3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,209
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Corbyn's days (very) numbered?
- Thread starter GlennB
- Start date
The Blairite wing of the Labour party wanted to lose both seats. Amazing that they could be so disloyal to the party that's fed them.
Two Blairite MPs resigned together for unusual reasons - no health problems or scandals.
Then, in the week before the elections, the twin hated liars of Blair and Mandleson emerged from the woodwork to campaign vigorously against Corbyn and the official Labour policy of supporting Brexit.
Two Blairite MPs resigned together for unusual reasons - no health problems or scandals.
Then, in the week before the elections, the twin hated liars of Blair and Mandleson emerged from the woodwork to campaign vigorously against Corbyn and the official Labour policy of supporting Brexit.
Oh I see. Corbyn's deep unpopularity is Tony Blair's fault. Right.......
Oh, and the people of Stoke and Copeland listened more to Blair and Mandelson than they did to Corbyn. Might that say a little something about their respective credibilities?
Oh, and the people of Stoke and Copeland listened more to Blair and Mandelson than they did to Corbyn. Might that say a little something about their respective credibilities?
Last edited:
The people of Stoke and Copeland, in common with all Brits, hate Blair and Mandleson so much that the mere mention of their names makes turning out to vote Labour less likely.
How often do you get a former Prime Minister and a former senior member of his cabinet campaigning against their own leader and their own party policy in the week of an election?
It's not like Blair and Mandleson are on TV or in the papers very often nowadays. They made a special effort to help secure this defeat.
How often do you get a former Prime Minister and a former senior member of his cabinet campaigning against their own leader and their own party policy in the week of an election?
It's not like Blair and Mandleson are on TV or in the papers very often nowadays. They made a special effort to help secure this defeat.
I have a lot less of a problem with Blair and Mandelson than I have with either May or Corbyn. Corbyn was supposed to be this great fillip to Labour's election chances. I think it's now pretty clear that there is a small constituency drawn to his fringe views but the British public are turned off.
errrrr no.
Blair was reflecting the view of 2/3 of Labour Party supporters, Corbyn on the other hand with his pro-Brexit view is a vote loser. Someone who is passionately pro-Brexit isn't going to change party affiliation (whatever that may be) to vote for the Corbyn Labour party when there are other parties which are far more enthusiastic in their support for a hard Brexit. Someone like me, who is anti-Brexit would likely change party affiliation to vote for an anti-Brexit candidate (such as SNP or LibDem).
#alternativefacts
Much beloved of Brexiteers
I'm not expecting Blair and company to change their views, but you would think that they might just lay low and keep quiet rather than help secure a defeat for their own party.
How often do healthy MPs who've not been hit by any scandals suddenly resign their seats a couple of years after they were elected?
I'm no fan of Corbyn, but it was the Blairites in the Labour party that led Labour out of power to a stunning defeat - that's the reason why Corbyn got the job in the first place. You'd think that the Blairites having made such a mess of things would have the sense to keep quite for a while - instead they seem intent on destroying what remains of their party.
How often do healthy MPs who've not been hit by any scandals suddenly resign their seats a couple of years after they were elected?
I'm no fan of Corbyn, but it was the Blairites in the Labour party that led Labour out of power to a stunning defeat - that's the reason why Corbyn got the job in the first place. You'd think that the Blairites having made such a mess of things would have the sense to keep quite for a while - instead they seem intent on destroying what remains of their party.
That's an extra-ordinary re-writing of history. It was the Blairites who secured Labour's only ever 3 election victories in a row. It was the palace coup by the inept Gordon Brown which then handed an electoral chance to a resurgent Conservative party. Not content with anointing one duffer, Labour then went and elected one (Miliband) who was so unconvincing that it wouldn't have mattered if he was hard left or to the right of Genghis Khan, he wasn't going to win.
The only time the Blairite or reform side of the party "led to a stunning defeat" was in putting up 3 vacuous talking heads in the leadership election. Allied with Miliband's ridiculous change to the leadership election rules which handed me a vote, which handed victory to the greatest loser in Labour's history since the last one.
