Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media

[Andrew Hertford]

Fuck off, you dullard.

That's the extent of your intellectual capacity is it Nino? Are you even a socialist yourself? Because responding to a reasonable point with "Fuck off you dullard" doesn't make you a socialist, it makes you a twat.

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either. My own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s especially on foreign policy, but I'm a realist and I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.... by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

So never mind questioning other's political credentials, try and explain how you think we can get rid of the tories before they finish what Thatcher started and fuck up the social fabric of our country completely?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

That's the extent of your intellectual capacity is it Nino? Are you even a socialist yourself? Because responding to a reasonable point with "Fuck off you dullard" doesn't make you a socialist, it makes you a twat.

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either. My own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s especially on foreign policy, but I'm a realist and I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.... by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

So never mind questioning other's political credentials, try and explain how you think we can get rid of the tories before they finish what Thatcher started and fuck up the social fabric of our country completely?

Did you vote Labour in 1997? If so, how do you feel about the very 'successful' continuation of 'what Thatcher started' under the Blair administrations. How has voting Labour in the past 20 years advanced the socialist politics that you claim to share with Corbyn? And how would sending him back to the back benches now do that?

It is the complete disconnect between the socialism you say you want ('my own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s') and the means you propose of achieving them (voting for a Labour party lead by a 'realist'?) that jars so badly.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Strong rumours that Corbyn has invited House of Commons cleaning staff to join opposition front bench to make up the numbers.

That would be a disaster.

Best leave it to public schoolboys like Corbyn and Milne in my view. They know what's best for us eh?

 

[youngian]

My own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s especially on foreign policy, but I'm a realist and I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.... by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

Precisely it doesn't matter a toss what you or I think of Corbyn, if the evidence stacks up that he is a Marmite politician, loved only by 25%, then there is no point in him leading a political party.

 

[cantsin]

Strong rumours that Corbyn has invited House of Commons cleaning staff to join opposition front bench to make up the numbers.

the very thought of it eh you sneery div

 

[nino_savatte]

That's the extent of your intellectual capacity is it Nino? Are you even a socialist yourself? Because responding to a reasonable point with "Fuck off you dullard" doesn't make you a socialist, it makes you a twat.

Hilarious. You honestly think you're a socialist when there's plentiful evidence to the contrary on these boards? Your reply didn't warrant anything other than "fuck off you dullard". But then claiming that it's "the extent of my intellectual capacity" is a little rich coming from you.

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either.

Weird logic. Keep joining those dots. Corbyn is a social democrat.

I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.

You're still claiming to have the ability to see into the future. Don't give up your day job.

by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

When all else fails, accuse the other person of still being in school. Even your insults are shite.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

Did you vote Labour in 1997? If so, how do you feel about the very 'successful' continuation of 'what Thatcher started' under the Blair administrations. How has voting Labour in the past 20 years advanced the socialist politics that you claim to share with Corbyn? And how would sending him back to the back benches now do that?

It is the complete disconnect between the socialism you say you want ('my own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s') and the means you propose of achieving them (voting for a Labour party lead by a 'realist'?) that jars so badly.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Why assume that Labour has to be either ‘Blairite’ or ‘Corbynite’? It doesn’t. But one thing it does have to do is appeal to voters if we don’t want to endure the tories for another nine years.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

The above is French for "electable" which has no political meaning.

 

[existentialist]

That's the extent of your intellectual capacity is it Nino? Are you even a socialist yourself? Because responding to a reasonable point with "Fuck off you dullard" doesn't make you a socialist, it makes you a twat.

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either. My own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s especially on foreign policy, but I'm a realist and I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.... by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

So never mind questioning other's political credentials, try and explain how you think we can get rid of the tories before they finish what Thatcher started and fuck up the social fabric of our country completely?

Insurrection. It's the only way to be sure. I realise that the 1981 riots didn't get rid of the Tories, but they did force them to tread more carefully, and there is little doubt that the poll tax riots, nearly 20 years later, fatally undermined Thatcher, which was a significant step towards ridding ourselves at least of Blue Tories. Shame we then went and elected a bunch of red ones.

