Author Topic: The Labour Party (*)  (Read 113608 times)

Offline killer_heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,815
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5000 on: March 19, 2017, 11:23:05 AM »
Andrew Gwyn, Labour's election advisor, confirming that Labour currently has no tax, spending or NHS investment policy. Add to that Tom Watson's comments about Labour having no immigration policy.

The lot of them are a bunch of fucking useless c*nts. They dont even know how much money they would put into to the NHS.

Online Crosby Wych

  • Stills and Nash Warloch
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,188
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5001 on: March 19, 2017, 11:41:15 AM »
gained vote share in every byelection post brexit and have actually gained a seat, unlike labour who's vote share has dropped in every by-election and lost a seat they've never lost before (but it was a success when you consider their pathetic poll numbers), and there's the local elections where they are doing well

And despite all this they're sitting on a pathetic 8%

Westminster voting intention:
CON: 41% (+1)
LAB: 28% (+1)
UKIP: 13% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
GRN: 3% (-1)
(via Opinium / 14 - 17 Mar)

Labour are in crisis, and the Torys are carving open the country, and still the Lib Dems aren't able to reach double figures. More should really be made of just how out of touch with voters they are
"I would say we certainly have the resources to compete with anybody in football." Tom Werner 12/04/2012

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,688
  • Justice.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5002 on: March 19, 2017, 11:57:08 AM »
MPs, across all parties, recognise now that Corbyn can't be trusted not to fuck up having a few dozen Tories willing to vote against the government's whip. But, no, this is not a competence issue, is it? Wonder whether Rayner (current Shadow for Education) has recovered from her faceplanting on Radio 4 on grammar schools yet - her name is conspicuously absent from this crossparty effort.

Quote
Theresa May’s personal crusade to expand the number of grammar schools is in serious jeopardy today as senior Tory, Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs unite in an unprecedented cross-party campaign to kill off the prime minister’s flagship education reform.

In a highly unusual move, the Tory former education secretary Nicky Morgan joins forces with her previous Labour shadow Lucy Powell and the Liberal Democrat former deputy prime minister Nick Clegg to condemn the plans as damaging to social mobility, ideologically driven and divisive.

The formation of their cross-party alliance against grammar school expansion, which is opposed by about 30 Tory MPs, spells yet more political trouble for May on the domestic front. Last week, chancellor Philip Hammond was forced by a revolt in his own party into a humiliating budget U-turn over national insurance rises for the self-employed, and Conservatives lined up to oppose planned cuts in school funding.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/18/cross-party-alliance-grammar-schools-theresa-may
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Online Red Beret

  • Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,040
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5003 on: March 19, 2017, 11:58:26 AM »
Even Neil Kinnock managed a 20 point lead over Thatcher by 1990 - and he lost in 1992.

Corbyn's going to make William Hague's showing in 2001 look mildly competent.
Jürgen Klopp does not adapt to English Football.  English Football adapts to Jurgan Klopp.

I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do, I sit.

PROJECT WAKE UP UK

Popcorn's Art

Offline filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,447
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5004 on: March 19, 2017, 12:11:03 PM »
And despite all this they're sitting on a pathetic 8%

Westminster voting intention:
CON: 41% (+1)
LAB: 28% (+1)
UKIP: 13% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
GRN: 3% (-1)
(via Opinium / 14 - 17 Mar)

Labour are in crisis, and the Torys are carving open the country, and still the Lib Dems aren't able to reach double figures. More should really be made of just how out of touch with voters they are

Opinium are the outliers with the LibDem, they've been showing them lower than the other pollsters have a for a while, most others have them in low double figures I think now, still poor but not entirely surprising for a number of reasons.

They've struggled to get much media attention for a while now as the 4th party nationally, but the seemingly imminent collapse of UKIP will help on that front.
Farron isn't exactly a charismatic leader who generates media buzz on his own.
For left leaning voters they're still tainted by the coalition years

The focus on Brexit for the coming years will probably do them a fair bit of good, combined with UKIP likely pretty much disappearing, they can probably make modest progress over the rest of the parliament,, and pick up a few seats in Remain leaning areas.

Offline Classycara

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,762
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5005 on: March 19, 2017, 12:13:31 PM »
In my respectful opinion, only a fucking fool would think calling someone a fucking fool would make him change his mind.

