Jeremy Corbyn 2

330 posts / 0 new
Last post
Rev Pesky

JKR wrote:
...I think in a leadership contest 50%+1 is considered legitimate while in a leadership review approximately 70%+ is generally considered to be adequate. Labour seems to be stuck in a stalemate between these two requirements. I guess something will eventually have to give.

The reason for the difference is that a leadership review does not lead to the leader resigning necessarily. It does lead to a leadership election, wherein the winner needs only a simple majority of votes to win. So the two situtations are not really comparable.

Rev Pesky

mark_alfred wrote:

Rev Pesky, you've got the quote tags in your post above messed up.

Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out.

Rev Pesky

it's obviously time for the PLP to say, 'the membership has spoken, and confirmed Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the party. Now we must work to get the best result possible in the next election.'

And perhaps start thinking of the Conservatives as the enemy instead of the Labour party membership.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

JKR wrote:

At least Atlee had the support of his MP's before and during the election. That may not end up being the case with Corbyn. Does anyone have an example of a majour political leader leading their party in an election without the support of a majority of their MP's?

I would think that if it had happened in the past the MP's would have hid it until after the election, for the good of the party. The MP's who refuse to get behind the leader after two votes are acting like petulant two year olds upon being told they aren't in charge.

JKR

swallow wrote:

So now that Corbyn is decisevly back in, how to include critics and move towards unity? 

How about bringing back shadow cabinat elections, which were in place until 2011? Pretty democratic, overall. Hopefully the leader, a demcoratic fwellow, would agree. 

 

But wouldn't that leave Corbyn leading a shadow cabinet that doesn't support him and his policies?

JKR

kropotkin1951 wrote:

JKR wrote:

At least Atlee had the support of his MP's before and during the election. That may not end up being the case with Corbyn. Does anyone have an example of a majour political leader leading their party in an election without the support of a majority of their MP's?

I would think that if it had happened in the past the MP's would have hid it until after the election, for the good of the party. The MP's who refuse to get behind the leader after two votes are acting like petulant two year olds upon being told they aren't in charge.

What should Labour MP's who don't agree with their party leader's policies and overall leadership do? Pretend to agree?

mark_alfred

R̶e̶v̶ ̶P̶e̶s̶k̶y̶,̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶'̶v̶e̶ ̶g̶o̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶q̶u̶o̶t̶e̶ ̶t̶a̶g̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶p̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶a̶b̶o̶v̶e̶ ̶m̶e̶s̶s̶e̶d̶ ̶u̶p̶.̶

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

They should respect the will of the majority of people who are IN the party, for God's sakes.

Here's the thing the anti-Corbynites do NOT get...

if they DID succeed in forcing Corbyn to resign and then replace him(as they are apparently determined to do)by holding a leadership ballot in which no one to the left of Neil Kinnock(and if they really had their way, no one to the left of Yvette Cooper, and if they really really had their way, a ballot in which David Miliband or Alan Johnson was running unopposed), there would be no possible way they would have any right to ask Corbyn's supporters to even VOTE Labour ever again.  And not having those people voting, let alone working for Labour at a general election, they would have no possible hope of winning.

No one at all would ever again rally to a Labour campaign that once again, as in 2010 and 2015, said "vote for us...we're just barely not THEM".  No one would think it was worth replacing a Tory government with a "Labour" government that would have to be ten degrees to the right of Blair DURING the Iraq War.  No one would want a Labour government that bombs Syria, sticks to Tory spending targets, keeps Thatcher's anti-worker laws, keeps the benefits cap, and keeps the Bomb.

No one here would ever think a party like that could be worth trying to elect.  No one anywhere would.

The anti-Corbynites simply refuse to listen or change.

JKR

Ken Burch wrote:

They should respect the will of the majority of people who are IN the party, for God's sakes.

Are any Labour MP's calling for Corbyn to resign?

Rev Pesky

JKR wrote:
Ken Burch wrote:

They should respect the will of the majority of people who are IN the party, for God's sakes.

Are any Labour MP's calling for Corbyn to resign?

As I posted above, a prominent Labour bureaucrat has already said the fight against Corbyn will go on.

