Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media

[agricola]

So there's a clique bedding down so that they're in place when things go to shit? Nice, and rather revealing of an unhealthy contempt for the electorate.

Clique? I think they prefer to be called "cells" now.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Clique? I think they prefer to be called "cells" now.

They can prefer what they like. They're a clique, and that's that!

 

[nino_savatte]

Poor.

Not half as poor as your dreck...er, replies on this thread. Would you care to tell us how your 'ilk' is more electable than Corbyn? I'm all ears.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

not as poor as your refusal to admit you can't read basic data, thus leading you into false claims such as polling evidence suggesting non-voters are to the right of voters, when the polls showed precisely the opposite.

Show me the "polls" that show non-voters are to the left of the electorate. And then show me how the exact fifteen percent you need are suddenly going to show up. And then tell me how you get back those we've lost since the election - according to the polls.

Oh, I forgot, we lost those because they're unthinking and the media told them they don't support Labour under Corbyn. They would be revolutionaries if it wasn't for the media.

It's lunacy.

 

[laptop]

As with the Labour right throughout the party's history, they refuse to acknowledge that position on the political spectrum. Instead they invent all sorts of positions that elide that fact. They're "pragmatists", they follow "the third way", they're "moderates" and they're "reasonable". They're even "sensible" and "common-sense".
It's amazing how many labels can be deployed by right-wingers intent on avoiding admitting that they're right-wing.

And each time they take up a new euphemism, a word-fairy dies

 

[nino_savatte]

It's lunacy

Yes, your posts are lunacy.

 

[nino_savatte]

One more thing, MarkyMarrk, if you're so fired up about Labour needing to appeal to Tory voters, perhaps you could show me how the Tories appeal to Labour voters?

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Yes, your posts are lunacy.

That one was, because it's the orthodoxy on this thread. You all know the truth, but those that have moved away from labour because of the leader you support are controlled by the media.

Fortunately not in the country.

Sadly the state of labour means the Tories in power, and those desperate for a labour government won't get one because you are playing lunacy and think electable labour is as bad as the Tories.

I've noticed now that people are blaming those that disagree with Corbyn for his lck of popularity, rather than his imbecilic leadership and batshit positions.

Still, let's make a big deal out of the Falklands. That is going to make the difference

 

[belboid]

Show me the "polls" that show non-voters are to the left of the electorate. And then show me how the exact fifteen percent you need are suddenly going to show up. And then tell me how you get back those we've lost since the election - according to the polls.

Oh, I forgot, we lost those because they're unthinking and the media told them they don't support Labour under Corbyn. They would be revolutionaries if it wasn't for the media.

It's lunacy.

I am referring to the poll YOU quoted, but obviously didn't read or understand.

The rest of your post is almost entirely incoherent gibberish, especially as the notion of needing an 'exact fifteen percent' is nonsensical, or maybe you think 'at least' means 'exact'.

As to those labour have 'lost' - in the one parliamentary election since the general, you may have missed this, labours share of the vote went up. Bit of an awkward fact for you.

 

[agricola]

That one was, because it's the orthodoxy on this thread. You all know the truth, but those that have moved away from labour because of the leader you support are controlled by the media.

Fortunately not in the country.

Sadly the state of labour means the Tories in power, and those desperate for a labour government won't get one because you are playing lunacy and think electable labour is as bad as the Tories.

I've noticed now that people are blaming those that disagree with Corbyn for his lck of popularity, rather than his imbecilic leadership and batshit positions.

Still, let's make a big deal out of the Falklands. That is going to make the difference

 

[Pickman's model]

That one was, because it's the orthodoxy on this thread. You all know the truth, but those that have moved away from labour because of the leader you support are controlled by the media.

Fortunately not in the country.

Sadly the state of labour means the Tories in power, and those desperate for a labour government won't get one because you are playing lunacy and think electable labour is as bad as the Tories.

I've noticed now that people are blaming those that disagree with Corbyn for his lck of popularity, rather than his imbecilic leadership and batshit positions.

Still, let's make a big deal out of the Falklands. That is going to make the difference

can you explain how a party which got 1/4 of the registered electors to vote for them has a majority in the commons?