Then again, we all know he wrote this article for those who already agree with him. Both sides are equally guilty of useless pontificating while Rome burns.

But only one side started the fires

Offline filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,447
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5006 on: March 19, 2017, 12:14:12 PM »
Andrew Gwyn, Labour's election advisor, confirming that Labour currently has no tax, spending or NHS investment policy. Add to that Tom Watson's comments about Labour having no immigration policy.

The lot of them are a bunch of fucking useless c*nts. They dont even know how much money they would put into to the NHS.

Labour have gotten soundbites from leadership campaigns, thats about it, unfortunately while some of those may play well with Corbyn's base, they really don't with the country at large.

Offline less grotesquely offensive?

  • [BANNED] FORMERLY TEPID WATER Folically-challenged, God-piece-wearing, monkey-rubber. Jizz aroma expert. Operating at the lower end of the distribution curve...has the hots for Alan. Bastard. Fearless in transfer windows with lack of conviction
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,201
  • Liberal, and proud to be so.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5007 on: March 19, 2017, 12:15:31 PM »
Andrew Gwyn, Labour's election advisor, confirming that Labour currently has no tax, spending or NHS investment policy. Add to that Tom Watson's comments about Labour having no immigration policy.

The lot of them are a bunch of fucking useless c*nts. They dont even know how much money they would put into to the NHS.
I don't have too much of a problem with this...

Very few opposition parties put flesh on the bones of their policies until a year before the election.

The interim years are about convincing the public you would do a better job of running the government (leadership, statesmanship etc) and undermining the current government in parliament.  Ah well...
With courage, nothing is impossible.

"My right arm hurts - I don't know why or who hit me."

Offline filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,447
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5008 on: March 19, 2017, 12:20:37 PM »
Even Neil Kinnock managed a 20 point lead over Thatcher by 1990 - and he lost in 1992.

Corbyn's going to make William Hague's showing in 2001 look mildly competent.

It's even more shocking when you consider how utterly fucking useless May has been so far, this is not some smooth running government machine that Labour are up against, Corbyn's been fucking lucky the Tories have actually been pretty shit since he came to power.

The Tory support may be wide at present but I'm not convinced its particularly deep, a competent opposition would be really making progress at present.

Mind you we seem to be in an era of political minnows all round at present.

Online Red Beret

  • Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,040
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5009 on: March 19, 2017, 12:25:05 PM »
It's even more shocking when you consider how utterly fucking useless May has been so far, this is not some smooth running government machine that Labour are up against, Corbyn's been fucking lucky the Tories have actually been pretty shit since he came to power.

The Tory support may be wide at present but I'm not convinced its particularly deep, a competent opposition would be really making progress at present.

Mind you we seem to be in an era of political minnows all round at present.

Oh absolutely.  Labour are on course to be absolutely crushed at the next election - by the weakest, most incompetent Tory government since Ted Heath.

And it will all be the fault of backstabbing Blairite MPs splitting the party, and Rupert Murdoch.  None off it will be poor Jeremy's fault.  :butt
Jürgen Klopp does not adapt to English Football.  English Football adapts to Jurgan Klopp.

I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do, I sit.

PROJECT WAKE UP UK

Popcorn's Art

Offline SP

  • Alpheus. SPoogle. The Equusfluminis Of RAWK. Straight in at the deep end with a tube of Vagisil. Needs to get a half-life. Needs a damned good de-frag.
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,750
  • .
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5010 on: March 19, 2017, 01:07:17 PM »
It's even more shocking when you consider how utterly fucking useless May has been so far, this is not some smooth running government machine that Labour are up against, Corbyn's been fucking lucky the Tories have actually been pretty shit since he came to power.

The Tory support may be wide at present but I'm not convinced its particularly deep, a competent opposition would be really making progress at present.

Mind you we seem to be in an era of political minnows all round at present.

John Major is looking like a political colossus at the moment. That is damning.

Offline Libertine

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,111
  • Nothing behind me, everything ahead of me
    • Frontiers of Travel
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5011 on: March 19, 2017, 01:24:17 PM »
Interesting parallels in France....