It is plain that the UK Labour Party hierarchy is to the right of the Canadian Liberal Party. It may be time for UK Labour to give up the ghost, and have the left wing make overtures to the Scottish and Irish national parties.

The only other way to make the Labour Party relevant again is to completely purge the Blair leftovers, which I doubt will happen. What a sad end for a political party that once really believed in something.

JKR

Rev Pesky wrote:

JKR wrote:
Ken Burch wrote:

They should respect the will of the majority of people who are IN the party, for God's sakes.

Are any Labour MP's calling for Corbyn to resign?

As I posted above, a prominent Labour bureaucrat has already said the fight against Corbyn will go on.

It is plain that the UK Labour Party hierarchy is to the right of the Canadian Liberal Party. It may be time for UK Labour to give up the ghost, and have the left wing make overtures to the Scottish and Irish national parties.

The only other way to make the Labour Party relevant again is to completely purge the Blair leftovers, which I doubt will happen. What a sad end for a political party that once really believed in something.

Labour would be able to split up into separate functional political parties if the UK had PR or AV. FPTP is keeping a divided Labour Party together for now. A huge electoral defeat might be required in order to end this stalemate. In the meantime the working class will be the losers as the Conservatives, UKIP, LD's, and nationalist parties take advantage of the situation. However, there has been talk among the opposition parties to have a united campaign for PR:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/electoral-reform-labour-sn...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The real lesson from Corbyn’s victory? You can’t hold back history

Only one thing could have stopped Jeremy Corbyn: if the coup mounted by the Labour right in the week beginning 27 June had actually been a coup. They had momentum – anti-Corbyn shadow cabinet members at one point seemed to be resigning as fast as they were volunteering. If the Labour frontbench operation had collapsed through understaffing, leaving Corbyn incapable of fulfilling the duties of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition, the way was open either to handing the role to the SNP – or forming a separate “continuity Labour” group in parliament.

For those of us among what was, at that time, a loose alliance of rank-and-file Corbynistas, it felt like Stalingrad. We had our backs to the river and were throwing cavalry against tanks. What ended the crisis was not some counterstroke by Corbyn himself but the launch of Saving Labour.

Saving Labour looked and smelled so similar to the operation launched by the cold war faction of Labour against the miners and printers in the 1980s that it was uncanny. All it needed to complete the parallel was for the MP Gloria De Piero to call for Sun readers to join Labour to overthrow Corbyn. That was the moment we realised the Corbyn leadership was not up against a serious organic revolt of members, but one manufactured by the neoliberal stay-behinds.

As the result of the coup’s failure, Labour’s conference this week has a visible faultline running through it. People floating mysteriously between corporate fringe events, dressed in the sharp suits and shiny tights of the Blair-Brown era, are still there. But nobody really understands why....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

quote;

First: this is a real, networked reinvention of social democracy. My heart leapt on Saturday when the SWP handed me a leaflet saying it did not want to be part of Corbyn’s Labour. The feeling is mutual. Though there are undoubtedly far-left activists inside Momentum, they are a small minority swimming in a sea of networked, horizontal, democratic, globalist and liberal young professionals who regard them, largely, as oddities. When the man in charge of crowdfunding the Momentum fringe event approached me for help, I asked what had brought him into this. He’d studied social movements at university, he said, and spent five years in banking.

Though Corbyn himself, and many of his rally-goers, are gung-ho for scrapping Trident, this young inner core of activists understands the difference between principles and tactics. They know they’ve been handed a historic opportunity to pursue one thing – social justice – and they’ve no intention of letting it slip.

The second thing media coverage misses is the pent-up excitement Corbyn is tapping into. He has become Zen-like himself. But I have never seen the streets around a political conference venue come alive in the way Liverpool did with Labour this weekend. “The whole city’s buzzing,” a bloke said, accosting me. He had his teenage son with him; they were on their way between the Momentum fringe and a pro-Corbyn comedy event.

The challenge is to turn that buzz into something relevant to service personnel’s families on a rainy estate in Portsmouth; or to Scots enthralled by the cultural renaissance of their nation; or jobless kids in the Welsh valleys drawn by the white identity politics of Ukip.

For me, a bit-part player in the failed Bennite movement and witness to the betrayal of the printers and the miners, Corbyn’s victory on Saturday was about more than politics.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Corbyn Elected – A Great Victory for British and European Left!

