Jeremy Corbyn & Tom Watson elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party

muddythefish · 30 Sep 2015

DaveHarries said:
It is an idea that, to my mind, hasn't worked in the past.

Dave

Presumably you don't believe in or use the NHS then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

DaveHarries said:
TBH I will never vote Labour whoever leads that lot. Certainly don't want a socialist in charge. I would rather Labour woke up with a serious hangover after downing their sorrows on loosing the next election. I would never accept JC as PM.

Dave

You wouldn't have any choice if he were elected.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

fowler9 said:
Hmmmm. Would you say the recent neo liberal governments have worked?

They have worked very well... for the 1 per cent.

The sort that live in Prestbury and seem to think they're superior.

RailUK Forums

NSEFAN · 30 Sep 2015

muddythefish said:
They have worked very well... for the 1 per cent.

The sort that live in Prestbury and seem to think they're superior.

Going by global population, I understand that most people in Britain are in the top 1% most wealthy. It's funny how even the 1% most wealthy like to distinguish themselves from each other within that relatively small group. Old money vs new money, etc.

On the other hand, if you look at who actually holds 99% of the wealth, this is by far fewer than 1% of the world's population. The free market is wonderful, until you factor in human greed and its desire to warp those markets until they're no longer free. :lol:

backontrack · 30 Sep 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Your belief in what you say that I was trying to say is one that I must inform you is totally and utterly wrong. I am quite capable of saying what I do without any assistance from anyone else. The only correct connection that you make is where you state "They're both "socialist" and on that point I agree with you. But then you spoil your argument by making a silly assumption about "automatically meaning the situation there will be replicated" On this thread, I invite you to show how you arrive at that supposition. It is wording of your own making, not of mine.

I shall therefore make no comment upon the wording of your final paragraph, as that is unsubstantiated supposition based upon further unsubstantiated supposition and something that you are far too intelligent to really mean.

Maybe the 'sarcasm' cannot be seen for the trees. :roll:

DynamicSpirit says what I meant to say better than I did. However, I believe that my post makes perfect sense. And I don't think I'm alone in that respect.

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Sep 2015

Let us return to the matter of what Jeremy Corbyn said about the use of British nuclear weapons if he was Prime Minister today and of how one of the Eagle twins then responded to his statement, by saying that Labour was in favour of retaining that form of weaponry which formed part of the policy of the Labour Party.

Not exactly singing from the same hymn sheet, were they..:roll:

backontrack · 30 Sep 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Let us return to the matter of what Jeremy Corbyn said about the use of British nuclear weapons if he was Prime Minister today and of how one of the Eagle twins then responded to his statement, by saying that Labour was in favour of retaining that form of weaponry which formed part of the policy of the Labour Party. Not exactly singing from the same hymn sheet, were they..:roll:

No, let's not. Why haven't you answer the question?

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Sep 2015

muddythefish said:
The sort that live in Prestbury and seem to think they're superior.

Rather than go to the trouble of responding in print to your comment above, I will refer you to the final paragraph of my posting # 74 on the Teesside Steel thread that was also made in response to another one of your posting submissions.

I come from the most humblest of backgrounds and am where I am today at the age of 70 for the reasons stated in that particular paragraph.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

backontrack said:
No, let's not. Why haven't you answer the question?

The question concerned the relative term "Socialism" in terms of how that colours the views and aspirations of both the Greek Government and of Jeremy Corbyn.

I have answered that particular point now twice in postings. I cannot be held responsible for forum members who cannot understand that particular connotation, as if I were to do so, I would be accused of being patronising to them, who as one has already stated in print, having already been accused on this very thread of being thought to be a superior personage.

Let not a clear, concise, cognitive thinking ability be confused with accusations of supposed superiority, for heavens sake....

backontrack · 30 Sep 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
I have answered that particular point now twice in postings. I cannot be held responsible for forum members who cannot understand that particular connotation, as if I were to do so, I would be accused of being patronising to them, who as one has already stated in print, having already been accused on this very thread of being thought to be a superior personage.

So go ahead. Patronise me.

The only link between Labour and Syriza is that they were both socialist parties. Both in totally different scenarios, and in different environments.

I'd like you to expand upon this premise. How else are these similar, and how is your original point really relevant?

muddythefish · 30 Sep 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Let not a clear, concise, cognitive thinking ability be confused with accusations of supposed superiority, for heavens sake....

