The Labour Party - Part 2

[Vaati 11]

Post(s) have been removed because they could be considered to breach our Terms of Service or Forum Rules.

[Pettytom 1]

35 minutes ago, banjodeano said:

Tom, you cant cherry pic the best bits unfortunately, 

Why not?

 

You seem content to cherry pick the worst bits.

 

What’s the difference?

[Arnold_Lane 0]

2 hours ago, banjodeano said:

no not at all, where have i stated that? i have stated that the Blairites have never given Corbyn a chance,  and if they wasnt prepared to give Corbyn a chance and continually undermine the party they should leave to form their own party (like a few of them tried)

Talking about unity, it appears starmer has no intention of uniting the party, which was one of his pledges that he has now broken

 

wow...just wow,

didnt he take us into an illegal war that cost the lives of over half a million people?

Can you define what you mean? 

 

If its to pander to Corbynites and embrace Corbynism why would he do that?  It's cost Labour two elections to poor opposition.

 

I suspect your idea of  what "unifying" the party is is unreasonable and you will continue to be disappointed.  

 

Oh well.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Arnold_Lane

[melthebell 863]

2 hours ago, banjodeano said:

Talking about unity, it appears starmer has no intention of uniting the party, which was one of his pledges that he has now broken

Really? evidence?

 

As i stated earlier, isnt there more pressing matters? like covid which need urgent attention?

Hes been putting Boris under the cosh by some accounts at pms question time making him look like the bumbler he is.

 

How long does he get before hes broken the pledge? 2 days, 2 weeks? 2 years?

 

Hes put his pledges out there, Tom posted them earlier?

Do they look more socialist than you imagined?

Do they look "tory lite"?

Could some socialists look at them and think oh go on then i'll give them a chance?

Would that be starting to unite the party?

 

I'd say uniting the party is difficult with both sides in the party so entrenched in their own idealisms and opinions.

[Baron99 800]

5 hours ago, melthebell said:

Really? evidence?

 

As i stated earlier, isnt there more pressing matters? like covid which need urgent attention?

Hes been putting Boris under the cosh by some accounts at pms question time making him look like the bumbler he is.

 

How long does he get before hes broken the pledge? 2 days, 2 weeks? 2 years?

 

Hes put his pledges out there, Tom posted them earlier?

Do they look more socialist than you imagined?

Do they look "tory lite"?

Could some socialists look at them and think oh go on then i'll give them a chance?

Would that be starting to unite the party?

 

I'd say uniting the party is difficult with both sides in the party so entrenched in their own idealisms and opinions.

I'd recommend reading the excellent book, 'Beyond The Red Wall: Why Labour Post, How The Conservatives Won And What Will Happen Next?' by Deborah Mattinson.

 

The author interviewed many previous, long-standing Labour across Labour's Northern heartlands as to why they voted Conservative at the last election, turning their backs on Labour & it wasn't just because of Corbyn.  

 

Many felt that Labour had been taking their support for granted & done nothing to suggest that a vote for Labour would do anything level up the North / South divide.  A number sited that the Party was still London-centric, just as it was under Blair's stewardship. 

 

I saw Mattinson, once dubbed, 'Gordon Brown' s favourite pollster', being interviewed on Sky last week, regarding Brexit issues but she was asked about other areas of politics & Starmer's name cropped up. 

 

Unfortunately for all who think Starmer is the new Massiah, Ms Mattinson is still doing her polling work in those Northern heartlands & according to her, 'Labour is seen less as a Party of pints & pies, more of a Party of quinoa', under Starmer.  The Party, remains London-centric to Northerners, with many unable to relate to him, yet many are still willingly supporting a man who's middle name is 'de Pfeffel'. 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2020 by Baron99

[melthebell 863]

3 hours ago, Baron99 said:

I'd recommend reading the excellent book, 'Beyond The Red Wall: Why Labour Post, How The Conservatives Won And What Will Happen Next?' by Deborah Mattinson.

 

The author interviewed many previous, long-standing Labour across Labour's Northern heartlands as to why they voted Conservative at the last election, turning their backs on Labour & it wasn't just because of Corbyn.  