Corbyn won a majority over Smith in every category: members, registered supporters and trades union affiliates. He won the support of 59% of voting members (10 points higher than last year), 70% of registered supporters and 60% of affiliated supporters. This result constituted a ringing endorsement of Corbyn and a massive blow to Labour’s right wing.

The mass movement behind Corbyn

Let us remember that Corbyn’s victory today was in spite of a ferocious battle by the Establishment, inside and outside of the party, to unseat him. Everything was thrown at him in a bitter campaign. 130,000 new members were debarred from voting. Tens of thousands were suspended – and even expelled – to prevent them voting. Despite this, Corbyn increased his majority!....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

On Foreign Policy

Excerpt on foreign policy from Jeremy Corbyn’s address to the 2016 Labour Party Conference on September 28, 2016 in Liverpool, England.

mark_alfred

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/06/jeremy-corbyn-appoints-diane-...

Article about shuffles in the Shadow Cabinet.  One criticism is that a high number of the appointees are from London and so aren't representative of the various regions of Britain.  Mind you, the fact that he's been able to put together a Shadow Cabinet seems an accomplishment in and of itself, given the acrimony that seemingly exists in the PLP.  The next election over there will be interesting to observe.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The current situation makes an unassailable case for requiring ALL sitting Labour MPs to face a mandatory reselection process at every general election..

Most of the PLP were nominated and elected during the eras of Neil Kinnock and Tony Blair's tenures as leader-the era when the party was waging all out war against the left and against socialism as an idea.  Many of them were chosen as parliamentary candidates solely as a result of the Labour leadership of the day having imposed them against the will of the constituency party organizatio in the seats they contested(Kinnock and Blair largely stripped the constituency parties of any real say in the candidate selection process).  As a result, they tend to believe that they won their seats in spite of the constituency parties, and that they have only been re-elected as a result of keeping a dismissive distance from Labour activists and traditional Labour policies.

To these MPs, it is inconceivable that Labour could ever again win a general election in any program other than Blairism, and without keeping the party's ordinary paid members and electoral activists completely out in the cold in terms of policy or candidate selection.

They feel that the party owes everything to them yet they owe nothing at all to the party-and that the constituency workers who get them re-elected through hours of grassroots electoral work have no right to expect them to show any respect for the deeply-held convictions that keep these people working for a party that, since the Kinnock takeover, has treated them as worthless nuisances.

And they believe they are entitled to automatic reselection as Labour candidate in their constituency until they stand down, are defeated at the polls, or die.

The Third Way is the only reality to them.  They would rather see Labour kept out of power for decades than to do anything at all to help Labour win an election on any program outside of the reactionary constraints of market supremacy, the maintenance of Thatcher's vindictive anti-worker laws, and a foreign policy based on perpetual military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world.

The adoption of a mandatory reselection policy is crucial, because Labour cannot recover any significant support unless the tradition of MPs being able to create their constituencies as a personal fiefdom, in which they are completely removed from any accountability to the people of the party, is brought to an end.  The current PLP is hopelessly tied to the politics of defeatism, retrenchment and repression, and will not begin to change until its members are once again obligated to be responsive to those who do the actual work of keeping them in office.   It's the Labour Party, not the Parliamentary Labour Party Party. 

Rev Pesky

What's funny is that the Conservative party of Theresa May is now going all CCF. Interesting article in Globe & Mail Report on Business today, by Carl Mortished. It's behind a wall, so I won't post it, but it's probably worth the price of a paper.

Mortished reports on the speech given by (Theresa) May at the recent Conservative Party convention. In that speech she referred to her party as "the party of the workers", and repeated that old stock NDP phrase 'ordinary working people' several times.

According to Mortished, Theresa May told the party she would intervene in disfunctional markets, and force large companies to pay their taxes and treat their workers better.

What's absolutely hilarious is that if what's-his-name Owen had won the Labour Party leadership, the Conservatives would be further to the left than Owen's Labour! Those Labour Party heavyweights who did their best to rid the party of Jeremy Corbyn, must be feeling like they've been kicked in the stomach. One wonders what sort of campaign the Owenites would be able to run against a populist Theresa May.