Let's also not confuse self-congratulatory delusions of grandeur with knowledge and wisdom either.

To get back to the Labour party, comparing it to Syriza is like comparing the Conservatives to the Republican party - both are nominally on the right but both are entirely different beasts.

valenta · 30 Sep 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Not exactly singing from the same hymn sheet, were they..:roll:

Indeed, Corbyn has once again been criticised from his shadow cabinet, as happened following his refusal to sing his national anthem. The particular idiom you have used would have been a particularly effective quip for Cameron to have used in the last PMQ's given that took place two days after the national anthem incident!

Xenophon PCDGS · 1 Oct 2015

muddythefish said:
To get back to the Labour party, comparing it to Syriza is like comparing the Conservatives to the Republican party - both are nominally on the right but both are entirely different beasts.

My post made reference to the socialist ambitions of the Greek government and Jeremy Corbyn...not the Greek government and the Labour party. Jeremy Corbyn's personal aspirational view of socialist ambitions is not the same as many of his shadow cabinet collegues.

Who was it then who brought the Labour party into the equation as it most certainly not me, as a reading of my post posts will so reveal.?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

backontrack said:
So go ahead. Patronise me.The only link between Labour and Syriza is that they were both socialist parties. Both in totally different scenarios, and in different environments.

Read the answer that I have just made in my posting to muddythefish as you too seem to be under the same misapprehension that he was.

NSEFAN · 1 Oct 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Jeremy Corbyn's personal aspirational view of socialist ambitions is not the same as many of his shadow cabinet collegues.

The prime minister is a leader, not a dictator. People are individuals but to reach consensus there must be discussion and compromise. I think Corbyn has become popular because he at least appears willing to listen to the concerns of a large section of the population who otherwise feel ignored by the political class who run the country. Let's face it, Labour and Conservative have been very much the same party since Blair. If Labour become more left leaning, or at least having many different views to the Conservatives, the public will at least feel like they can have some actual influence on the decisions the country makes.

Xenophon PCDGS · 1 Oct 2015

NSEFAN said:
The Prime Minister is a leader, not a dictator. People are individuals but to reach consensus there must be discussion and compromise. I think Corbyn has become popular because he at least appears willing to listen to the concerns of a large section of the population who otherwise feel ignored by the political class who run the country.

Jeremy Corbyn is not the Prime Minister, just the leader of a party in opposition.

NSEFAN · 1 Oct 2015

Paul Sidorczuk said:
Jeremy Corbyn is not the Prime Minister, just the leader of a party in opposition.

I know that, but the leader of a political party does tend to end up being prime minister should that party obtain a majority vote in an election. In practice the public vote for a party and its leader, even though they're supposed to be voting for a local representative. Such is our rather broken voting system, but there we are.

The point still stands that, in what is supposed to be a democracy, the government should represent the view of the people (whether the people know what's best for them is another matter, populism isn't a great way to run a country). Corbyn's approach is more likely to achieve this than doing what the Conservatives appear to be suggesting, which is apparently to go in already standing for XYZ policies and not backing down. That is just an unhelpful attitude to have, nothing gets done and it just fosters an attitude of resentment on either side, when it needn't be like that. What surprises me most is how recent government seems to have been completely blind to this, with Blair for example being seemingly unable to understand why Corbyn was getting so much support. It is a demonstration of how detached many leading politicians appear to be with the will of the public. At last someone comes along who actually appears to care about the people he's supposed to represent. It's not rocket science that this person will become popular, even if his policies aren't the most sensible.

pemma · 1 Oct 2015

muddythefish said:
To get back to the Labour party, comparing it to Syriza is like comparing the Conservatives to the Republican party - both are nominally on the right but both are entirely different beasts.

The PRI in Mexico has moved to right of centre and with PRI in power you have one of the most corrupt Police Forces in the world. Yet people don't say a Conservative government in 2020 would mean corruption in the police force would get out of control but do say a Labour government under Corbyn won't work due to anti-austerity not being a viable plan pointing to Greece for evidence. Double standards.

