Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[Guineveretoo]

Do they? Who watches PMQs anyway?

Its just part of conning us into thinking politics is just a spectator sport.

It was all over the news media.

he had lots of opportunities to put her back in her box, but he simply doesn't seem to be able to think and react quickly enough for something like that.

You can that is fine, and that he is not playing the game, but the media is what gets to the GBP, and the media report what they see. (Well, sometimes...)

 

[Guineveretoo]

Even if Corbyn wiped the floor with her, the media's agenda is such that it just wouldn't be shown anyway, or would be framed in some other unhelpful way -- so it's just the same media-bias problem taht Corbyn and co have whether he's good at PMQ or not.

i don't agree.

if he had wiped the floor with her the press would have been so stunned it would have been headline news.

Besides which, not all the media is against Corbyn....

 

[Guineveretoo]

Hilarious.

I found it really quite sad, actually.

He needs to play the Westminster game if he is going to be a good leader of a parliamentary party, which is part of being Leader of the Opposition.

 

[eoin_k]

What a performance:


The media sees what it wants to see, and his rejection of this countries public-school-debating-club style of political discourse is refreshing.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

i don't agree.

if he had wiped the floor with her the press would have been so stunned it would have been headline news.

Besides which, not all the media is against Corbyn....

If he had wiped the floor with (which is a pretty subjective judgement call) I am willing to bet we would have seen stories saying:

• Corbyn is inconsistent...the country needs a leader who can always be counted on;
• Corbyn bullies May in a way he didn't do with Cameron...more evidence of his problem with women.

I know this looks ridiculous on the screen, but this is where we've got to with so much of the reporting on the Labour Party leader.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[DaveCinzano]

Labour could do with an umlaut.

Heavy metal social democracy

 

[nuffsaid]

I found it really quite sad, actually.

He needs to play the Westminster game if he is going to be a good leader of a parliamentary party, which is part of being Leader of the Opposition.

Absolutely, It's the ultimate test of leadership in front of your peers. Thinking on your feet, being able to articulate policy, justify it, back it up with examples. Blair with all his media skills hated it and wanted it scripted, Thatcher hated it - because it's a proper test. May breathed a huge sigh of relief when it was over. Most importantly it's what the media report on every week and they use it to add to the public image of MPs. If you want to be PM it really helps if you're good at PMQs.

 

[nuffsaid]

If he had wiped the floor with (which is a pretty subjective judgement call) I am willing to bet we would have seen stories saying:

• Corbyn is inconsistent...the country needs a leader who can always be counted on;
• Corbyn bullies May in a way he didn't do with Cameron...more evidence of his problem with women.

I know this looks ridiculous on the screen, but this is where we've got to with so much of the reporting on the Labour Party leader.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Well no because you could see for yourself as it happened, there was a live feed, reports on all media outlets and you could watch it and make your own mind up on BBC Parliament. You can see it impartially if you want to.

 

[Kesher]

What a performance:


The media sees what it wants to see, and his rejection of this countries public-school-debating-club style of political discourse is refreshing.

She sounds a bit like Thatcher's puppet from Spitting Image. Some of comments by the media were sickening: James O'Brien said that May owned Corbyn and that she was better than Cameron at PMQs. Also heard Quentin Letts say it was a work of genius.

 

[Gromit]

That the media thinks landing a few cheap shots in a political debate about the state of the nation is 'wiping the floor' with someone is worrying.

It's like saying I won a boxing match by telling your momma is soo fat jokes.

It's kind of missing the point that PMQs should be about landing solid political blows rather than constant dodging and weaving and occasional crowd pleasing bitch slap.

 

[maomao]

He wouldn't be allowed to wipe the floor with her. She has 300 jeering pricks sitting behind her. However sharp his one-liners, however childish and dull her responses they will win because it's a bully's game not a serious debate. However the media chooses to represent it he is taking the best possible approach.

 

[butchersapron]

Absolutely, It's the ultimate test of leadership in front of your peers. Thinking on your feet, being able to articulate policy, justify it, back it up with examples. Blair with all his media skills hated it and wanted it scripted, Thatcher hated it - because it's a proper test. May breathed a huge sigh of relief when it was over. Most importantly it's what the media report on every week and they use it to add to the public image of MPs. If you want to be PM it really helps if you're good at PMQs.

