|
Poll: Who Should Be Leader of HM Most Loyal Opposition? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Corbyn |
|
95 | 18.63% |
| Dennis Skinner |
|
53 | 10.39% |
| Angus Robertson |
|
20 | 3.92% |
| Tim Farron |
|
9 | 1.76% |
| Paul Ukips |
|
7 | 1.37% |
| Robot Lenin |
|
105 | 20.59% |
| Tony Blair |
|
28 | 5.49% |
| Pissflaps |
|
193 | 37.84% |
| Total: | 510 votes | ||
|
Lt. Danger posted:So did Corbyn. He should stick to doing that.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:I think they gave him the nominations precisely because they thought he was such a poor candidate he wouldn't win Yes the problem with putting up a token bad candidate is that they tend to win when the others are terrible candidates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Fangz posted:What will it actually take to prove that the PLP can accept moderately left wing policies but just dislike Corbyn personally, and for what he represents? At this point I'm not sure I would believe them given that they've shown very clearly that they are much more concerned about themselves than the party or anyone else. So all the protestation in the world won't make me more inclined to believe someone I know to lie. But I suppose maybe a decade or so of consistent and active support for good policies might convince me. Enough to let a small number of them near the reins of power with only a gun to the back of their head at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:I dunno, I reckon the PLP would get behind anyone who isn't Corbyn at this point. Being simultaneously in Opposition AND having most of your party membership disagreeing with you must be pretty draining: I bet most of the PLP would be relieved to be able to draw a line and move on. Why would you think that? The PLP was hostile to the very idea of a Corbyn since the leadership race began, and they've fought him all the way at the expense of the party. They even set up a new opposition group, with rich donors offering a ton of funding to oust him. There's been talk of splitting off and keeping the Labour name. There's been a steady stream of stories where Labour MPs have been briefing against him, and within months of his election there was a plan to overthrow him after the EU referendum (complete with a media blitz to inflict maximum damage) Point is whatever Corbyn's faults, the PLP are responsible for starting this internal war, and the damage it's done to the party and their own standing. They didn't immediately start attacking him because they could see the future, they did it because they're ideologically opposed to what he stands for, and they don't want the balance of power shifting. It's not about Corbyn at all Obviously 'the PLP' is a bit handwavey and I'm sure there are lots of MPs who just want any kind of fresh start, but there are internal power structures that successfully pushed this undermining campaign in the first place, there's an establishment that will absolutely do what it can to roll things back and make sure the left wing never gets a chance again
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:He should stick to doing that. I'm glad we established the PLP is no particular authority on winning elections, and in fact has had less success than Corbyn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
loving Farage is having another hissy fit: Nigel Farage: Carswell 'Stopping Ukip Becoming Radical Anti-Immigration Party' He's trying to undermine my legacy of making naked racism mainstream! Filthy traitor!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
spectralent posted:It also seems to be an issue that much criticism was labelled on calling Corbyn a throwback, saying he was damaging economic credibility, and so on. I don't remember any complaints to the effect of "we'd love a leader with those policies but Corbyn's not good at keeping a schedule". http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/11705704?utm_hp_ref=uk
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
This seems to be a post-election thing saying Corbyn's not a very good leader, which we know, though? As soon as it looked like Corbyn was going to win there was at times hysterical complaints that he was too left wing, that being more left wing would be a regressive step for labour. Kerry McCarthy may well be a good egg; I honestly don't know her voting record. But there seems to be, if not a majority, then a substantial faction who're opposed to Corbyn on a political basis, rather than distrust of his capabilities. How would we get rid of those people by electing someone they'd be picking?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Again, the evidence-free assertion that the disagreement is with the moderate policies. The hatred that New Labour grandees have for "the left" isn't something that people made up. They are extremely open about it and it long predates Corbyn 's leadership. Watch this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szd4bvx0-Gc&t=8041s. That's the day after the last general election. Long before anybody even imagined Corbyn becoming leader. In summary senior figures from Blair's government say: Miliband and Brown filled their manifestos with "sixth form left wing nonsense". The British media isn't right wing or biased. Left wing parties can't win elections in the UK. Do you think Gordon Brown was incompetent? The PLP attempted to bring him down multiple times. It wasn't because they thought he was incompetent, it was because they thought his policies were too left wing. You can listen to John Reid and Alastair Campbell talking about how the party became too left wing under Brown (and Campbell blaming himself for not stopping it i.e. not deposing Brown) here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szd4bvx0-Gc&t=12034s. Again, they talk about policies, not the competence or character of the leader. They are clear that they think Miliband ran a good campaign, but that he lost because he was too left wing. Miliband also faced several coup attempts during his time as leader: 1 2 As well as sustained attack from the PLP over his 'left wing' policies. There's a bit of a pattern here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