Since Hamon won the Socialist party primary elections in January, a succession of leading Socialist ministers have thrown their weight behind rival Emmanuel Macron, who refused to take part in the PS primary process. The latest, Manuel Valls, the former prime minister and an early favourite to win the Socialist party primaries before his surprise defeat by Hamon, last week admitted that he could not support the party’s official candidate, despite previously promising to do so.

At a closed-door meeting of 300 supporters last week, Valls accused Hamon of drifting into “factionalism”. “If the left is incapable of being responsible, it will be consigned to history,” he told the audience.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/19/rallies-french-left-set-for-presidential-poll-defeat
interested in adventure travel?

Then check out my new website http://www.frontiersoftravel.com to find inspiration and information for your travels

Offline shelts

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,105
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
    • My Twitter Account
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5012 on: March 19, 2017, 01:44:28 PM »
It is an interesting situation with the LibDems, but I think it's more complex for them. By going into coalition with the Tories, they are rightly seen as quislings and thus no alternative for a voter keen on a progressive left choice. After all, they proved that if you vote LibDem, you get a Tory government.

This is the issue with Labour's future: once a party establishes a certain perception, it hangs round the neck for a generation or more. May was right when she told the Tories they were seen as the 'nasty' party and Blair's government would continue to annihilate them until they found a way to avoid the label. In the event, the world recession allowed them to use the 'nasty' label as somewhat of an advantage as people fell for the austerity agenda, and "Call Me Dave" cynically put a bit of a spin on to cement the 2010 election by a hair's breadth.

Labour has struggled for generations to break free of the 'incompetent' party with its heart in the right place but unable to manage the economy (specifically) without everything going badly titsup. The world recession broke the one time the party had built up a very strong competence record, and then the party itself took gleeful sabotage of that record as its new article of faith. Even more astonishingly, we then guaranteed the label of incompetent fuckwits by electing Corbyn and his gang of chancers to lead. Had we elected David Miliband as leader (instead of his brother) stood by our New Labour record of social justice and excellent economic progress, and rammed home the fact that the recession was not caused by Gordon Brown but mad bankers, I firmly believe we would have won in 2015 and none of the current nightmare would be unfolding. But no, we just had to indulge ourselves and prove again we can't run a fucking bath, let alone a political party.

In my view, that will never be forgotten by the electorate, just as the LibDems have condemned themselves to complete irrelevance by that one, idiot decision to be Tory-lites.

But comrades, let us not be downhearted! Diane Abbot is confident Labour is going to win a snap election. Because reasons.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-interview-labour-party-jeremy-corbyn-general-election-a7635706.html
Well said Sir
Im in the nude in the garden rubbing marmite on myself,and i fucking hate marmite.
http://www.twitter.com/shelts_lfc

Offline Laughter is the best medicine...

  • unless you're actually ill.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,076
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5013 on: March 19, 2017, 01:51:23 PM »
And despite all this they're sitting on a pathetic 8%

Westminster voting intention:
CON: 41% (+1)
LAB: 28% (+1)
UKIP: 13% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
GRN: 3% (-1)
(via Opinium / 14 - 17 Mar)

Labour are in crisis, and the Torys are carving open the country, and still the Lib Dems aren't able to reach double figures. More should really be made of just how out of touch with voters they are
you do know there are polls where they've been over 10% for a while right?

Offline shelts

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,105
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
    • My Twitter Account
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5014 on: March 19, 2017, 01:54:52 PM »
Even Neil Kinnock managed a 20 point lead over Thatcher by 1990 - and he lost in 1992.

Corbyn's going to make William Hague's showing in 2001 look mildly competent.
a better comparison would be with Michael Foot, prior to the Falklands he was polling at over 50% in some polls, up to 17 points ahead yet two years later we had the worst Labour showing in a general election since the 1920s, a record that will shortly be broken.

Foot wasn't a great leader and he didn't really want the job but he was a great orator and a principled man unlike Corbyn. At least MF can no longer be called the worst Labour leader in history
Im in the nude in the garden rubbing marmite on myself,and i fucking hate marmite.
http://www.twitter.com/shelts_lfc

Offline hide5seek

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,630
  • We all live in THE 5 EUROPEAN CUPS
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5015 on: March 19, 2017, 02:03:34 PM »
In my respectful opinion, only a fucking fool would think calling someone a fucking fool would make him change his mind.

