On 3 Aug 2016 at 6:40pm Gerty wrote:
Not really. Lewes Labour have scored around 16% of the vote in by elections before and after Corbyn. The navel gazing of their party will see them fail again. They need to sort themselves out. Most people don't care who leads them they just want an opposition party.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 6:58pm Fairmeadow wrote:
The leader does matter. They need to be bright, they need to have a plan, and they need to be able to enthuse a wide spectrum of people. Corbyn is dim, he is clueless, and 80% of his close colleagues think he is useless.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 7:30pm Wolfie Smith wrote:
Corbyn is the greatest thing since sliced bread! I am so glad that my fellow comrades in Lewes are voting for him as a leader! He is championing the cause of those of us who have chosen to not to support ourselves but live on the generous contributions donated by those who work ( in the form of compulsory taxation) . We are doing our bit by fathering illegitimate children whose mothers turn up at Social Services demanding (and getting) free housing.
It is our human right to have a roof over our heads provided ultimately by those who have worked hard to buy their own home by way of a mortgage. Their wealth must be redistributed to support us downtrodden scroungers. Long live Jeremy Corbyn and his brave new world of a socialist paradise!
On 3 Aug 2016 at 7:31pm leaf wrote:
If he's so crap,how dud he get to be leader????
On 3 Aug 2016 at 8:04pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
@Leaf - He got in because people were completely disillusioned with the political class and responded to a man who valued morality above pragmatism. Sadly, one year on, it's become clear that he's not bright enough to offer a credible alternative that goes beyond soundbites. The dilemma for Labour has always been that in order to get into power, they need to compromise their principles, but there's something unattractive about politicians who don't follow their convictions.
I think someone like Dan Jarvis could lead the Labour Party to victory, but many of my Labour friends would rather remain ideologically pure, even if it stopped them getting into power. I think they're bonkers.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 8:18pm Hyena wrote:
Leaf, 'dud' a Freudian slip if ever there was one.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 8:54pm Bertrand wrote:
I recently saw someone giving their long family heritage in Labour as if it meant more than rational consideration of reality. That's the kind of tribal loyalty that undermines Labour and is why they are in such an identity crisis. On the one hand you have the old school left who should be voting Green or another left wing party if they stuck to prinicples. On the other hand you have the Blairites who are more like soft Tories. In the middle you have the confused "Labour forever" tribe who will support them regardless and who seem to me to have very flexible principles. There doesn't seem to be a Labour party for all of them.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 9:44pm thoughts wrote:
The Tories, under Cameron, fully ingested and adopted Blairite ideology and in doing so have now robbed the New labour faction of their purpose and so they now spend every moment trying to remove Corbyn who, for all his faults, is at least a leader of slightly more conviction and principle than we have been used to in the Labour party for the last 20 years.
Labour though really are in serious trouble - they are very unlikely to win with Corbyn at the helm and to re-install a blairite would be useless as they and the policies exist perfectly happy in the new May government. If UKIP can sort themselves out they will continue to take the overwhelmingly eurosceptic north and scotland has been lost to the SNP for a generation if not for good.
On 3 Aug 2016 at 10:52pm My town wrote:
Piss off Corbin you will bring the labour party down
On 3 Aug 2016 at 11:01pm Fairmeadow wrote:
I think we can take it UKIP will now implode. Their Tory votes will go back home. But I don't think Corbyn Labour has the slightest chance of recovering the traditional-Labour votes that have been lost to UKIP. Those voters support England, they serve in the forces, they are pretty Royalist, they don't support terrorists and they have borne the brunt of uncontrolled immigration without the provision of matching infrastructures. Theresa May's Downing Street speech was aimed right at them - whether she will follow through with actual policies remains to be seen. Corbyn offers them everything they hate and despise.
Neither Labour nor the Conservatives can win on their core vote alone. To win they both need a broad coalition, and in Labour's case that includes getting support from the socialists and Eco-warriors at one end and the nice Small-C conservatives in the middle. It also means inspiring the hordes of know-nothing don't-really-cares to turn out and vote. And it also needs the Scots. Anyone think Corbyn can get any of those groups to vote for him?
On 3 Aug 2016 at 11:34pm My town wrote:
I would not piss on him if he was on fire for Me to say that about another person show to me what I think of that thing of a leader
On 4 Aug 2016 at 6:55am Fireman Sam wrote:
Well said My Town. You have won the prize for Illiteratus in this thread. Kind regards. P.S. You wouldn't need to piss on him, he's too wet to ignite.
On 4 Aug 2016 at 7:57am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Corbyn won the leadership because the grassroots members wanted a leader who would reflect their views, not one who offer more Nu-Labour, Nearly Tory crap. The PLP, otoh, are mostly concerned with keeping their parliamentary seats and salaries.
It may be the case that the party will never get elected under Corbyn, but for members who want real change, rather than a slight difference, there's no real choice.
I think it might lead to another split in the party. I don't see how a party can really function when its MPs are so far to the right of its members.
On 4 Aug 2016 at 3:17pm Bob wrote:
Exactly ACT. Corbyn won the leadership because the grassroots wanted a genuine opposition view to be reflected in the party at large. Rather than Tory-lite (i.e. May's Tory government) vs. Tory-lite (i.e. Blairite New Labour), we have Tory-lite vs. a principled socialist opposition (which, let's face it, is what the Labour party is SUPPOSED to stand for).
I've never voted Labour in my life, but would seriously consider it with Corbyn at the helm if it made any difference in our ridiculous constituency.
On 5 Aug 2016 at 9:42am Observer wrote:
This tory-lite nonsense really is utter rubbish. Blair's government achieved a huge amount of change in education, health, poverty and inequality. Yes, Iraq iraq iraq and I agree, but ultimately they got into power and changed things for the better. No, there wasn't a wholesale change in society, but then no-one in Britain wanted that at the time.
Yes great that the overwhelmingly middle-class grassroots and members now want a leader who makes them feel better about themselves and supports their sense of moral superiority. But Labour was founded to represent ordinary people across Britain and bring about change through parliament, not to serve the vanities of a small section of society which will not really suffer from long periods of Conservative government.
Incidentally Corbyn has voted against the whip over 600 times, and help start a coup against Kinnock in the 80s. So why should the PLP be loyal now?
And it's not really about policy ACT. Plenty of left-wing MPs are now disillusioned with COrbyn. He's a useless manager, has no interest in the mieda, cannot communicate.
On 5 Aug 2016 at 11:32am OnTheC7 wrote:
ACT - I think the only way to change your view about Corbyn is if you get stuck behind him on his bike (he's a keen cyclist)
On 6 Aug 2016 at 10:12am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Oh, I've got plenty of reservations about Corbyn (although I do believe he's fundamentally a decent bloke, which is more than you can say about most politicians). Fewer than I have about Owen Smith though, and far fewer than I have about warmonger Angela Eagle.
I just think that the party as a whole should choose their leader, and the MPs who don't like it should either put up and shut up or stand down.