At the same time, May has recanted her opposition to leaving the Euro Zone, and is talking all 'independence' and 'sovereignty', referring to the Euro exit vote as a 'quiet revolution'.

Strange days, indeed!

 

nicky

Kevin Schofield
Kevin Schofield – Verified account ‏@PolhomeEditor

Labour MP: "Diane Abbott is now in charge of our response to security, terror and immigration. Do they want anyone to vote for us again?"

Rev Pesky

nicky wrote:
Kevin Schofield Kevin Schofield – Verified account ‏@PolhomeEditor Labour MP: "Diane Abbott is now in charge of our response to security, terror and immigration. Do they want anyone to vote for us again?"

Took a while to find this tweet, but I did. It's an anonymous contribution on the twitter account of Kevin Schofield.

For those who might wonder who Kevin Schofield is, he is currently an editor with Politics Home, a web based news outleet.

Prior to that he spent five years as political correspondent with the Sun Newspaper, one of Rupert Murdoch's tabloids. If you want to see where Kevin Schofield worked, here's a link:

The Sun Newspaper UK

The Sun if most famous for it's 'Page 3' models. No longer in the newspaper, but still prominent on the website.

So, an anonymous quote posted by a former political correspondent for one of the trashiest newspapers in the world is a definitive criticism of Jeremy Corbyn?  Wow.

 

nicky

He puports to quote a Labour MP.

There is much reason to think this represents the opinion of any number of Labour MPs who dread the slaughter that awaits them if Corbyn leads them into the next election.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

There is much reason to think this represents the opinion of any number of Labour MPs who dread the slaughter that awaits them if Corbyn leads them into the next election.

That's one point of view. The other one, which I adopt, is that they are disgusting careerists who dread the end of their personal gravy train through deselection by the constituency party members.

Rev Pesky

nicky wrote:

He puports to quote a Labour MP...

Anonymous is anonymous. Whatever he 'purports' there is not a shred of evidence that anyone other than himself is the source of the quote. Surely you must realize that. Especially given Schofield's credentials as a journalist.

nicky

Whatever the source ot is a sentiment shared by the vast majority of the British electorate

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The British people are not demanding that Labour be just as authoritarian on sercurity, immigration and terror issues as the Tories.  And it is now clear that authoritarian response to the problems of security and terrorism have been absolute failures wherever they've been used.

And it's too late to get rid of Corbyn.  The size of his re-election victory makes the vote of the PLP offiicially moot, just as it would cease to be legitimate to keep demanding the resignation prime minister who'd been defeated in a confidence motion but then managed to win an overall majority at the snap election she or he was forced to call.  

No one who became Labour's next leader as a result of Corbyn being forced out would have any right to ask Corbyn's supporters to still work for or vote for Labour, and couldn't possibly offer any policies on anything that those hundreds of thousands of people could support.

JKR

Ken Burch wrote:

The current situation makes an unassailable case for requiring ALL sitting Labour MPs to face a mandatory reselection process at every general election.

I agree. The current situation of having the membership, leader, and MP's not working well together is untenable. I agree that MP's should be endorsed by their local membership between elections. If this were the case then I think MP's should be able to vote out their leader and have the membership select another person from a list approved by the MP's who have been recently elected by their local district. In any case I think a party must always insure that its membership, the majority of its MP's, and its leaders are always working well together.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Absolutely.  As things stand now, the PLP have the attitude that THEY are the party and no one else is. 

Rev Pesky

nicky wrote:
Whatever the source ot is a sentiment shared by the vast majority of the British electorate

Then instead of trying to shore up your opinion by an anonymous shady quote from a very shady source, why not just say, 'The British electorate doesn't like Jeremy Corbyn?'

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Perhaps we could even wait for the British electorate to say it (or not).

But would that really put this to bed?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

There isn't time to replace Corbyn now and still get anything close to party unity before 2020, nicky, and we don't know that the electorate actually doesn't like him.

He has the support of the overwhelming majority of the Labour Party.  That makes the motion the PLP voted for completely meaningless. No one who came in if he resigned ever could get that.  There is no alternative leader in the entire PLP who has any broad personal popularity.  Owen Smith didn't...that's why he lost.  If there had been polls showing he coud lead Labour to victory and Jeremy couldn't, Owen would have won.