Then again, we all know he wrote this article for those who already agree with him. Both sides are equally guilty of useless pontificating while Rome burns.
Your answer is?

Online ShakaHislop

  • Main Stander
  • **
  • Posts: 186
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5016 on: March 19, 2017, 02:04:25 PM »
Quote
Blair: Labour should reconsider Brexit stance

Labour should be prepared to alter its stance on Brexit - and if necessary argue that Britain should stay inside the EU, Tony Blair has said.

The former PM told the BBC's Andrew Marr that Labour should change its position if the government delivers a Brexit deal the people do not like.

He urged Labour to hold ministers to account over its pledge to secure a trade deal with the EU.

Labour's Jeremy Corbyn has said the referendum result should be respected.

Mr Blair, who was Labour prime minister between 1997 and 2007, said the government faced negotiations of "unparalleled complexity" if it was to achieve its stated aim of delivering an agreement that replicates as closely as possible Britain's existing trade arrangements with the EU.

While voters had backed Brexit in last year's referendum, he said he believed it was "possible" the public mood would change if it did not result in the promised benefits - and Labour should be ready to capitalise on that.

Option of staying

"A few weeks ago in the House of Commons [Brexit Secretary] David Davis said they were going to deliver a deal with exactly the same benefits we now have from the single market and the customs union - we should hold them to that," he told the BBC.

"If they are going to try and deliver exactly the same benefits as we have now in the single market and customs union, this is an endeavour of unparalleled complexity."

He argued that if control of EU migration is the only reason for Brexit "it is possible - I don't put it higher than that - that people start to think, 'is this really the thing that is going to be important?'"

Mr Blair said in his opinion Labour should say: "We believed in Remain, we still think the best thing is for Britain to be part of the European Union - we acknowledge the people voted against that, we acknowledge therefore the government has a mandate to negotiate Brexit, but we are going to hold them to the test that they have set.

"And if they do not pass that test, then we are going to retain the right to represent the people of this country should their will change, to offer them the option of staying."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39321138?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

Yeah, but Iraq...  ::)

Online Red Beret

  • Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,040
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5017 on: March 19, 2017, 02:10:02 PM »
a better comparison would be with Michael Foot, prior to the Falklands he was polling at over 50% in some polls, up to 17 points ahead yet two years later we had the worst Labour showing in a general election since the 1920s, a record that will shortly be broken.

Foot wasn't a great leader and he didn't really want the job but he was a great orator and a principled man unlike Corbyn. At least MF can no longer be called the worst Labour leader in history

Don't you believe it. The Corbyn die hards already have what they need to excuse Jezza's inevitable failure.
Jürgen Klopp does not adapt to English Football.  English Football adapts to Jurgan Klopp.

I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do, I sit.

PROJECT WAKE UP UK

Popcorn's Art

Offline Laughter is the best medicine...

  • unless you're actually ill.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,076
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5018 on: March 19, 2017, 02:13:08 PM »
Don't you believe it. The Corbyn die hards already have what they need to excuse Jezza's inevitable failure.
michael foot destroyed left wing politics in Britain?

Online BoRed

  • BoRing
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,332
  • BoRac
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5019 on: March 19, 2017, 02:16:57 PM »
Your answer is?

My answer was always to let Corbyn fail by himself. Without last year's leadership challenge and the constant criticism from within, he wouldn't have been able to play the blame game and rally the troops, and would have been removed by the same people who elected him long ago. Articles like Cohen's can only make things worse. Stop providing Corbyn with excuses.

Online Red Beret

  • Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,040
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5020 on: March 19, 2017, 02:23:07 PM »

michael foot
Everybody except Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters destroyed left wing politics in Britain?
Jürgen Klopp does not adapt to English Football.  English Football adapts to Jurgan Klopp.

I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do, I sit.

