I really like Corbyn. He could be just like 'unelectable' Thatcher. He sure has the Establishment in a spin.

I see the PM has been very un-PM like this evening and said anyone who votes against the bombing is guilty of sympathising with terrorism - idiot!

 

So he's saying that half of the UK population are terrorist sympathisers.

 

What a complete and utter MORON.

Don't like Burnham, too slippery came through with James Purnell and like him very ambitious!

 

I see the PM has been very un-PM like this evening and said anyone who votes against the bombing is guilty of sympathising with terrorism - idiot!

The only time that numbskull manages to be remotely Prime Ministerial is when he apologises for something that had nothing to do with him, e.g. Bloody Sunday and the Hillsborough cover-up. Even then, it is clear from the rest of his behaviour that the sincerity is fake. The man is an utter fraud.

I really like Corbyn. He could be just like 'unelectable' Thatcher. He sure has the Establishment in a spin.

The only grounds on which people insisted Thatcher was unelectable were 70s sexist ones that were outdated even at the time. And it's also worth recalling that Thatcher in Opposition was nowhere *near* as far from the political consensus or precedented policy as Corbyn is now. It'd be like insisting Corbyn were beyond the pale if Labour had tried radical leftism for a year or two in the mid-00s then u-turned during a recession, at the same time as the Conservatives having an economic crash of such a magnitude they had to borrow from the IMF. And even then Thatcher wasn't the dogmatic ideologue of the 80s in her time in opposition - most of her 70s messaging was based on a mixture of populist 'common-sense' housewife economics and saying the unions needed reining in, which even a huge number of *union members* agreed with at the time.

 

It's also worth noting that Thatcher was never as toe-curlingly incompetent as Corbyn. He doesn't have 'the establishment' in a spin at all. They're laughing themselves silly at him because he's a complete and utter joke that is destroying the only party of government that has ever consistently supported the interests of ordinary people over the most affluent.

 

And as if to emphasise the point, the Tories have gone into an *eleven point lead* with YouGov over Labour tonight. Corbyn approval ratings at a net minus 41. That's Thatcher during the poll tax levels, twelve weeks in, while the Labour Party are in opposition. But sure, the establishment are just ~terrified~ of the self-indulgent old fool.

If they weren't terrified, the 'impartial' (lol, see them airing a LOT of anti-gay views and NO OPPOSING VIEWS AFTER AIRING CRITICISMS FROM THE CHURCH!!! during the equal marriage vote then not reporting on it when it passed easily lol, see them calling Corbyn 'left wing', see them talking up a hung parliament when Blair was running a 3rd time etc) BBC wouldn't be reporting badly on him all the time too and BBC is as establisment as it gets these days.

The only grounds on which people insisted Thatcher was unelectable were 70s sexist ones that were outdated even at the time. And it's also worth recalling that Thatcher in Opposition was nowhere *near* as far from the political consensus or precedented policy as Corbyn is now. It'd be like insisting Corbyn were beyond the pale if Labour had tried radical leftism for a year or two in the mid-00s then u-turned during a recession, at the same time as the Conservatives having an economic crash of such a magnitude they had to borrow from the IMF. And even then Thatcher wasn't the dogmatic ideologue of the 80s in her time in opposition - most of her 70s messaging was based on a mixture of populist 'common-sense' housewife economics and saying the unions needed reining in, which even a huge number of *union members* agreed with at the time.

 

It's also worth noting that Thatcher was never as toe-curlingly incompetent as Corbyn. He doesn't have 'the establishment' in a spin at all. They're laughing themselves silly at him because he's a complete and utter joke that is destroying the only party of government that has ever consistently supported the interests of ordinary people over the most affluent.

 

And as if to emphasise the point, the Tories have gone into an *eleven point lead* with YouGov over Labour tonight. Corbyn approval ratings at a net minus 41. That's Thatcher during the poll tax levels, twelve weeks in, while the Labour Party are in opposition. But sure, the establishment are just ~terrified~ of the self-indulgent old fool.

 

Oh come on that last sentence just lost your arguemnt - instead of sneering from the side lines why not think of an alternative which can capture the imagination of member and MPs which the so called moderates have clearly failed to articulate so far they just sit on their hands and the only beneficiaries are the Tory party.

Likely in the false dawn stage of luke-warm apathetic popularity. I have a feeling he'd have actually been able to make some running of his own on the tax credits thing. That aside I reckon it would've been mostly underwhelming.