Railops · 28 Apr 2016

Corbyn's new look Labour party has certainly encouraged all the anti-Semites out of the woodwork, they've always been there but have been encouraged to show their colours now they have a leader who fully represents their views.
2 mp's suspended since yesterday, please please Diane Abbott come out in support of Ken and Naz I would love to see her go the same way.
The party is in total chaos with over 30 Labour mp's calling for Livingstone to be expelled, Naz Shah is actually looking slightly less extreme then Ken with his Hitler jibes today.

This comment about Shah yesterday from a Corbyn spokesman is the ultimate definition of political spin of the highest order :

“We’re not suggesting she’s anti-Semitic, we’re saying she’s made remarks that she doesn’t agree with.”

Can Corbyn recover from this disaster as the Blairites prepare to ambush him after Labour bombs in the council elections ?

Busaholic · 28 Apr 2016

Corbyn would do much better to admit that the Labour Party has a problem and it can, and will, be solved, by coming down hard on those peddling this pernicious stuff. Living stone should never have been allowed back in the Labour Party having stood against the official Labour candidate for London Mayor - let him join his friend Galloway in the (Dis)Respect Party. Farage wouldn't have come out with this garbage, which has really shown the true nature of Cuddly Ken.

Groningen · 28 Apr 2016

So Corbyn has Livingstone shown the door (exit)?

RichmondCommu · 28 Apr 2016

Groningen said:
So Corbyn has Livingstone shown the door (exit)?

No at the moment he's just been suspended from the party. Corbyn and Ken Livingstone are great friends so there is not a hope in hell of him being expelled from the party.

Steveman · 29 Apr 2016

RichmondCommu said:
No at the moment he's just been suspended from the party. Corbyn and Ken Livingstone are great friends so there is not a hope in hell of him being expelled from the party.

Listening this morning to various Labour politicians including the shadow home secretary if either of them survive then it will surely lead to a very dangerous split in the party.

I imagine the BBC are trawling UKIP and the Conservatives as we speak to try and find a story to take this one out of the headlines.

DynamicSpirit · 29 Apr 2016

Steveman said:
Listening this morning to various Labour politicians including the shadow home secretary if either of the 2 mp's survive then it will surely lead to a very dangerous split in the party.

Umm, which two MPs? Ken Livingstone isn't an MP

Steveman said:
I imagine the BBC are trawling UKIP and the Conservatives as we speak to try and find a story to take this one out of the headlines.

Gosh, you really do like silly conspiracy theories don't you! Have you considered the massively greater likelihood that the BBC are simply reporting the news that comes up, and selecting it based on perceived public interest?

If you want a slightly more plausible conspiracy theory, you could perhaps ponder why Naz Shah's blog posts, which presumably have been available for some considerable time, suddenly got discovered and publicised by a right-wing blog, by a remarkable coincidence, just a week before elections across the country - including the London Mayoral election in which the Labour candidate happens to be a Muslim? (Note that I'm not defending the posts, just noticing the timing.)

Steveman · 29 Apr 2016

DynamicSpirit said:
Umm, which two MPs? Ken Livingstone isn't an MP

Gosh, you really do like silly conspiracy theories don't you! Have you considered the massively greater likelihood that the BBC are simply reporting the news that comes up, and selecting it based on perceived public interest?

If you want a slightly more plausible conspiracy theory, you could perhaps ponder why Naz Shah's blog posts, which presumably have been available for some considerable time, suddenly got discovered and publicised by a right-wing blog, by a remarkable coincidence, just a week before elections across the country - including the London Mayoral election in which the Labour candidate happens to be a Muslim? (Note that I'm not defending the posts, just noticing the timing.)

My mistake about Livingstone, No conspiracy theories at all. Are you seriously suggesting that the BBC given 2 exact similar bad stories one being UKIP and one being Labour would not give more air time to rubbishing UKIP ?
If you care to check there are a multitude of ex BBC presenters, producers even an ex Director General who have all gone into print rubbishing the BBC's so called impartiality, the BBC is institutionally Leftist.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10235967/BBC-is-biased-toward-the-left-study-finds.html

The corporation has long been accused of left-wing bias, but now researchers claim to have found statistical evidence that challenges the broadcaster’s claim to fairness.
The BBC are more likely to cover left-wing think tank reports and to hail them as “independent” while giving right-wing research a “health warning” by pointing out its ideological position, the Centre for Policy Studies have found.
Oliver Latham, who compiled the Bias at the Beeb report, said: “Our results suggest the BBC exhibits a left-of-centre bias in both the amount of coverage it gives to different opinions and the way in which these voices are represented.”