 

[MarkyMarrk]

You poor, stupid fool. You cannot comprehend something that doesn't fit your worldview. And you think this thread is representative of the wider population.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Can you name me the person that is best suited as leader of the Labour party, MarkyMarrk?

 

[brogdale]

Can you name me the person that is best suited as leader of the Labour party, MarkyMarrk?

Best suited?

 

[belboid]

You poor, stupid fool. You cannot comprehend something that doesn't fit your worldview. And you think this thread is representative of the wider population.

so, you're not going to respond to the many factual points that have been raised contradicting your argument? But it's everyone else who is being dishonest. Funny that.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Show me the "polls" that show non-voters are to the left of the electorate. And then show me how the exact fifteen percent you need are suddenly going to show up. And then tell me how you get back those we've lost since the election - according to the polls.

Oh, I forgot, we lost those because they're unthinking and the media told them they don't support Labour under Corbyn. They would be revolutionaries if it wasn't for the media.

It's lunacy.

You're obsessed with polls, yet you don't know how to read them.

 

[ViolentPanda]

You poor, stupid fool. You cannot comprehend something that doesn't fit your worldview. And you think this thread is representative of the wider population.

Rather than chucking round insults, how about actually answering any of the questions asked of you?

Too radical for you?

 

[magneze]

We need a culture change. I suggest looking at:

• As a party, learn to debate reasonably, so we have disagreements not fights. Both left and right of the party seem convinced that organising is the way to shape the party, never persuasion.
• Recreate routes for working class people to get into politics. And by “working class” I mean manual workers and unskilled labourers who haven’t even gone to university.
• Give up on identity politics. We are not the arbiters of who is or is not sexist or racist. Positive discrimination makes us look utterly unconcerned with fair treatment of individuals.
• Don’t let any issue be a taboo. Immigration is the obvious issue, but we are becoming equally unable to articulate sensible thoughts on benefit spending too.
• Stop arguing over the record of the last Labour government. And in particular, don’t make future policy on the basis of continuing, or correcting, the policy of the last Labour government.
• Stop attacking the media whenever we are unable to get good coverage.

Okay, but instead of doing any of this, you want to get rid of 'your' leader. Eh?

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Twitter says Neale Coleman has resigned.
If he's fallen out with Corbyn, that's a huge rupture.

 

[belboid]

Who?

Now we know you're just a pisstaking troll.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

It's true: Corbyn aide quits as Labour feud turns nasty | The Times

The backroom power struggles gripping Labour | The Times
This really is big. There must be carnage going on in those meetings.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I had to Google. A media adviser apparently. Oh deary dear.

It's all about the media for you eh mm. You are truly a child of Blair.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's true: Corbyn aide quits as Labour feud turns nasty | The Times

The backroom power struggles gripping Labour | The Times
This really is big. There must be carnage going on in those meetings.

Ironic that you quote the times uncritically on this thread

 

[treelover]

"In 2016, the Tories are planning even more savage cuts across the country. We'll defend those communities and the services they depend on."

J/C's clarion call in his L/P political broadcast, go to it now!

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Who?

Jeremy Corbyn bolsters his team with former Livingstone and Johnson aide Neale Colman

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Ironic that you quote the times uncritically on this thread

You're that desperate to throw mud, you make things up.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Hattersley on Newsnight saying that he thinks this is worse than the 1980s.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You're that desperate to throw mud, you make things up.

Nope
I've not read your links. I don't give a toss what the times is saying.

You really don't see the irony do you?

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Nope
I've not read your links. I don't give a toss what the times is saying.

You really don't see the irony do you?

I haven't quoted the Times. I've linked to the first news story of something significant. There's nothing critical to say, especially since I haven't quoted.

But you just making things up, like me "quoting the Times uncritically".

I suppose I'm a Murdoch lackey because I find something of relevance to the thread and post it, linking to the Times. Earlier in the thread, I was criticised for not linking. It's the only link available.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Maybe every link to the Times should have a health warning in case it influences people on this thread to fall under the spell of Murdoch.