PROJECT WAKE UP UK

Popcorn's Art

Offline hide5seek

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,630
  • We all live in THE 5 EUROPEAN CUPS
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5021 on: March 19, 2017, 02:33:36 PM »
My answer was always to let Corbyn fail by himself. Without last year's leadership challenge and the constant criticism from within, he wouldn't have been able to play the blame game and rally the troops, and would have been removed by the same people who elected him long ago. Articles like Cohen's can only make things worse. Stop providing Corbyn with excuses.
Even when Labour lose in 2020 I don't think they would remove him. Has to be remembered that many who voted for him are trots, commies and Tories. They want him as leader, either because they love Labour being damaged (Tories) or they think there showing the people the true way to a perfect socialist life (trot and commies). In many cases there bloody hard left, with no idea that to win elections you need to compromise and every time they support suck a weak, pathetic, useless man like Corbyn they are empowering the enemy, the Tories. They'll never admit there wrong and to win elections you need to take middle England with.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2017, 02:35:07 PM by hide5seek »

Offline Bakez0151

  • Grumpy Optimist
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,050
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5022 on: March 19, 2017, 02:56:56 PM »
My answer was always to let Corbyn fail by himself. Without last year's leadership challenge and the constant criticism from within, he wouldn't have been able to play the blame game and rally the troops, and would have been removed by the same people who elected him long ago.

I don't know about the last bit, as there was definitely already entrenched support for Jezza from the moment he got started, but you're absolutely correct about the leadership challenge and how damaging it has been to any hopes of removing Corbyn.

As for the constant criticism, of course it's ampified given Corbyn's background, but he is hardly the first and will not be the last Labour leader to have to deal with that. That's something, more generally, that goes with the turf of political leadership.

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,417
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5023 on: March 19, 2017, 03:07:20 PM »
In my respectful opinion, only a fucking fool would think calling someone a fucking fool would make him change his mind.

Then again, we all know he wrote this article for those who already agree with him. Both sides are equally guilty of useless pontificating while Rome burns.

Did you read the article and the context for that phrase. It's a last ditch attempt to try make Corbyn supporters see the disaster that's developing under his leadership. The 'fucking fool' comment relates to a previous moment in history when it was suggested that a respectfully titled analysis might have been better titled 'Don't be a Fucking Fool'. All of the measured arguments have been tried. The evidence is all there in plain view that Corbyn is a disaster, but still his supporters insist it's the media, the PLP, it's 'red tories' and two-faced-twats, and that the Tories are scared of the one true hope for pure socialism. The responses from Corbyn supporters in the comments under the article, in this forum and on Twitter suggest that nothing will get through. Cohen's article is the equivalent of a someone screaming at the driver of a bus who's heading straight for a cliff edge. We're past the moment for reasonable argument. The Labour Party is heading over a cliff and the only people who can stop it after Ed Milliband's changes to the voting system, are the people who currently support Corbyn.  Not all of them but maybe enough will see reason if the full consequences of our current direction are made clear.

What do you say to all those promises that Cohen lists at the start of his article? Mobilising non-voters, winning back Scotland etc? Is that all the right-wing media? Is that all the right wing media?
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Online oldfordie

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,373
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5024 on: March 19, 2017, 03:18:32 PM »
My answer was always to let Corbyn fail by himself. Without last year's leadership challenge and the constant criticism from within, he wouldn't have been able to play the blame game and rally the troops, and would have been removed by the same people who elected him long ago. Articles like Cohen's can only make things worse. Stop providing Corbyn with excuses.
If I believed the sentence in bold was even remotely true then I would agree with your post.
 Corbyn would still be leader today no matter what the PLP or the polls said.

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've have been fooled" Mark Twain on Brexit.

Offline Trev20

  • Wool
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • I am not!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5025 on: March 19, 2017, 03:45:33 PM »
Your tone is somewhat unpleasant.

Your horse must be so high, I'm surprised you can see us all from up there.
Just seen this - I echo such sentiments.

 

Online BoRed

  • BoRing
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,332
  • BoRac
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5026 on: March 19, 2017, 03:48:56 PM »
What do you say to all those promises that Cohen lists at the start of his article? Mobilising non-voters, winning back Scotland etc? Is that all the right-wing media? Is that all the right wing media?

I say he failed on all counts, and pretty much all of it is down to him. But when he failed on Brexit, the PLP came along and gave him a helping hand. Most recently, when he failed in Copeland, along came Blair and provided the excuse. The membership rally behind him because he's under attack from the people they dislike most.