One can only hope that, if the populace do eventually see no alternative to disorder, they make a better job of poleaxing the government this time around. Given the demonstrable incompetence of the latter, one feels that they wouldn't take that much of a hard shove to make enough bad mistakes to topple themselves without too much trouble.

 

[redsquirrel]

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either.

In what way does that follow?

Why assume that Labour has to be either ‘Blairite’ or ‘Corbynite’? It doesn’t. But one thing it does have to do is appeal to voters if we don’t want to endure the tories for another nine years.

Where has LM made the assumption you claim? And surely even you can see that the Labour party of the 90/00s (and the type of party you are arguing for in the present) wasn't/isn't socialist.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

In what way does that follow?

My views have always been very close to Corbyn’s, so if Savette’s going to claim that I’m not a socialist for some reason best known to himself then he’d have to say the same about Corbyn.

Where has LM made the assumption you claim? And surely even you can see that the Labour party of the 90/00s (and the type of party you are arguing for in the present) wasn't/isn't socialist.

I’m not saying it was, but a left of centre Labour party under someone like Andy Burnham would at least stand a chance of appealing to enough voters to get into government. Give me that rather than full on toryism until 2025.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

Insurrection. It's the only way to be sure. I realise that the 1981 riots didn't get rid of the Tories, but they did force them to tread more carefully, and there is little doubt that the poll tax riots, nearly 20 years later, fatally undermined Thatcher, which was a significant step towards ridding ourselves at least of Blue Tories. Shame we then went and elected a bunch of red ones.

One can only hope that, if the populace do eventually see no alternative to disorder, they make a better job of poleaxing the government this time around. Given the demonstrable incompetence of the latter, one feels that they wouldn't take that much of a hard shove to make enough bad mistakes to topple themselves without too much trouble.

Come off it, surely no one really believes that we’re going to get rid of the tories through ‘inserrection’! There’s nowhere near enough support for it. It ain’t gonna happen.

It’s true that the tories will probably fuck things up and accelerate their own demise, most governments do that eventually, but it will still need the Labour party to offer an alternative that will attract enough to voters, and sadly with Corbyn as leader they're a million miles from that.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Come off it, surely no one really believes that we’re going to get rid of the tories through ‘inserrection’! There’s nowhere near enough support for it. It ain’t gonna happen.

There's more support for insurrection in Britain than there is for Liz Kendall, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper...

 

[Andrew Hertford]

There's more support for insurrection in Britain than there is for Liz Kendall, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper...

But not all of it on the left...

 

[teqniq]

There's more support for insurrection in Britain than there is for Liz Kendall, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper...

Who is this insurrection that you speak of?

are there tickets on Ebay or something?

 

[SpackleFrog]

But not all of it on the left...

What's that got to do with it?

 

[J Ed]

Is Britain's media biased against the left?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Why assume that Labour has to be either ‘Blairite’ or ‘Corbynite’? It doesn’t. But one thing it does have to do is appeal to voters if we don’t want to endure the tories for another nine years.

This was not an assumption I made; perhaps you'd have a go at answering the questions I put.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Dogsauce]

Precisely it doesn't matter a toss what you or I think of Corbyn, if the evidence stacks up that he is a Marmite politician, loved only by 25%, then there is no point in him leading a political party.

Wasn't the current government put there by only around 25% of the electorate?

 

[irf520]

Is Britain's media biased against the left?

It's biased against anyone who argues against the wishes of their paymasters, whether that be from the left or the right or anywhere else.

 

[nino_savatte]

Savette’s

Savatte. You can see how my username is spelt and you still manage to misread/misspell it.

then he’d have to say the same about Corbyn.

Such a weak argument. I only have your word that you're a socialist and sadly, for you, your word isn't worth a bucket of warm spit.

I’m not saying it was, but a left of centre Labour party under someone like Andy Burnham would at least stand a chance of appealing to enough voters to get into government

Hilarious. Yet this sentence is predicated on the notion that Labour has to appeal to Tory voters to get elected into power. That's how Labour managed to lose two elections in a row. But you and many others are still incapable of seeing it.