Corbyn's popularity is going to rise now because a lot of people admire him for the courage he showed in fighitng off the right-wing takeover attempt, and because they are going to realize that he has actually been a great opposition leader, making the Tories climb down on at least a dozen occoasions and giving ordinary people a real say in paraliament through the crowd-sourced quesetions to the prime minister. 

And if it hadn't been for the completely unjustified campaign to try to make Corbyn resign, Labour would be much stronger in the polls.

sherpa-finn

Well, Magoo, we actually have the opportunity of observing the very similar, parallel process currently underway in the USA, - where Trump appears to be leading the Republican Party towards a long predicted but nonetheless unavoidable electoral debacle.  Rather than tack to the centre as the going got rough (and as all the smart money advised), he battened down the hatches and played to his base - that 25% or so of the American electorate that is prepared to follow him over the electoral cliff. 

As moderate Republicans leave the party fold and the polling numbers for Hillary start to lock in, the response of Trump's diehard supporters is the predictable mishmash of "Its all a media conspiracy!" and "We have been betrayed by the Party establishment!"

FWIW, I expect that we will see pretty much the same scenario play out in the UK within the Labour Party, if on a somewhat slower timeline and more modestly British scale.  No doubt the media will be blamed by Corbynistas for his continued inability to connect with the British public. And as 2020 draws nearer, the Tory Gov't and media will collaborate in highlighting Corbyn's political ineptitude, ensuring that a litany of unflattering tales of his chequered political history are firmly fixed in the public mind. And the Labour Party establishment will at best be half-hearted in supporting him, knowing full well that the claim "I stood with Jeremy!" will be a poisoned chalice come 2021.

And Corbyn supporters will revert to those same shrill claims of "Its all a media conspiracy!" and "We have been betrayed by the Party establishment!"  

BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here, so actively defending the jeremy. The power of wishful thinking (or is it willful self-deception) is an amazing thing.

NorthReport

Good on Corbyn

Corbyn sets goal for 50% of Labour MPs to be women by 2020

Party leader tells committee he backs all-female shortlists and is determined to have 50/50 representation by next election

 

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/12/jeremy-corbyn-sets-...

NorthReport

The more I learn about Corbyn the more I admire him

Jeremy Corbyn to MPs: Why are no women being questioned?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37631830

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:

Well, Magoo, we actually have the opportunity of observing the very similar, parallel process currently underway in the USA, - where Trump appears to be leading the Republican Party towards a long predicted but nonetheless unavoidable electoral debacle.  Rather than tack to the centre as the going got rough (and as all the smart money advised), he battened down the hatches and played to his base - that 25% or so of the American electorate that is prepared to follow him over the electoral cliff. 

As moderate Republicans leave the party fold and the polling numbers for Hillary start to lock in, the response of Trump's diehard supporters is the predictable mishmash of "Its all a media conspiracy!" and "We have been betrayed by the Party establishment!"

FWIW, I expect that we will see pretty much the same scenario play out in the UK within the Labour Party, if on a somewhat slower timeline and more modestly British scale.  No doubt the media will be blamed by Corbynistas for his continued inability to connect with the British public. And as 2020 draws nearer, the Tory Gov't and media will collaborate in highlighting Corbyn's political ineptitude, ensuring that a litany of unflattering tales of his chequered political history are firmly fixed in the public mind. And the Labour Party establishment will at best be half-hearted in supporting him, knowing full well that the claim "I stood with Jeremy!" will be a poisoned chalice come 2021.

And Corbyn supporters will revert to those same shrill claims of "Its all a media conspiracy!" and "We have been betrayed by the Party establishment!"  

BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here, so actively defending the jeremy. The power of wishful thinking (or is it willful self-deception) is an amazing thing.

There's nothing in common between the two situations.  Trump is a bigoted misogynistic militarist.  Corbyn is a good person who is under attack for no reason.  Corbyn hasn't insulted or degraded anyone and he isn't inciting his supporters to violence.

Those who defend Jeremy Corbyn do so because he represents the only chance for Labour to be a party that stands for something.  It would be meaningless to even try to elect a Labour government with the sort of person you'd like to see leading it...a pro-war, pro-austerity, anti-worker and anti-immigration "centrist".  And there haven't been any polls showing that Labour's vote would increase if Corbyn were ousted and replaced with someone like that.