Did you read the article and the context for that phrase.

I read the entire piece, it's an odious piece of work, much like its author. It consists of nothing more than apportioning blame, saying "I told you so", and expecting a pat on the back of it. Which, to be fair, is par for the course on a RAWK-like internet forum, but I'd expect better from a newspaper such as the Observer. Claiming it's some sort of scream for help is way off the mark. The article reeks of self-righteousness and self-satisfaction, and I'm pretty sure the author very much enjoyed writing it.

The responses from Corbyn supporters in the comments under the article, in this forum and on Twitter suggest that nothing will get through.

I didn't read the comments under the article, and I'm not on Twitter, but I haven't seen any Corbyn supporters commenting on it here.

Corbyn would still be leader today no matter what the PLP or the polls said.

Today, maybe, though not for much longer. Without interference, I'd have given him three years at most.

Online oldfordie

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,373
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5027 on: March 19, 2017, 04:30:37 PM »


Today, maybe, though not for much longer. Without interference, I'd have given him three years at most.
I think the last 18 months or so has shown us Corbyn can do no wrong. Corbyns support is not down to the sympathy vote.
The support is for one man not the best man to lead the party, it's about keeping the man they want as leader of the Labour party. so theres no reason to believe Corbyn would have been kicked out after 3 yrs.
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've have been fooled" Mark Twain on Brexit.

Offline Libertine

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,111
  • Nothing behind me, everything ahead of me
    • Frontiers of Travel
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5028 on: March 19, 2017, 05:30:22 PM »
@newdawn1997

New poll – Reuters/NOP – 18th March 1997

Labour 54%
Conservatives 29%
Lib Dems 11%


This is what governments in waiting look like.
interested in adventure travel?

Then check out my new website http://www.frontiersoftravel.com to find inspiration and information for your travels

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,688
  • Justice.
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5029 on: March 19, 2017, 05:31:02 PM »
I don't see it either with Corbyn being left alone getting himself forced out by the same people who voted for him twice. Have a look at what passes for analysis in Momentum circles and they don't even need the enemy within. The whole thing is based on the idea that they're having a long term movement. Political constipation of the most severe kind.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline Laughter is the best medicine...

  • unless you're actually ill.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,076
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5030 on: March 19, 2017, 05:37:37 PM »
@newdawn1997

New poll – Reuters/NOP – 18th March 1997

Labour 54%
Conservatives 29%
Lib Dems 11%


This is what governments in waiting look like.
the Tories won 165 seats with their 29% btw

Offline zebenzui

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,781
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5031 on: March 19, 2017, 05:38:41 PM »
@newdawn1997

New poll – Reuters/NOP – 18th March 1997

Labour 54%
Conservatives 29%
Lib Dems 11%


This is what governments in waiting look like.

I read this post from the bottom up, and nearly had a heart attack.

Offline killer_heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,815
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5032 on: March 20, 2017, 08:40:35 AM »
That Momentum plot has led to a 'Twitter' battle between Lansmann, Jess Phillips and Tom Watson, which all sounds very professional.

Offline TravisBickle

  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,936
  • RAWK n' Roll
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5033 on: March 20, 2017, 10:06:53 AM »
Even Neil Kinnock managed a 20 point lead over Thatcher by 1990 - and he lost in 1992.

Corbyn's going to make William Hague's showing in 2001 look mildly competent.

 Hague was a serious politician who took his party forwards, however marginally. Corbyn and the people who elected him are going to wipe us out.
"My idea was to build Liverpool into a bastion of invincibility. Napoleon had that idea and he conquered the bloody world! And that's what I wanted; for Liverpool to be untouchable. My idea was to build Liverpool up and up and up until eventually everyone would have to submit and give in."

Online Crosby Wych

  • Stills and Nash Warloch
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,188
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5034 on: March 20, 2017, 10:21:57 AM »
We're fucked if this happens

"I would say we certainly have the resources to compete with anybody in football." Tom Werner 12/04/2012

Offline filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,447
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5035 on: March 20, 2017, 10:38:23 AM »
We're fucked if this happens



I would welcome it, if we're going to lose the next election badly anyway, may as well get it out of the way now.