 

I'd take underwhelming in a heartbeat over what we've got now though.

It surely would have been more difficult to make hay out of the tax credits u-turn when his own stance was so confused.

Oh and may the gods of hellfire rain down on anyone who tries to deselect Stella Creasy.

Oh come on that last sentence just lost your arguemnt - instead of sneering from the side lines why not think of an alternative which can capture the imagination of member and MPs which the so called moderates have clearly failed to articulate so far they just sit on their hands and the only beneficiaries are the Tory party.

I don't see how anything I laid out before the last sentence showing why the establishment aren't terrified of him is rendered irrelevant by me thinking him self-indulgent?

 

In any case, I'm at the point of thinking that the gap between what the public thinks and what the current memberbase of the Labour Party think on so many different issues is now so wide as to be virtually unbridgeable.

 

'Why not think of an alternative which can capture the imagination of members?' - because there *is* no alternative that can capture the imagination of the current memberbase that is substantively different from Corbynism. The majority of members now judge a leader of the Labour Party solely on the basis of how closely they reflect their opinions: regardless of basic competence, regardless of how they perform, regardless of how persuasive they are to those not already converted. That is unprecedented. And until that elementary fact changes and we once again return to the normal situation where most members appreciate that any leader has to pick their battles, there is no viable alternative.

If they weren't terrified, the 'impartial' (lol, see them airing a LOT of anti-gay views and NO OPPOSING VIEWS AFTER AIRING CRITICISMS FROM THE CHURCH!!! during the equal marriage vote then not reporting on it when it passed easily lol, see them calling Corbyn 'left wing', see them talking up a hung parliament when Blair was running a 3rd time etc) BBC wouldn't be reporting badly on him all the time too and BBC is as establisment as it gets these days.

There are pro-Corbyn voices on the BBC pretty much all the time, so I'm not sure what your point there was. Kind of says a lot you think them calling Corbyn 'left wing' is them being terrified and partial. He's pretty objectively the most left-wing leader of a major party since George Lansbury - if you're taking *that* as an issue...

 

And again, this doesn't really detract from the fact that the establishment are laughing themselves silly at him.

If they deselect Stella I'm out - and in that situation I would fully support going SDP on this shit. *That* would be the point where they would just be declaring war on any MPs who didn't sign up dot and comma to their agenda, given Stella's one of the most clearly talented and clearly Labour MPs that we have who's done more to help the least well-off with her campaigns than most of the groups organising against her will in their lifetimes.

There are pro-Corbyn voices on the BBC pretty much all the time, so I'm not sure what your point there was. Kind of says a lot you think them calling Corbyn 'left wing' is them being terrified and partial. He's pretty objectively the most left-wing leader of a major party since George Lansbury - if you're taking *that* as an issue...

 

And again, this doesn't really detract from the fact that the establishment are laughing themselves silly at him.

And this is the most right-wing government we have had for a long time, possibly ever. But, how often do the BBC describe Tory ministers as right-wing?

 

The BBC are terrified, but not of Corbyn. They are terrified of the upcoming Charter renewal, so they are bending over backwards even more than normal to appease the government. Look at the coverage of the Syria debate in recent days. It has all been about what Labour are up to. When have Cameron / Hammond / Fallon been asked some tough questions. When have they been asked to give even the merest hint of an exit strategy? Has anyone been asked to justify Cameron's claim that there are 70,000 rebels waiting in the wings to take over? Have they been asked to confirm that there will be no ground troops and explain how that will work? The lack of scrutiny of this decision is frightening.

And this is the most right-wing government we have had for a long time, possibly ever.

Well, since the last one anyway. I'd still argue Thatcher's was more right-wing when you consider everything beyond cuts.

It surely would have been more difficult to make hay out of the tax credits u-turn when his own stance was so confused.

Probably easier given he only abstained out of loyalty.

I should admit at this stage that I'm starting to be slightly tempted by the idea of voting for Jeremy Corbyn for Accelerationist reasons. If the radical left are right (they're not) and Corbyn's 'literally the same speech he probably wrote for Benn in 1981' prospectus is what Britain's been crying out for all this time, huzzah, a Labour government.