It's not a proper test. And if policy is made by reactive thinking on your feet in response to scripted barbs by your opponent...well surely you see the problem?

 

[teqniq]

Cross-posted on the Prime minister May thread:

The new poll which shows Jeremy Corbyn and Labour really are in crisis

Theresa May has given the Conservative Party an immediate bounce in the opinion polls which, if sustained, could revive speculation that she will call an early general election.

Ms May made an assured debut at Prime Minister’s Questions when she ridiculed Jeremy Corbyn after he raised the issue of insecurity at work. She told him: “I suspect that there are many members on the Opposition benches who might be familiar with an unscrupulous boss. A boss who doesn't listen to his workers, a boss who requires some of his workers to double their workload and maybe a boss who exploits the rules to further his own career. Remind him of anybody?”...

So I am wondering how much of this is media spin, particularly aimed at portraying Corbyn in a negative light. Haven't watched it myself but it seems likely to me.

 

[nuffsaid]

It's not a proper test. And if policy is made by reactive thinking on your feet in response to scripted barbs by your opponent..

Obviously policy isn't made on your feet, but you should be able to know your policies so well you can answer question on it from any angle and be able to defend it. It very much is a test - of your knowledge, thinking around the subject, bringing in other points to validate yours, etc, etc. All sorts of transferable skills in there, but the main one being - showing leadership and authority.

 

[Guineveretoo]

If he had wiped the floor with (which is a pretty subjective judgement call) I am willing to bet we would have seen stories saying:

• Corbyn is inconsistent...the country needs a leader who can always be counted on;
• Corbyn bullies May in a way he didn't do with Cameron...more evidence of his problem with women.

I know this looks ridiculous on the screen, but this is where we've got to with so much of the reporting on the Labour Party leader.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

No doubt some press would have spun it that way, but plenty of others would report that Corbyn has stepped up to the plate (or whatever) and learnt how to deal with PMQs.

It's part of his job, like it or not. And he's constantly showing how crap he is at it.

 

[butchersapron]

Obviously policy isn't made on your feet, but you should be able to know your policies so well you can answer question on it from any angle and be able to defend it. It very much is a test - of your knowledge, thinking around the subject, bringing in other points to validate yours, etc, etc. All sorts of transferable skills in there, but the main one being - showing leadership and authority.

Have you ever watched the thing? None of that happens. None. It's not an actual debate.

 

[butchersapron]

No doubt some press would have spun it that way, but plenty of others would report that Corbyn has stepped up to the plate (or whatever) and learnt how to deal with PMQs.

It's part of his job, like it or not. And he's constantly showing how crap he is at it.

No they wouldn't.

 

[killer b]

Where is this Corbyn supporting press? The morning star? The Canary?

 

[teqniq]

Jesus H Christ

 

[nuffsaid]

Have you ever watched the thing? None of that happens. None. It's not an actual debate.

I've watched it on several occasions - it's verbal sparring, but within that it shows the mettle of the person. Blair didn't like being seen to not have answers so demanded to know what he was going to be asked beforehand, completely ducking the pressure and so appearing to always look in control. If people like Blair and Thatcher found it a pressure, it's a good thing.

 

[redsquirrel]

We've just had an referendum were despite the government, all major and medium political parties bar one, the CBI, the Institute of Directors, the Bank of England, the IMF, foreign governments and any number of 'experts' telling people that they must vote one way 52% of voters gave them two fingers and people really think PMQs matters.

Christ, some pages back it was asked what the pitfalls of getting involved with the Labour Party are, well you've got a perfect example here over the last two pages.

 

[redsquirrel]

No doubt some press would have spun it that way, but plenty of others would report that Corbyn has stepped up to the plate (or whatever) and learnt how to deal with PMQs.

Which paper? Bar the Morning Star all the papers are opposed to him. This is deluded.

 

[butchersapron]

I've watched it on several occasions - it's verbal sparring, but within that it shows the mettle of the person. Blair didn't like being seen to not have answers so demanded to know what he was going to be asked beforehand, completely ducking the pressure and so appearing to always look in control. If people like Blair and Thatcher found it a pressure, it's a good thing.

