. July 2016, 12:54: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
M.
Ship's Spare Part
# 3291
|
Posted
Tangent alert. May I interrupt this serious discussion to say that I don't think I have come across the expression 'betty swollocks' for lo! these 40 years.
So thank you, Callan, for reminding me of it.
Tangent over.
M.
Posts: 2303 | From: Lurking in Surrey | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Well, here's a carry on. I have now got no idea which way the NEC will jump. It looks as though Jeremy and his supporters are relying on a legal interpretation of the words, rather than the intention of the reform. That really doesn't look good.
Why not? You could argue that Ray Collins should've ensured that it was made clear that the challengers and the incumbent needed to get the PLP nominations first and that the PLP is relying on a vague "intention" (which is hard to prove either way at this distance) rather than a legal interpretation which would clarify things for all concerned.
But this is the problem with this whole debate (and I'm not getting at you specifically here, Barnabas - I promse!!): things are said against Corbyn without them being followed up with very much in the way of evidence:
* He's "unelectable"; then when he wins an election (eg the leadership election) or the party does under him (eg the Oldham byelection) the voters are either unreperesentative (how?) or it's nothing to do with him.
* He should've campaigned more in the Euro referendum, been more enthusiastic, got more Labour voters to vote Remain. How? Angela Eagle praised him during the campaign for the amount of campaigning he was doing. What if his campaigning actually upped the Labour Remain vote - we don't know, no one's produced any evidence either way.
* Ricardus' post above about the stupid, idiotic threats against Angela Eagle. How is Corbyn supposed to be personally responsible for the behaviour of every single one of his supporters? No human being can do that. Especially as Corbyn has spoken repeatedly of the need for the party to pull together and to unite.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
(With apologies for the double post...)
And let's be clear: this present crisis is a crisis for which the PLP bears a huge responsibility. They complained about a "lack of effective opposition", yet passed up the chance to be that effective opposition by choosing to start their own leadership crisis when the Tories were entering into one of their own. I'd have thought the thing to do, politically, when your opponenets are in turmoil is to go after them, not to start turmoil of your own. It was a stupid, stupid time to start all of this. And now the Tories have come through their (immediate) crisis and Labour are still in the midst of theirs. Who's going to do better in the polls in the aftermath of all this? Who's going to be setting the agenda? Clue: Not Labour.
Then they had no plan, no idea of what to do next. They had no candidate to put up against Corbyn, no one they could present as a suitable alternative. Eventually, Angela Eagle announced she might stand, but even then it took the best part of a fortnight for her to finally announce she was actually going to do it. A fortnight when the whole party has been in limbo when they could've have been getting with being this "effective opposition" they claimed they wanted to be.
At least when the Tories get the knives out against their leader, they get on with it quickly and make a clean job of it. The PLP's looked ridiculous and inept.
They've done nothing to address the gap between themselves and the wider membership. They've never once asked why so many ordinary members voted for Corbyn, or even attempted to find a candidate who might address those concerns. They haven't listened or thought or asked "do we need to change? Is it us? Is Corbyn's election pointing to something wrong with us in Parliament"? And their actions in provoking this leadership crisis have only made things worse to the point that a split looks almost inevitable. But apparently, it's Corbyn who's out of touch with ordinary members. Really?
[ 12. July 2016, 13:19: Message edited by: Stejjie ]
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Great headline from the BBC website: "Eagle tries to carry off Australian boy".
Nothing to do with the Labour Party though.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Well, here's a carry on. I have now got no idea which way the NEC will jump. It looks as though Jeremy and his supporters are relying on a legal interpretation of the words, rather than the intention of the reform. That really doesn't look good.
Why not? You could argue that Ray Collins should've ensured that it was made clear that the challengers and the incumbent needed to get the PLP nominations first
He's just made that clear! We're arguing about whether the words made that clear, rather than what the reformers intended. These things need to be resolved within the party, not in the courts. It's perfectly reasonable to ask Ray Collins what he meant. And it's perfectly reasonable for Ray Collins to provide that clarification.
Let's see what the NEC make of this now.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
<snip>
They've done nothing to address the gap between themselves and the wider membership. They've never once asked why so many ordinary members voted for Corbyn, or even attempted to find a candidate who might address those concerns. They haven't listened or thought or asked "do we need to change? Is it us? Is Corbyn's election pointing to something wrong with us in Parliament"? And their actions in provoking this leadership crisis have only made things worse to the point that a split looks almost inevitable. But apparently, it's Corbyn who's out of touch with ordinary members. Really?
I don't recall seeing anything that explained where all the much vaunted "new" "£3" members who flocked to vote for Corbyn lived. Which matters, because if he's rejuvenated the membership in the Welsh valleys or other Labour hearlands of old, it won't make much difference in an election.
If Corbyn has been racking up new Labour supporters in swing seats, then they might well end up winning an election because of that - assuming those people stay engaged.
It's not a question of who's in touch the ordinary Labour party members , it's a question of who's in touch with potential Labour voters .
I can't remember if anybody already linked to this, but Neil Kinnock certainly thinks Corbyn is a bogey man for the latter group.
Kinnock speech to Labour MPs
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Well, here's a carry on. I have now got no idea which way the NEC will jump. It looks as though Jeremy and his supporters are relying on a legal interpretation of the words, rather than the intention of the reform. That really doesn't look good.
Why not? You could argue that Ray Collins should've ensured that it was made clear that the challengers and the incumbent needed to get the PLP nominations first
He's just made that clear! We're arguing about whether the words made that clear, rather than what the reformers intended. These things need to be resolved within the party, not in the courts. It's perfectly reasonable to ask Ray Collins what he meant. And it's perfectly reasonable for Ray Collins to provide that clarification.