Anyone who lived through the 70s and 80s in Britain can't help but notice the parallels between Foot/ Thatcher and Corbyn/ May, with the major difference being that Foot could string together half a dozen words without stumbling.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,209
Much as I hate the woman and always will, to compare May to Thatcher does immense disservice to Thatcher, I feel.
Seismosaurus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2003
- Messages
- 6,092
I'm a Brit. Please don't presume to speak for me on what my opinion of Blair or Mandleson is. Most especially don't do so when the claim is factually wrong.
Sorry. I did think I shouldn't have said 'all Brits' when I wrote that - I wanted to say that with present day voters, when Blair and Mandleson speak it's more likely to reduce the Labour vote than increase it. But then I forgot and posted without editing.
I don't deny that, but you must admit that Brown, who was certainly a Blairite, then led Labour to defeat. Blair himself was so unpopular by that time that if he'd not handed over to Brown then Labour would have probably have suffered a greater defeat.
The Blairites certainly haven't covered themselves in glory ever since - look at their pathetic attempts to remove Corbyn: Jeremy is a terrible leader, but even so he's better than the stooges that the Blairites put up against him.
If the Blairites are going to run campaigns that damage the party in the short term, they should at least first make certain that they have a reasonable chance of winning so that in the longer term the party might recover.
Last edited:
Evidence, apart from your gut feel ?
It seems that at the moment, the Labour vote has been reduced to a Corbynite rump. The five other Labour Party members and ex-members I know locally (between us we have more than 150 years membership) are by no means hardcode Blairites but all are like me, not intending to vote Labour any time soon because of Corbyn and the direction in which he's letting the party drift.
Its pretty obvious labour couldn't have won in Copeland hearing the reasons people voted conservative.
Corbyn opposition to trident must means he wants to close Sellafield being the main, misguided one, but it gets better.
Corbyn wants to close the hospitals.
Now, normally you could put this down to hilariously stupid people but, hearing people on the Beeb repeatedly saying this makes me surprised ukip and their brainiacs didn't do better.
You can't fix stupid.
Corbyn opposition to trident must means he wants to close Sellafield being the main, misguided one, but it gets better.
Corbyn wants to close the hospitals.
Now, normally you could put this down to hilariously stupid people but, hearing people on the Beeb repeatedly saying this makes me surprised ukip and their brainiacs didn't do better.
You can't fix stupid.
It was on the cards that's why the PM popped up there.
Well, this is pretty much the sort of reasoning that means Labour are going to be out of power for a generation: it's everyone else's fault. "They didn't get the message", "it's because of Blair", "voters are stupid", "we didn't get our message across"............and never "they don't like our message", "we've failed this community for generations" or "they don't like our leadership or policy direction".
Kinnock was a hero for standing up to these people. If you don't keep your eyes open, they keep coming back, often with a different name (Militant Tendency then, Momentum now). They're self-serving and destructive, and unelectable.......and they hold the reins in Labour at the moment. Maybe the only way to really get rid of them is to leave them in control and then watch the annihilation at the next general election. Who'd bet now on Labour holding 150 seats post the 2020 election? What will the excuse be then?
Last edited:
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
When did Corbyn say he wanted to close the hospitals? It's the Tories who are deciding the policies for people with accidents and serious illness to be treated by care in the community, supposedly paid for by local authorities. Added to which is a policy to fill the universities with Chinese, and a long-term plan to do away with the state pension, and unemployment and disability benefits. The country needs electricity, even if it is imported and comes from coal, gas and future nuclear accidents. Rejoice in the new high speed trains and third Heathrow runways to paid for by billions, at a time when financial weakness is plainly visible. Have any politicians, and the London media, got any wide and practical experience?
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,209
As far as I can work out, the primary and over-riding motivation for most of the lower house is to ensure that they have their party's nomination at the next general election.