spectralent posted:This seems to be a post-election thing saying Corbyn's not a very good leader, which we know, though? That's because that's always been the prime criticism of Corbyn. It's only more recently that all criticism of his has been described as a Blairite plot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
spectralent posted:This seems to be a post-election thing saying Corbyn's not a very good leader, which we know, though? I don't deny there's factions in the labour party that hate Corbyn politically. I don't think that's the only factor in the subsequent escalation of the PLP-Corbyn conflict though. The question is to what degree do these people fear those more left wing, and are those factions over 85% of MPs? Are we saying really that there's not going to be even 15% of moderate lefties in the PLP *forever*? The conversation is kinda shifting to a 'who started this' one, and I'm not that happy with that. The more difficult question is *how* we end this. If you argue that it's necessary to purge the party, then it should be done. As an alternative (which will no doubt be unpopular here) the PLP can get rid of Corbyn as a scapegoat and show itself worthy of trust by delivering moderately leftwing policies without the leash. But this status quo serves no one on the left.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
dispatch_async posted:The hatred that New Labour grandees have for "the left" isn't something that people made up. They are extremely open about it and it long predates Corbyn 's leadership. You have a nasty habit of using 'the PLP' to describe individual members of the PLP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I don't deny there's factions in the labour party that hate Corbyn politically. I don't think that's the only factor in the subsequent escalation of the PLP-Corbyn conflict though. The question is to what degree do these people fear those more left wing, and are those factions over 85% of MPs? Are we saying really that there's not going to be even 15% of moderate lefties in the PLP *forever*? The PLP decided to respond to Brexit, possibly the biggest political event of a generation, by launching mass resignations timed to cause maximum damage to the party. A lot of people on the left aren't going to forgive that. Maybe some of the PLP can regain grudging acceptance if they threw themselves behind left-wing policies, but there's no sign of that happening. They have actively sabotaged the purpose of the Labour party - to promote socialist policies - and that shouldn't be forgotten.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
I'd put forward Richard Burgon as being a good candidate to replace Corbyn. Similarly lefty and seems to interview well. It's pointless talking to Pissflaps about this if you want the Labour Party to be left wing because Pissflaps is not left wing. He likes Tony loving Blair for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
jabby posted:The PLP decided to respond to Brexit, possibly the biggest political event of a generation, by launching mass resignations timed to cause maximum damage to the party. A lot of people on the left aren't going to forgive that. Maybe some of the PLP can regain grudging acceptance if they threw themselves behind left-wing policies, but there's no sign of that happening. They have actively sabotaged the purpose of the Labour party - to promote socialist policies - and that shouldn't be forgotten. If you think causing damage to the party is the intent of the majority of the party, then purge them. I think that's ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Fangz posted:If you think causing damage to the party is the intent of the majority of the party, then purge them. I don't get why you're so committed to the idea that everyone means well, or that meaning well is all that matters, in the face of the evidence. Especially when it comes to politicians. Why on earth would you trust a politician?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Fangz posted:If you think causing damage to the party is the intent of the majority of the party, then purge them. Do you think the idea that the Tories would deliberately sabotage the NHS is ridiculous?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Fangz posted:If you think causing damage to the party is the intent of the majority of the party, then purge them. I think the PLP wants to force Corbyn out, and it benefits that aim to tank the reputation and the polling of the party as much as possible. I mean you only have to look at Tom Watson on TV today going full 'trots under the bed' to see that. If he had genuine concerns he could resolve them in private without harming the party, but that isn't his game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:I'd put forward Richard Burgon as being a good candidate to replace Corbyn. Similarly lefty and seems to interview well. It's pointless talking to Pissflaps about this if you want the Labour Party to be left wing because Pissflaps is not left wing. He likes Tony loving Blair for fucks sake. Only been an MP since 2015 though, part of the necessary stuff for being leader is being pretty familiar with how the MPs and parliament all work so anyone in the first term is probably never going to be leader unless there's some real 'charismatic figurehead in a time of crisis' moment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Fangz posted:If you think causing damage to the party is the intent of the majority of the party, then purge them. That's already the idea so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Though I'm not sure you're correct in calling the more right-wing Labour MP's "the majority of the party" when there are only a hundred or so of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't get why you're so committed to the idea that everyone means well, or that meaning well is all that matters, in the face of the evidence. Especially when it comes to politicians. Why on earth would you trust a politician? Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:I'd put forward Richard Burgon as being a good candidate to replace Corbyn. Similarly lefty and seems to interview well. It's pointless talking to Pissflaps about this if you want the Labour Party to be left wing because Pissflaps is not left wing. He likes Tony loving Blair for fucks sake. If you can't persuade me you can't win an election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Fangz posted:You have a nasty habit of using 'the PLP' to describe individual members of the PLP. are you actually aware that the PLP is an organisational body with meetings and factions and leadership or not? that's "the plp" people refer to. The parliamentary labour party group, which has dramatically lost power since the introduction of the AV one-man one-vote system and removal of their right to decide leader. They can go; they don't serve a useful purpose anymore. It's like trying to argue the tories and the 22 comittee are the same. They aren't. Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. cool tell that to the ones who began attempting to capsize the boat before corbyn even won
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. A lot of them don't, and can't, dipshit. You think the history of neoliberalism as practiced by New Labour was motivated by concern for the working poor? gently caress why am I even bothering, you're as worthless as pissfalps. Wait no, at least old flaps is funny every once in a while....
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. But a number of Labour MPs have proven they don't mean well and can't be trusted. Getting rid of these people shouldn't be considered some kind of failure state.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:If you can't persuade me you can't win an election. Shadowy figure reveals British democracy is a lie... you'll never guess who or how! Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. Sure that's totally reasonable but you do quickly have to actually start naming names about who the MPs are rather than making it a general assumption because there definitely are MPs who don't mean well and so there need to be some lines set about who falls where.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Perhaps if the PLP had gotten to the stage where they could tell each other that even if there are disagreements, Corbyn means well and should be trusted, we wouldn't be in this mess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Your problem here Fangz is that you're making the false assumption that the primary goal of the Corbynite is a labour government.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Then *get rid of them*. Why are people trying to deny rumours of secret plans to introduce reselection of MPs etc? Do it immediately and openly. What are people waiting for? The move to the 5% limit is to set up a system where you still don't trust these guys, but yet somehow think that you can tell other people to vote for them!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
namesake posted:Shadowy figure reveals British democracy is a lie... you'll never guess who or how! If you think over 85% of them don't mean well and can't be trusted you might as well start reselecting at random.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Then *get rid of them*. Why are people trying to deny rumours of secret plans to introduce reselection of MPs etc? Do it immediately and openly. What are people waiting for? I think most of the people replying to you would like to deselect a lot of current MPs, so I don't know who you're arguing against.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
When you've deselected your MPs and turned away your voters it makes you wonder what the point of the exercise was other than political vandalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Because if we don't get to the stage where we can tell each other that even if there is disagreements, at least Labour candidates mean well and should be trusted, then we will never be able to make the case to ordinary voters that they should vote Labour. I concur. However, that doesn't have any bearing on whether they actually do mean well and should be trusted. Which was your initial assertion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
jabby posted:I think most of the people replying to you would like to deselect a lot of current MPs, so I don't know who you're arguing against. Is that so? Because it seems like people don't imagine anything outside of the lovely current situation and the only pressure is on the dumb 5% thing. OwlFancier posted:I concur. You statements on 'why should you trust a politician' means they can *never* be trusted. Fangz fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Selections can't begin until 18 months before a general election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Dabir posted:Selections can't begin until 18 months before a general election. What if there's a snap election? Purely hypothetically of course, May assured us such a thing won't happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Dabir posted:Selections can't begin until 18 months before a general election. ?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Dabir posted:Selections can't begin until 18 months before a general election. That's a very odd thing to say, there's nothing in electoral law or the current Labour rules saying so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Pretty sure there is, I was told so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
Fangz posted:Then *get rid of them*. Why are people trying to deny rumours of secret plans to introduce reselection of MPs etc? Do it immediately and openly. What are people waiting for? You can only do it when picking candidates for a General Election and bar a snap election it'll be late 2018 at the very earliest where this is an option, so that's why they're waiting. The long wait for a GE is also why nobody in Labour is much interested in working with each other right now. Internal battles can have immediate changes and so the struggle is over who is going to get to lead the party into the next GE still and likely will be until 2019.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 20:03
|
|