These are pointlessly vague terms aren't they 'mettle' and so on. Every Prime Minister is going to know what questions they're going to be asked and have had extensive briefs prepared by a whole team of civil servants and political appointments. There is no back and forth, no testing of command of info, no bringing in of other knowledge. It's not even verbal sparring when one sides quips have been pre-written and the whole farce is just to manouvere to be able to use those quips. Pretty much the same for the other side. It's like a panel show where they lie they haven't been given lines.

 

[belboid]

The Mirror has been pro corbyn. If he did a good job they'd show it, as they did when he landed a few blows on Cameron at his smuggest. However, anyone can see he was shit against May, and that he should be a lot sharper. It isn't bloody sacrilege to point out the obvious.

 

[belboid]

These are pointlessly vague terms aren't they 'mettle' and so on. Every Prime Minister is going to know what questions they're going to be asked and have had extensive briefs prepared by a whole team of civil servants and political appointments. There is no back and forth, no testing of command of info, no bringing in of other knowledge. It's not even verbal sparring when one sides quips have been pre-written and the whole farce is just to manouvere to be able to use those quips. Pretty much the same for the other side. It's like a panel show where they lie they haven't been given lines.

And yet PM's have been made to look foolish time and time again. Because they're outmanoeuvred.

 

[billy_bob]

If he had wiped the floor with (which is a pretty subjective judgement call) I am willing to bet we would have seen stories saying:

• Corbyn is inconsistent...the country needs a leader who can always be counted on;
• Corbyn bullies May in a way he didn't do with Cameron...more evidence of his problem with women.

I know this looks ridiculous on the screen, but this is where we've got to with so much of the reporting on the Labour Party leader.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Absolutely right. And also:

• I thought he said he wasn't going to do this kind of yah-boo politics? Hypocrite.

 

[nuffsaid]

These are pointlessly vague terms aren't they 'mettle' and so on. Every Prime Minister is going to know what questions they're going to be asked and have had extensive briefs prepared by a whole team of civil servants and political appointments. There is no back and forth, no testing of command of info, no bringing in of other knowledge. It's not even verbal sparring when one sides quips have been pre-written and the whole farce is just to manouvere to be able to use those quips. Pretty much the same for the other side. It's like a panel show where they lie they haven't been given lines.

And yet the media report where a PM is seen to be unable to answer direct questions on policy or where an opposition leader is made to look daft and has been out-witted. If the media are reporting it it matters.

 

[Sprocket.]

In my lifetime, the most able, respected and experienced parliamentary orators and party leaders I ever heard was Michael Foot and we all remember how he was made 'un-electable' too.

 

[billy_bob]

It might sound like an odd comparison, but the last couple of pages' discussion has reminded me of Griffin on Question Time. Afterwards, the media was full - as they were themselves - of how Bonnie Greer and Jack Straw had 'bested' the BNP leader and 'defeated' his arguments, but in reality Griffin was tactically smart enough to know that he had nothing to gain by engaging with them on their terms.

His aim was to cement the appearance of the mainstream-ness and normality of his views, while also emphasising and making a virtue of the fact that he was outside the 'bubble' which the other panellist inhabited, where they're insulated from real people and any understanding of their lives. If you looked at most of his supporters' reactions at the time to his performance, he achieved this pretty successfully. Obviously the BNP pissed away any advantage this gave them pretty soon afterwards, and I've even seen media commentators try to claim that the QT appearance had something to do with that, but that's absolute ill-informed bollocks.

Similarly, Corbyn may or may not be up to the knockabout atmosphere of PMQs, but he has clearly judged that even 'succeeding' at that would not be to his benefit. By not engaging in it he is cementing his claim to many of the qualities that people support him for in the first place, and has at least some hope of conveying that to a wider section of society who see the punch and judy show of the Commons and are completely turned off politics by it.

 

[butchersapron]

And yet the media report where a PM is seen to be unable to answer direct questions on policy or where an opposition leader is made to look daft and has been out-witted. If the media are reporting it it matters.

So not quite the broad and informed open debate and demonstration of informed thinking on your feet you first suggested? Just making someone look daft like on a panel show? I really don't think a) the media does report across the board on such things - it's always selective in a number of ways, from which incidents you choose to report and which not, and how to frame them in their own terms and against you organisations wider narrative vs the narrative of others. The media never just reports. 2) I don't think most people give a shit.