Let's see what the NEC make of this now.
Apologies: I meant the words weren't clear enough, not what Ray Collins said today...
I wasn't clear enough in my words. The irony... ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
I'll get me coat...
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Meanwhile, Angela Eagle is forced to cancel an engagement in Luton after the hotel whereat she would have stayed received death threats, a brick id chucked through the window of her constituency office, and her staff have stopped answering the phone due to the level of abuse. But, of course, Mr Corbyn's leadership skills shouldn't be taken to imply leadership of his own supporters.
Corbyn himself has received death threats and thugs from the right of the party have been attacking his supporters in Brighton:
http://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-d9b4-Labour-right-thugs-threaten-own-side
Suffice to say I don't think you can blame Corbyn for morons attacking his opponents any more than you can blame those same opponents for attacks on him and his supporters.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Ray Collins who chaired the review of election rules, made it clear in the WATO today that the intention of the rules was that all candidates (and the sitting leader becomes a potential candidate once there is a challenge) needed to get the threshold PLP support before their name could go forward. He claimed the rule was unambiguous about this (personally I disagree), but observed that there was no intention to take away the traditional and initial PLP role in selection of candidates.
Well, here's a carry on. I have now got no idea which way the NEC will jump. It looks as though Jeremy and his supporters are relying on a legal interpretation of the words, rather than the intention of the reform. That really doesn't look good.
Here is Ray Collins' background. He doesn't sound like the kind of man who would reinvent the past for the sake of the present.
It's amazing how, even without duplicity, past memory can be gradually elided to fit with current beliefs. My guess is that nobody considered it an issue, because they never conceived of a leader getting elected in the first place who was so at odds with the parliamentary party, and likewise never conceived that the PLP would be so terrified of their leader winning that they'd try to keep them off the ballot. It's an utterly bizarre situation.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
The reality is that the Labour Leader does not think he can get 51 MP and MEP votes, otherwise why should he bother to declare, in advance, that he will challenge an NEC decision which means he has to get them?
The reality is that this is a car crash which will injure the Labour Party for years.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Suffice to say I don't think you can blame Corbyn for morons attacking his opponents any more than you can blame those same opponents for attacks on him and his supporters.
You're right, the implication in my post does go a bit too far.
However, I do think it's relevant because one of Mr Corbyn's virtues is supposed to be that he has re-energised the grassroots and brought new members into the fold. If those new members contain a percentage of self-righteous hooligans then one might question how far this is a good thing. I do not remember brick-throwing thugs campaigning on behalf of Ms Cooper, Mr Burnham, or Ms Kendall.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
We don't even know if the brick throwing was from a Corbyn supporter, actually. Plus, when you motivate over a quarter million people it's likely that there will be a percentage of all manner of dispositions, particularly is you motivate mostly people who have, thus far, felt disenfranchised by the political process. Besides, we don't know which of Cooper, Burnham or Kendall the thugs in Brighton supported, so don't go making that claim so quickly either.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Have a look at Angela Eagle's Facebook page and ask what happened to treating Labour Party members with dignity and respect.
Of course we don't know yet who threw the brick. There are plenty around throwing brickbats.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
don't know if anyone else is following the shenanigans at the NEC meeting on twitter but it's riveting...
that and bleakly hilarious.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Hells bells. Michael Crick must be wearing the Potter invisibility cloak.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The reality is that the Labour Leader does not think he can get 51 MP and MEP votes, otherwise why should he bother to declare, in advance, that he will challenge an NEC decision which means he has to get them?
I think it's quite consistent with Corbyn's character, actually. He has principles, and his own sense of what is right and wrong. He has fairly consistently acted in accordance with his principles, even when it seems counter-productive. If Corbyn thinks that it is wrong that an elected leader should be required to produce enough MP's nominations to allow the party membership to vote on his leadership, it is entirely consistent with his historical behaviour that he would stand up for that regardless of whether he thinks it would personally affect him.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
That's fine. I agree that on the basis of his history you might expect him to behave in accordance with his beliefs.
But in which case why did he not recuse himself from the NEC meeting? That would have been normal in view of the fact that he had an interest in the outcome. Apparently his decision to attend came very late.
And why were attempts made to exclude Jon Ashworth from his role as Shadow Cabinet rep on the NEC? Apparently he received an email or msg in the middle of the night. It took a Shadow Cabinet meeting this morning to stop that attempt.
Source.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
Tts Michael Foot all over again.
Some folks never learn.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
As if the NEC earthquakes weren't enough. See entry timed at 18.41.
What the Hell is going in the Party?
[ 12. July 2016, 17:50: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
I don't think Michael Foot is remotely relevant at this stage, at least not to me.
I am hugely, hugely disappointed, and not a little angry. Only a massively toxic combination of un-harnessed, freewheeling political ambition, coupled with/up against a self-regard that is impenetrable to the demands of a truly exceptional situation, could manage to make this situation about Labour's internal problems when the Tories have fucked up so badly.
The whole PLP should be considering their positions. The depth of fuck-up they have created is absolutely heartbreaking.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
And what was wrong with Worzel Foot? And what's the comparison?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Corbyn's on the ballot.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
And that is, I guess, for the best. Better than a court case, that's for sure.
Presumably there will be some kind of public statement?
(ETA - just seen it; any other candidate needs to make the threshold of support. Looks like a precedent has been set.)
[ 12. July 2016, 19:07: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Good.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
The Eagle is stranded.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
The Eagle is stranded.
Or possibly hoist....
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