As regards Shahs words you are now the conspiracy theorist.

Johnuk123 · 29 Apr 2016

Corbyn told to keep out of Wales as he's toxic.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-cancels-wales-visit-11259510

Jeremy Corbyn has cancelled a campaign visit to Wales at the request of Welsh Labour amid a row in the party over anti-semitism.
The controversy has led to former London Mayor Ken Livingstone being suspended by the Labour Party.
The team around Carwyn Jones are understood to be angered by Mr Corbyn’s perceived dithering before action was taken against Bradford West MP Naz Shah and Mr Livingstone.
Welsh Labour’s National Assembly election campaign has been built around projecting Mr Jones as a strong national leader. His team believe that Mr Corbyn’s failure to act swiftly after offensive comments made by Ms Shah on social media were revealed.
For the Welsh Labour team, Mr Corbyn compounded this initial error by dithering over what to do about Mr Livingstone, who backed Ms Shah.

jon0844 · 29 Apr 2016

So many people within the BBC come from university and use the many graduate schemes, so it not really surprising that many people may have more left wing views which influences reporting. Likewise, chances are the older staff are more balanced and management may even be more right wing.

I think by and large the BBC is pretty impartial, certainly compared to anything you see in the printed press.

Arglwydd Golau · 29 Apr 2016

Johnuk123 said:
Corbyn told to keep out of Wales as he's toxic.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-cancels-wales-visit-11259510

Actually, the report doesn't say that he is 'toxic'. Unfortunately for many commentators, including the political classes in Cardiff, Jeremy Corbyn is very popular amongst Labour Party members, far more so in this neck of the woods than Carwyn Jones.

TheKnightWho · 29 Apr 2016

Steveman said:
My mistake about Livingstone, No conspiracy theories at all. Are you seriously suggesting that the BBC given 2 exact similar bad stories one being UKIP and one being Labour would not give more air time to rubbishing UKIP ?

I'm beginning to notice a theme of certain elements of the right - especially UKIP - having an absolute obsession with victimising themselves. Your conspiracy theories make absolutely no sense.

asylumxl · 29 Apr 2016

I don't really understand the uproar around Livingstone's comments. If anything the Zionist lobby is trying to rewrite their own history.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haavara_Agreement

Arglwydd Golau · 29 Apr 2016

asylumxl said:
I don't really understand the uproar around Livingstone's comments. If anything the Zionist lobby is trying to rewrite their own history.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haavara_Agreement

Quite simple in my view, the Israeli Government are happy to muddy the waters between between themselves and Zionists and the Jewish diaspora. Therefore anyone who dares to criticise the actions of the Israeli state can be accused of outright and blatant anti-semitism....and Dynamic Spirit is correct, I believe, in his statement about the timing of the right-wing blog......

Barn · 29 Apr 2016

Regardless of the history either way, the uproar is that major Labour party figures (including MPs and former mayors) are talking about Hitler, Jews, 'solutions', transportation. In 2016.

WHY?!

Unprompted. Entirely of their own volition. Just before elections. Utterly bizarre.

In a strange way this might be good for Labour and for the official opposition as this might finally be the point at which sensible moderates within the party lose patience and start to aim to bring the party back to normalcy again.

phoenixcronin · 29 Apr 2016

Although I fundamentally disagree with Ken Livingstone on this and many other issues, I personally think that the content/truthfulness (or not) of his comments don't actually matter too much with regards to the upcoming elections, as seeing the words "Labour" "Ken Livingstone" "Corbyn" "Israel" "Jews" "Hitler" "Zionist" "Anti-Semitism" on the front pages/TV will have an affect on the electorate no matter what his actual views are.

asylumxl · 29 Apr 2016

phoenixcronin said:
Although I fundamentally disagree with Ken Livingstone on this and many other issues, I personally think that the content/truthfulness (or not) of his comments don't actually matter too much with regards to the upcoming elections, as seeing the words "Labour" "Ken Livingstone" "Corbyn" "Israel" "Jews" "Hitler" "Zionist" "Anti-Semitism" on the front pages/TV will have an affect on the electorate no matter what his actual views are.

And that's what it all comes down to. Media spoon feeding the general public lies and half truths without any context.

Jeremy Corbyn & Tom Watson elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party

On Moderation

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member