 

Many felt that Labour had been taking their support for granted & done nothing to suggest that a vote for Labour would do anything level up the North / South divide.  A number sited that the Party was still London-centric, just as it was under Blair's stewardship. 

 

I saw Mattinson, once dubbed, 'Gordon Brown' s favourite pollster', being interviewed on Sky last week, regarding Brexit issues but she was asked about other areas of politics & Starmer's name cropped up. 

 

Unfortunately for all who think Starmer is the new Massiah, Ms Mattinson is still doing her polling work in those Northern heartlands & according to her, 'Labour is seen less as a Party of pints & pies, more of a Party of quinoa', under Starmer.  The Party, remains London-centric to Northerners, with many unable to relate to him, yet many are still willingly supporting a man who's middle name is 'de Pfeffel'. 

 

 

my post was about the membership inside the party NOT the voters

[Anna B 1,414]

15 hours ago, banjodeano said:

no not at all, where have i stated that? i have stated that the Blairites have never given Corbyn a chance,  and if they wasnt prepared to give Corbyn a chance and continually undermine the party they should leave to form their own party (like a few of them tried)

Talking about unity, it appears starmer has no intention of uniting the party, which was one of his pledges that he has now broken

 

wow...just wow,

didnt he take us into an illegal war that cost the lives of over half a million people?

He did indeed, and the fact that he made millions as a 'peace envoy' in the middle east (oh the irony,) IMO shows what kind of man he is.

[alchresearch 215]

Not looking good for Corbyn.  

 

Lost his case and will have to pay.

 

Time to either step quietly out of the limelight or, if he has the supporters he thinks he has, start his own party.

 

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/westminster-news/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-suspension-court-case-7078092

[Baron99 800]

Lord Corbyn of Islington then for sure? 

 

You know?  Like all the great Labour Socialist firebrands, (Blunkett, Prescott, et al) , elevated to the House of Lords, to bring them down by fighting them from within (on £320 per day signing in claim). 

[ECCOnoob 1,048]

2 hours ago, alchresearch said:

Not looking good for Corbyn.  

 

Lost his case and will have to pay.

 

Time to either step quietly out of the limelight or, if he has the supporters he thinks he has, start his own party.

 

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/westminster-news/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-suspension-court-case-7078092

Interestingly, this could just be one of many losses for Corbyn. 

 

This wasn't even the main case. It was just a preliminary hearing to argue what documents should be disclosed. As you say, let's hope he gets the message and goes back quietly before he risks even more personal loss.

[banjodeano 31]

5 hours ago, alchresearch said:

Not looking good for Corbyn.  

 

Lost his case and will have to pay.

 

Time to either step quietly out of the limelight or, if he has the supporters he thinks he has, start his own party.

 

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/westminster-news/jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-suspension-court-case-7078092

i wouldn't necessarily say so.

this link is quite interesting,  it states...

 

"However, the judge also linked the decision to her finding that Corbyn already had enough to press on with in the substantive case at this point – and said his team can submit amendments later in the case regarding the agreement that was negotiated with Starmer’s office. And there was considerable bad news for Starmer’s case in the rest of the judgment, which:

1. acknowledges in a judicial finding – in paragraph 9 – that the ‘Governance and Legal Unit’ (GLU) report presented to the National Executive Committee ‘Disputes Panel’ did not find that JC had engaged in prejudicial conduct
2. finds in paragraph 10 that the Disputes Panel made no finding that Corbyn’s conduct was grossly detrimental
3. finds that there is a clear arguable case of procedural unfairness that has been identified"

https://skwawkbox.org/2021/01/28/exclusive-result-in-corbyn-pre-action-disclosure-is-not-what-mainstream-media-are-claiming/?fbclid=IwAR1nNpp6ylTPw7GsVocd5vsnyebEDSJwmNLGzFjBtZAdPjIqWGuGVZ-b-g8

[Anna B 1,414]

There is something wrong with the system when an honest decent man like Corbyn can be so maligned, and an obvious liar and charlatan like Johnson becomes Prime Minister.