Corbyn is supported by the overwhelming majority of the party.  You can't simply dismiss that.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And if you want Corbyn out, sherpa-finn, it's proof that you want Labour to stand for nothing and to do nothing to help working people in the poor.  No one you would want as leader ever cared about non-millionaires.

sherpa-finn

Go for it, Ken.   

"Our leader represents the only chance for this to be a party that stands for something.... it would be meaningless to even try to elect a government with the sort of person you'd like to see leading it... Our leader is supported by the overwhelming majority of the party.... If you want him out, it's proof that you want the party to stand for nothing." 

Hallowe'en is approaching. Perhaps you and I can go out trick-or-treating together. I will be the Paul Ryan to your Rudy Giuliani. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

I don't have to join you in wanting the Labour Party to be right wing to prove I'm not Rudy Giuliani.

Giuliani incites hatred and bigotry.  He helped push the world into war.

You owe me an apology for ever making such a despicable comparison.

 

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And nobody sees Corbyn as being in any way comparable to Donald Trump.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

(Self-delete. Dupe post.)

 

 

sherpa-finn

Geez, Ken - your understanding of metaphors is apparently as shallow as your political analysis.  I will explain it. Slowly. 

You are a strong advocate and defender of a political "maverick" who the polls suggest is most likely leading his party to an electoral disaster. Agreed?  Well, - if you don't see the parallel with Rudy Giuliani, what can one say? 

On the other hand, I am a strong party loyalist who is concerned that this same leader is indeed leading his party to an electoral disaster. So I get the Paul Ryan role. 

And as regards your latest silly comment that "nobody sees Corbyn as being in any way comparable to Donald Trump".... take your pick: 

New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/03/why-jeremy-corbyn-...

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-and-donald-trump-sim...

The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/30/donald-trump-labour-pers...

National Post: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-the-fascinating-s...

And there's more.... Google is a wonderful thing. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Trump is a hatemonger.  All Corbyn is guilty of is having strong, transformative values and of fighting for them with eloquence and passion.

Corbyn hasn't caused violence against anyone or incited hatred towards anyone.  And it wasn't his fault that Remain lost.  Remain lost because the people running the Remain campaign sounded like dismissive elitists.  There was nothing Corbyn could have done to overcome that.

He's far from infallible, but there isn't anyone else in the Labour Party who offers a better alternative.  There aren't any votes to be gained from supporting the bombing of Syria and more cuts in benefits. And there is no alternative leader who would even be more popular.  If there had been, the polls would have shown that at some point.

There is no way to be anti-Corbyn AND to still care about working people and the unemployed.  And there is no way for Labour to win if Momentum is kicked out and most of Corbyn's supporters are made as unwelcome as the left was under Kinnock and Blair.  If you lost those people, there wouldn't be anyone else remaining in the party to do the work of campaigning for a Labour victory.  The "moderates" are all 60 or over and they aren't up to it by themselves.   The 2015 election proved that.

The practical politics of the matter argue against continued efforts to force Corbyn out.

josh

sherpa-finn wrote:

Geez, Ken - your understanding of metaphors is apparently as shallow as your political analysis.  I will explain it. Slowly. 

You are a strong advocate and defender of a political "maverick" who the polls suggest is most likely leading his party to an electoral disaster. Agreed?  Well, - if you don't see the parallel with Rudy Giuliani, what can one say? 

On the other hand, I am a strong party loyalist who is concerned that this same leader is indeed leading his party to an electoral disaster. So I get the Paul Ryan role. 

And as regards your latest silly comment that "nobody sees Corbyn as being in any way comparable to Donald Trump".... take your pick: 

New Statesman: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/03/why-jeremy-corbyn-...

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-and-donald-trump-sim...

The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/30/donald-trump-labour-pers...

National Post: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-the-fascinating-s...

And there's more.... Google is a wonderful thing. 

Both are males.  Both are over 65.  Both are white.  Both speak English.  Both live in the 21st century.  Both breathe air. 

swallow

sherpa-finn wrote:
So I get the Paul Ryan role. 

