advertisement


Corbyn at it again over Iran blowing up Oil tankers

Tony L said:
Surely as a Labour supporter/activist you must be disappointed by poorly Corbyn and the party are performing. I’m 56 years old, have been aware of politics since the late-70s-early-80s and I can’t recall a weaker or less liked government than this shower of Tories, yet against that backdrop Labour are clearly still failing to gain traction. I can’t see Liz Kendall having faired much better, but I’m prepared to bet Labour wouldn’t be in such a mess now had Yvette Cooper got the leadership.
Click to expand...
Indeed... but that would introduce a different scenario. A Cooper led Labour would have been much closer to the Tories prior to the 2017 election, to degree that there wouldn't have been an election with the Tories too afraid to take the risk. Still... they'd have been out of government in 2020 in that case.
Seanm... in case you're wondering about the logic of this, it is because to win an election you need to be the party most appealing to those voters who traditionally flip flop between Labour and Conservative. And a Corbyn led Labour isn't it, whatever his virtues are.
Anyway, as I said when I raised it, it's all whatiffery. Still, I do not see any logic in an argument that says that without Corbyn we'd have already had Brexit.
 
It doesn't Matter whether he is right or wrong that isn’t the issue. The fact that he leads with his jaw before having ascertained the facts is his downfall. He may be right but the Salisbury screwup will make most potential Labour voters assume he is talking out of his backside.
 
wyjsar said:
Indeed... but that would introduce a different scenario. A Cooper led Labour would have been much closer to the Tories prior to the 2017 election, to degree that there wouldn't have been an election with the Tories too afraid to take the risk. Still... they'd have been out of government in 2020 in that case.
Seanm... in case you're wondering about the logic of this, it is because to win an election you need to be the party most appealing to those voters who traditionally flip flop between Labour and Conservative. And a Corbyn led Labour isn't it, whatever his virtues are.
Anyway, as I said when I raised it, it's all whatiffery. Still, I do not see any logic in an argument that says that without Corbyn we'd have already had Brexit.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you have a very good point there.... It kinda means only "Tory lite" Labour govs can ever get in though... what a depressing thought:(
 
Rodrat said:
It doesn't Matter whether he is right or wrong that isn’t the issue. The fact that he leads with his jaw before having ascertained the facts is his downfall. He may be right but the Salisbury screwup will make most potential Labour voters assume he is talking out of his backside.
Click to expand...
What ‘Salisbury screwup’?
 
Rodrat said:
It doesn't Matter whether he is right or wrong that isn’t the issue. The fact that he leads with his jaw before having ascertained the facts is his downfall.
Click to expand...
Are you aware of what he actually said?

Here he is on Twitter

Britain should act to ease tensions in the Gulf, not fuel a military escalation that began with US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement. Without credible evidence about the tanker attacks, the government’s rhetoric will only increase the threat of war.

What is actually wrong with saying that? He makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned.
 
This thread reveals that what a politician says is not important provided people like the politician.

Corbyn is right, but not liked

Johnson Trump Farage etc are consummate liars and deceivers, but they’re liked

Difficult truths verses comfortable lies and all that.

As I’ve said before, no wonder we’re fooked.
 
wyjsar said:
I'm not sure I understand the logic here. By talking about 2 years ago I assume you mean the 2017 GE - yes? May went to the GE to increase her majority, having triggered A50 she did not believe that she had enough of a majority to see Brexit through given the splits in the Tory party. That was the only reason for the GE that I can see. So... on that basis the thinking would have to be that even without the 2017 GE we still would not have had Brexit due to the ERG etc.
Of course, the fact that the Tory majority was eliminated in 2017 is clearly a good thing. However, to claim the only reason we do not already have Brexit is Corbyn is stretching it. Tory divisions and May's personal abject failure to inspire in the 2017 campaign are equally if not more compelling reasons.
It's also possible to put in a "what if" here - what if Cooper (in particular) or Burnham had been elected Labour leader in 2015 - could they have led the Labour party to a higher number of seats in 2017?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what’s contentious. May called the election to get an increased majority to drive through Brexit. Corbyn oversaw a massive increase in membership and popularity since his election and mobilised that membership to decimate May’s majority. No majority, no Brexit.
 
Regardless of whether Corbyn is proved right it does raise an interesting question as to how future relations with the US will pan out if he becomes PM. This is very unlikely to happen.
 
maxflinn said:
Britain should act to ease tensions in the Gulf, not fuel a military escalation that began with US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement. Without credible evidence about the tanker attacks, the government’s rhetoric will only increase the threat of war..
Click to expand...

More common sense from Corbyn, theres zero to critise in that statement, unless you're hell bent on a war regardless of justification.
 
maxflinn said:
Corbyn made reference to the 90th anniversary of the death of Anne Frank during PM Questions on Wednesday. Quoting her.

Rachel Riley of Ch4 had this to say to him about it:

Take our dead out of your mouth you revolting ignorant recruiting racist.

Personally, I think Ch4 ought to suspend her for abusive behaviour. But I guess that won't happen...
Click to expand...

Not sure I know who this Riley woman is but I was foolish enough to click on the link and I now feel mildly contaminated.
 
Steve Taylor said:
You're quite right. Mrs Balls would be just the sort of leader the media could get behind. More of the same, go with "the city" (or at least the crooks creaming £ off the top), the "special relationship" and all the other crap that got us into the mess we're in.
Click to expand...

The above, like Corbyn, is just a student common room/union radical-grade argument as it stands not the slightest hope in hell of ever gaining a parliamentary majority. The question you need to ponder is which is likely more effective; a Labour majority with a moderate leader like Cooper who could actually win, lose the stain of racism etc, or a backwards-moving Corbyn-led opposition party with Johnson’s Tories the largest party even if they fall short of a majority?

It really is time to admit Corbyn has failed. It may not be fair that he has failed, but the reality is that he has.
 
ks.234 said:
I’m not sure what’s contentious. May called the election to get an increased majority to drive through Brexit. Corbyn oversaw a massive increase in membership and popularity since his election and mobilised that membership to decimate May’s majority. No majority, no Brexit.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is that even with a majority (of less than 50, say) the Tories wouldn't be able to get Brexit through such is the depth of their split on the issue of the type of Brexit to go for. So I'm saying don't overdo giving Corbyn credit. Anyway, I won't Labour the point (no pun intended), happy to agree to disagree.
 
Tony L said:
Despite his errors I bet Clegg could come back right now and have a public approval rating way, way above Corbyn’s current record-breaking minus-53! Surely you see that Corbyn is now a laughingstock and dragging the whole Labour party down? He has made the party utterly unelectable even against the backdrop of Theresa May’s recursive failure. Johnson will just crucify his discredited Labour, as would Farage, and I find that terrifying.
Click to expand...
Only in your mind...Why not be honest as to what you really want.
 
Cav said:
Only in your mind...Why not be honest as to what you really want.
Click to expand...

You are the one being dishonest as you are such a tribalist, either that or you don’t quite understand what negative numbers are!

PS Minus fifty-three!
 
Tony L said:
You are the one being dishonest as you are such a tribalist, either that or you don’t quite understand what negative numbers are!

PS Minus fifty-three!
Click to expand...
I did not accuse you of being dishonest. You seem fixated on the -53. Why?

What I asked is what you want?
 
Yeah, let’s have another Corbyn knocking thread. At least it keeps the Lib Dem supporters off the steeets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top