Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Labour leadership

have many Labourites actually quit? IS there a list? Refusing to serve in a shadow cabinet, without being asked to, doesnt count

I don't even think people in caretaker positions in the shadow cabinet can 'quit' tbh. Any new leader would have picked his or her own cabinet, so the incumbents would have no reason to assume they would get to keep their jobs.

e2a: The fact that Chris Leslie was shadow chancellor just proves that nobody was taking these temporary shadow cabinet posts seriously.
 
The Observer view on Jeremy Corbyn’s victory in the Labour leadership

Ideology can sometimes be an indulgence best deployed by fringe politicians, pundits and activists. But people in need can’t survive on that – they require people to fashion legislation and effect change. And that requires political power. It’s difficult to see how a Corbyn victory makes that more likely.
This again. The great liberal conceit that they're dynamic solution providing go-getters untethered to ye olde ideological swim lanes, and that any of the other 3 shitheads could win an election by continuing to mug its voters and out-filth the tories. As if Corbyn's Labour won't be stuck with this route anyway.
But given long-term trends towards fragmentation and the declining importance of class, mainstream parties will be forced to adapt the way they interact with voters or face extinction.
One can only speculate about what horrid experience with oiks led an observer leader writer to rue "the declining importance of class" in the face of decades of evidence pointing to increasingly stratified societies.
 
It's a common argument, particularly from the grauniad-observer axis. It's better to have someone who won't do anything different to the tories but who might get into power than to pick a candidate whose policies you actually support.

As usual, the evidence for the claim that 'Corbyn cannot win a general election' is notable by its absence.
 
It's a common argument, particularly from the grauniad-observer axis. It's better to have someone who won't do anything different to the tories but who might get into power than to pick a candidate whose policies you actually support.

"A liberal is a man too broad-minded to take his own side in a quarrel"
 
eerhggh.... just made the mistake of ploughing through the comment peices in the gaurdian. A Great morass of patronising, conceited, condescending guff where they deign to give Corbyn the benefit of their wisdom. Predictably its all about how he should temper his message, appeal to the "centre" and tut-tuttting at his acceptance speech - where he didn't offer anything to people with "aspirations" (wanting a decent home, decent wages and a decent future is not an aspiration apparently).
As well as failing to find anything exciting or positive in a dramatically changed political landscape or even consider that an anti-austerity platform might actually resonate with many people outside the labour left - they conspicuously failed to show the slightest humility in acknowledging that they completely misread the rise of Corbyn, that the abject failure of their campaign against him suggests that no-one gives a fuck about what they say and that - really - like the rest of us - they dont have a fucking clue as to what's going to happen next.
 
:D


You don't hold with the placebo effect then? :)

I don't hold with charging sick, vulnerable and (lets be fair to them) stupid people large sums of money for a placebo no.

You can by homeopathic antimalarials ffs. The placebo effect cannot stop you contracting malaria.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
As usual, the evidence for the claim that 'Corbyn cannot win a general election' is notable by its absence.
The only one of the many, many things people have said that rings true to me is "Michael Foot couldn't win, and he's no Michael Foot." Which digs to the heart of the matter, if you're a supporter. I'm in favour of the policies (well, most of them), but Corbyn is no leader. He still hasn't managed to regularly engage his brain before his mouth, despite 20+ years as an MP - which tells me he never will be, either. If he manages to win, it will be entirely due to those around him and some massive own-goal from the Tory side. Personally, I see it as Milliband all over again. I hope it's not Foot and the SDP all over again.
 
The only one of the many, many things people have said that rings true to me is "Michael Foot couldn't win, and he's no Michael Foot." Which digs to the heart of the matter, if you're a supporter. I'm in favour of the policies (well, most of them), but Corbyn is no leader. He still hasn't managed to regularly engage his brain before his mouth, despite 20+ years as an MP - which tells me he never will be, either. If he manages to win, it will be entirely due to those around him and some massive own-goal from the Tory side. Personally, I see it as Milliband all over again. I hope it's not Foot and the SDP all over again.
Labour didn't lose in 1984 because of Michael Foot. That's a myth put about by the Tory press and Nu Labour revisionists. It lost because of the Falklands and Thatcher channelling Churchill. Foot was actually quite popular and Labour was doing well in the polls until the Falklands.
 
I don't hold with charging sick, vulnerable and (lets be fair to them) stupid people large sums of money for a placebo no.

which is why I presume the idea is to have it on the nhs

Eta - you think that the placebo effect only works on stupid people???? :D

You can by homeopathic antimalarials ffs. The placebo effect cannot stop you contracting malaria.

Didn't say it would. Might cut the UK's drugs bill if prescribed appropriately though. Or don't you hold with the placebo effect?
 
Back
Top Bottom