 

[Pickman's model]

Come off it, surely no one really believes that we’re going to get rid of the tories through ‘inserrection’! There’s nowhere near enough support for it. It ain’t gonna happen.

It’s true that the tories will probably fuck things up and accelerate their own demise, most governments do that eventually, but it will still need the Labour party to offer an alternative that will attract enough to voters, and sadly with Corbyn as leader they're a million miles from that.

why do you put a word spelt correctly in the post you quote in quotation marks & spell it wrong?

 

[Pickman's model]

That's the extent of your intellectual capacity is it Nino? Are you even a socialist yourself? Because responding to a reasonable point with "Fuck off you dullard" doesn't make you a socialist, it makes you a twat.

If you don't think I'm a socialist then it follows that you don't think Corbyn is either. My own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s especially on foreign policy, but I'm a realist and I know that the chances of Labour winning the election in 2020 with him as leader are virtually zero and that means a tory government until 2025 at the earliest.... by which time I'll be retired and you'll probably have left school.

So never mind questioning other's political credentials, try and explain how you think we can get rid of the tories before they finish what Thatcher started and fuck up the social fabric of our country completely?

you may not say 'fuck off you dullard' but there's no denying you're a twat.

 

[cantsin]

It's biased against anyone who argues against the wishes of their paymasters, whether that be from the left or the right or anywhere else.

silly

 

[gosub]

Savatte. You can see how my username is spelt and you still manage to misread/misspell it.



Such a weak argument. I only have your word that you're a socialist and sadly, for you, your word isn't worth a bucket of warm spit.



Hilarious. Yet this sentence is predicated on the notion that Labour has to appeal to Tory voters to get elected into power. That's how Labour managed to lose two elections in a row. But you and many others are still incapable of seeing it.

Milliband's strategy was hoover up disaffected Lib Dem's who would have no where else to go ...(apart from the Greens). And he hadn't factored in disaffected Scots

 

[agricola]

This is by some distance Corbyn's best PMQs.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

Did you vote Labour in 1997? If so, how do you feel about the very 'successful' continuation of 'what Thatcher started' under the Blair administrations. How has voting Labour in the past 20 years advanced the socialist politics that you claim to share with Corbyn? And how would sending him back to the back benches now do that?

I don't claim it did. I hate Blair as much as anyone, but even Blair and Brown's Labour governments were better for the sick, vulnerable, elderly, pensioners, the education system, the NHS and other public services than a continuation of a tory government in perpetuity would have been. There was no third alternative.

It is the complete disconnect between the socialism you say you want ('my own political opinions have largely mirrored Corbyn's since the early 1980s') and the means you propose of achieving them (voting for a Labour party lead by a 'realist'?) that jars so badly.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Sorry if it jars, but how else do you think we can get rid of the tories before 2025? Do have have an answer?

Labour don't want to be led by another Blair, but they will have to secure the votes of at least 12 million voters and that just isn't going to happen with Corbyn as leader.

 

[ViolentPanda]

My views have always been very close to Corbyn’s, so if Savette’s going to claim that I’m not a socialist for some reason best known to himself then he’d have to say the same about Corbyn.



I’m not saying it was, but a left of centre Labour party under someone like Andy Burnham would at least stand a chance of appealing to enough voters to get into government. Give me that rather than full on toryism until 2025.

Andy Burnham wouldn't take the party anywhere left of centre. He's Blairite through and through, which means he prescribes neoliberalism dressed up as paternalism, just like the other two also-rans in the leadership contest.
And frankly very few of the party membership "on the left" voted for him even though he mouthed some left-wing pieties during the leadership contest.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Wasn't the current government put there by only around 25% of the electorate?

A tad over 24%.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't claim it did. I hate Blair as much as anyone, but even Blair and Brown's Labour governments were better for the sick, vulnerable, elderly, pensioners, the education system, the NHS and other public services than a continuation of a tory government in perpetuity would have been. There was no third alternative.

so why did you vote for the third position way?