 

If they're wrong (they are) then I struggle to think of a quicker way to make it clear to them that they're wrong than the appalling polling collapse that will follow (soon enough at least - I imagine the novelty of having a literally no-holds-barred honest leader would be a refreshing novelty for voters, before wearing off as soon as most realised that yes, the Labour leader is someone who still believes in a command economy and thinks Labour lost in its most notorious radical left-wing loss of all-time because it wasn't left wing enough).

 

That said, knowing my luck, we'd probably enter a grim halfway house of Ed Miliband style polling (super-fun slowly fading mid-term default oppositional lead the second the Tories start fumbling obviously again!), or - even worse - we enter a world where all consistently dreadful polling is handwaved away with 'YOU CAN'T TRUST THE POLLS, REMEMBER LAST TIME' until the council losses become too much to bear.

Ah, it was the latter.

I'm missing the comfort blanket provided by Ed's "we're not going to win but we're united and ticking along well enough that we just might" state of purgatory. Even though it was sort of a waste of five years.

And this is the most right-wing government we have had for a long time, possibly ever. But, how often do the BBC describe Tory ministers as right-wing?

 

The BBC are terrified, but not of Corbyn. They are terrified of the upcoming Charter renewal, so they are bending over backwards even more than normal to appease the government. Look at the coverage of the Syria debate in recent days. It has all been about what Labour are up to. When have Cameron / Hammond / Fallon been asked some tough questions. When have they been asked to give even the merest hint of an exit strategy? Has anyone been asked to justify Cameron's claim that there are 70,000 rebels waiting in the wings to take over? Have they been asked to confirm that there will be no ground troops and explain how that will work? The lack of scrutiny of this decision is frightening.

 

There's a very good piece in "i" today about the Tory gross incompetency and deliberate warmongering being a diversion from all the U turns and sleaze going on in their months-old heavily anti-poor and pro-rich nastiness, and how the media is collaborating with the absolute gift of a left-wing shambolic Labour leader to create nothing headlines about and hide behind. It's all true, and was entirely predictable. I know, cos I did.

 

Cameron has no plan whatsoever, and he's determined to make the same mistakes Blair did by inevitably killing non-IS groups and inflaming Muslim hatred among the various groups sponsored by the various rich neighbouring Arab countries. It can only get worse, and it will make terrorism in the UK MORE likely not less.

 

As far as Right-wing goes, I lived through Thatcher and it was awful, but even she drew the line at the heavy slashing of crucial social and national services that are getting quietly axed everywhere in local newspaper articles, and ignored by the scummy national press. I think this government will go down in the history books as the worst one of all: Thatcher was trying to eradicate strikes, and heavy taxes, and promote her insane belief in private enterprise as a safe pair of hands. This lot, despite all evidence to the contrary (recently) want to go even further and eradicate the poor and needy individual by individual. That's certainly what's happening anyway. I hate them.

 

 

 

 

There isn't much difference between thatcher and the Cameron project it's the same agenda only 30 years on - she laid the ground for the dismantling of collective economic institutions and created a more selfish Social sphere with that and now Cameron's government can dismantle the NHS and welfare state.

Edited December 2, 20159 yr by Christmaseve201

I don't see how anything I laid out before the last sentence showing why the establishment aren't terrified of him is rendered irrelevant by me thinking him self-indulgent?

 

In any case, I'm at the point of thinking that the gap between what the public thinks and what the current memberbase of the Labour Party think on so many different issues is now so wide as to be virtually unbridgeable.

 

'Why not think of an alternative which can capture the imagination of members?' - because there *is* no alternative that can capture the imagination of the current memberbase that is substantively different from Corbynism. The majority of members now judge a leader of the Labour Party solely on the basis of how closely they reflect their opinions: regardless of basic competence, regardless of how they perform, regardless of how persuasive they are to those not already converted. That is unprecedented. And until that elementary fact changes and we once again return to the normal situation where most members appreciate that any leader has to pick their battles, there is no viable alternative.

 

My point was that I stopped listening to your argument when you started being personally offensive against Corbyn. And still there is no alternative strategy moderates can rally around its the fault of the members.

It's tough trying to restrain myself from being personally offensive about a man who is killing the only party which offers a hope of another left-wing government before I'm 50.

 

And yes, it is the fault of the members. They're the ones who decided a party of opposition being able to offer a prospectus which can conceivably win isn't a priority - just 24% put it in their *top four* most important qualities they seek in a new leader, and that was back in July before the memberbase became even more extreme. We've essentially transformed into the Green Party writ large. It's where a large proportion of them belong, to be honest.