You want to be the fanboy enabler who chides the leader for his tone, but still bows down and endorses him to run the country? That's an odd choice. 

sherpa-finn

Yeah, good point, swallow. Thought for a brief while this past week that Ryan was actually going to grow some cojones.

I suppose Jeb Bush would be a better parallel / avatar. Equally unappealing, but it is what it is.    

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Let Ken go as Giuliani, and you go as the Ghost of the Republican Party.

One white sheet (with eyeholes) and one red "Make America Great Again" ballcap.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:

BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here, so actively defending the jeremy. The power of wishful thinking (or is it willful self-deception) is an amazing thing.

This particular babbler thinks that your quoted statement is a vile, disgusting mischaraterization of Ken and Rev, neither of whom bears the slightest resemblance to Giuliani. The more you post on this thread, the less respect I have for you.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

sherpa-finn wrote:

BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here, so actively defending the jeremy. The power of wishful thinking (or is it willful self-deception) is an amazing thing.

This particular babbler thinks that your quoted statement is a vile, disgusting mischaraterization of Ken and Rev, neither of whom bears the slightest resemblance to Giuliani. The more you post on this thread, the less respect I have for you.

I agree. Comparing Trump to Corbyn is obsurd enough but then then claiming Ken is like Giuliana took it into personal attacks.  

There is no analogy here in the first place just another open attack on babble on a politician for being a socialist. Apparently anyone who is not bought and paid for by the ruling elite is interchangable with people like Trump. The term facile jumps to mind.

 

Rev Pesky

Michael Moriarity wrote:

sherpa-finn wrote:

BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here, so actively defending the jeremy. The power of wishful thinking (or is it willful self-deception) is an amazing thing.

This particular babbler thinks that your quoted statement is a vile, disgusting mischaraterization of Ken and Rev, neither of whom bears the slightest resemblance to Giuliani. The more you post on this thread, the less respect I have for you.

And a question I would ask is, what principles are shared by Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn? Are all principles the same? Does calling for the banning of Muslims from the United States equate with calling for the end of the Trident submarine?

I read through the articles posted by sherpa-finn, and for the most part they are reaching for comparables that dont' exist. One article even tried to suggest that both Trump and Corbyn are 'outsiders'. That of course is ridiculous. Trump joined the Republican party so he could get into the Republican primaries, much as Bernie Sanders joined the Democrats for the same reason.

Jeremy Corbyn is a long-time member of the Labour Party who stayed true the that party's principles even as the party itself was abandoning them.

The single factor that seems to apply to both is that they weren't expected to win. But that's it. There is no other comparison. And just so everyone knows where I stand on Donald Trump, he is a racist, mysogynist, bigoted, demagogue who has not shown adherence to any principles at all.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
BTW, just wondering if I am the only Babbler who, when watching Rudy Giuliani on CNN these days desperately defending The Donald's journey into imminent electoral immolation, is struck by how similar his tone is to that of Ken and the Rev here

One of these seems to be saying "He's NOT unpopular.  It's just that everyone's out to get him!!".

How is that even remotely comparable to what the other is saying?

sherpa-finn

IMHO, you need to lighten up, Michael. 

Rev and Ken are actively and enthusiastically advocating in support of an out-of-the-mainstream political leader who all polls suggest is being swept along by a committed and energized membership base that has failed to translate that energy into wider support in the populace, - and who is poised to perhaps do irrevocable damage to the brand of that party. In so doing, they knowingly run the risk of surrendering the power of government to their opponents for a generation.  And they consider this risk worth it, - on the faint hope that against all odds their man may indeed somehow prevail at the polls. 

Fair enough. My political calulations are a little different. I do not think the risk is worth it, - I think the odds of success are not with either of these leaders, - and I consider this course of action politically foolhardy because elections DO matter and DO have consequences for the lives of ordinary people, and political parties lurch out of the mainsteam at their peril.  

Perhaps you happen to think that this analysis applies to Trump and the Republican Party, but not to Corbyn and the Labour Party. I respectfully disagree.  Both are likely cruising for an electoral bruising, leaving their supporters disconsolate and alienated and their respective parties in shambles.

To ignore the similarities (acknowledging all the while that the leadership of one of these parties has obviously lurched to the right while the other has obviously lurched to the left) seems like willful blindness. 

Pages