Maybe it'll finally give the Labour the kick up the arse it seems to need, equally maybe not, but if the latter is the case the party is finished anyway

Offline Alan_X

  • WUM. 'twatito' - The Cat Herding Firm But Fair Voice Of Reason (Except when he's got a plank up his arse). Gimme some skin, priest! Has a general dislike for Elijah Wood. Clearly cannot fill even a thong! RAWK Resident Muppet. Has a crush o
  • RAWK Staff
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 39,417
  • Come on you fucking red men!!!
  • Super Title: This is super!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5036 on: March 20, 2017, 10:58:38 AM »
I would welcome it, if we're going to lose the next election badly anyway, may as well get it out of the way now.

Maybe it'll finally give the Labour the kick up the arse it seems to need, equally maybe not, but if the latter is the case the party is finished anyway

[sarcasm]But all of the non-voters, all of the Scots, all of the young people... they'll all flock to the polling stations and Labour will win by a landslide... [/sarcasm]

Looking at the responses to the Nick Cohen article and The Lansmann story from Corbyn supporters I don't think they'll change their attitudes just because of an election defeat. It will just prove that the party hasn't shifted far enough to the left and it will be blamed on the PLP, the Mainstream Media and of course, Tony Blair.

A snap election would be a disaster for the people who most need a Labour Government. It would almost certainly lock in a Tory Government for the foreseeable future and if Corbyn did step down (although there's no reason to see why he would given his shit-to-a-blanket stickability to date) the likelihood is we'd get someone as incompetent as Corbyn with less charisma (McDonnell and Thornberry are among the Corbynites favourites for the succession).
Sid Lowe (@sidlowe)
09/03/2011 08:04
Give a man a mask and he will tell the truth, Give a man a user name and he will act like a total twat.
Its all about winning shiny things.

Offline filopastry

  • seldom posts but often delivers
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,447
  • Let me tell you a story.........
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5037 on: March 20, 2017, 11:05:17 AM »
[sarcasm]But all of the non-voters, all of the Scots, all of the young people... they'll all flock to the polling stations and Labour will win by a landslide... [/sarcasm]

Looking at the responses to the Nick Cohen article and The Lansmann story from Corbyn supporters I don't think they'll change their attitudes just because of an election defeat. It will just prove that the party hasn't shifted far enough to the left and it will be blamed on the PLP, the Mainstream Media and of course, Tony Blair.

A snap election would be a disaster for the people who most need a Labour Government. It would almost certainly lock in a Tory Government for the foreseeable future and if Corbyn did step down (although there's no reason to see why he would given his shit-to-a-blanket stickability to date) the likelihood is we'd get someone as incompetent as Corbyn with less charisma (McDonnell and Thornberry are among the Corbynites favourites for the succession).

I wouldn't argue much with that, the problem is I don't see how it will be any better in 2020, we just get guaranteed Tory government for longer, if Labour has no interest in being a serious electable party then it will eventually die anyway, that may be sooner rather than later.

At least at this moment in time they still don't have the ability to actually get the likes of McDonnell on the next leadership ballot (although for exactly the same reason I can't envisage Corbyn being willing to stand down, no matter how bad things get)

I see Watson has also been pushing the idea of an early election.

Quote
Tom Watson says early general election is 'more likely than not'

In his Sky interview Tom Watson, the Labour deputy leader, said he thought Theresa May would call an early election.

She is losing votes in parliament. I think she will ultimately conclude she needs a new mandate to deliver these Brexit reforms that seem to be going a little bit awry ... And I think we are heading for an early general election. I think it is more likely than not.


Offline In Fowler We Trust

  • Athens Airport Queen
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,499
  • Truth Justice
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5038 on: March 20, 2017, 11:15:26 AM »
How can they call a "snap" election?  I thought there was legislation in place?
"If you can't say anything nice, don't say nothing at all"  Thumper (1942)

Justice for the 96

I'm a Believer

Offline Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Believer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,901
  • We are going to smash them!
Re: The Labour Party (*)
« Reply #5039 on: March 20, 2017, 11:16:58 AM »
How can they call a "snap" election?  I thought there was legislation in place?

They would have to repeal it, but Corbyn said he wouldn't mind an early election.

It would be a simple vote I think.