|
Post by shrewsace on Feb 18, 2019 21:56:12 GMT 1
Boils down to the fact that this is tha latest play from a handful of MPs who have never accepted Corbyn as Labour leader.
|
|
|
Post by percy on Feb 18, 2019 22:27:34 GMT 1
Boils down to the fact that this is tha latest play from a handful of MPs who have never accepted Corbyn as Labour leader. Not really. If Corbyn followed the conference direction this would not have happened. I’ve never known such an environment of intolerance within the Labour Party - any dissenting voices are deemed traitors to the cause. Express that view and you get told to F off usually with a comment about Blair attached to it. No way we will get the Tories out with Corbyn at the helm.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Feb 18, 2019 23:21:15 GMT 1
Boils down to the fact that this is tha latest play from a handful of MPs who have never accepted Corbyn as Labour leader. Not really. If Corbyn followed the conference direction this would not have happened. I’ve never known such an environment of intolerance within the Labour Party - any dissenting voices are deemed traitors to the cause. Express that view and you get told to F off usually with a comment about Blair attached to it. No way we will get the Tories out with Corbyn at the helm. Usual character assassinations for Chuka and others, by intolerant racists for whom “Blairite” is the ultimate insult, more than calling someone a Tory. And to think it used to be the Conservatives that we’re the nasty party!
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 18, 2019 23:53:19 GMT 1
I was briefly a party member, when Neil Kinnock was leader. I lived in an ultra-blue constituency and my membership lapsed. I almost rejoined in 2015 because I was a Corbyn enthusiast, believe it or not, though not a paid up Corbynite. Outside his own party enthusiasts, he's not a leader though and never will be. Nobody with approval ratings below the walking disaster that is Theresa May can lay claim to being a national leader in waiting. Does that matter? It does to me because you can't do anything about anything when you're locked into opposition and I believe Labour is on course to be that with Corbyn as leader. I don't understand how you can believe that a small number of MPs leaving the party are really battling for its heart and soul. I don't claim to have followed the anti-Semitism issue as closely as others but when the Jewish Labour Movement is reported to be considering its future there must be a problem. I'm certain too, that brexit isn't a sideshow in this; it's fundamental. You've seen Tom Watson's comments? It's probably too late to change Brexit, this is about the ongoing battle to oust Corbyn that has been ticking along nicely since 2015. Tom Watson sounds like he's not so far off making this move himself, as Newsnight just reported. I can't believe this is about ousting Corbyn when the seven have resigned from the party. That sounds like paranoid, fortress thinking. If you think it's probably too late to change brexit, what does brexit look like? I don't know of anyone that knows, or even seriously claims to know, on any side of the argument. It's all still up for grabs, never mind too late to be changed!
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 0:10:01 GMT 1
Note that the “usual character assassinations “ about Chuka are quotes of what he said and facts about the positions that he has taken. Pointing out facts about Chuka and quoting what he says is racism. Just like fundamentally disagreeing with someone is “bullying”. That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right - who call themselves centrists and moderates. But that is a prime example of their mindset.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 0:14:06 GMT 1
I'll say one thing - whoever's really behind these copycat yellow vest protesters on Newsnight tonight are the real enemy for anyone not on the far right.
The ones on camera seem to be easily manipulated but there's something far more sinister doing the manipulating. Not sure how big a threat it really is but it's no wonder the intelligence agencies are monitoring them so closely.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 0:16:50 GMT 1
Note that the “usual character assassinations “ about Chuka are quotes of what he said and facts about the positions that he has taken. Pointing out facts about Chuka and quoting what he says is racism. Just like fundamentally disagreeing with someone is “bullying”. That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right - who call themselves centrists and moderates. But that is a prime example of their mindset. The hounding of Luciana Berger seems to have been rather more than a disagreement, wouldn't you say? Angela Rayner certainly seems to think so. Extraordinary that Corbyn did so little to stop it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 0:18:06 GMT 1
I appreciate my views re different from the above, but as a lifelong labour supporter I am deeply saddened by this. I have spoken to Chuka a number of times and have found him to be one of the more reasonable and open minded mps - not at all the egotistical shyster portrayed above. McDonnell on the other hand i found closed completely - a deeply frustrating man. IMO Corbyn is the fringe who should be hounded out rather than the centrists (of which I am one). Sad day for labour- Corbyn refusing to follow the line agreed democratically by the party and everyone is scared to speak out against him because of the whitchhunters who support him - very much like the Spanish Inquisition which also persecuted Jews and those with different views. At a time when we need a true opposition to the Tories we are letting Corbyn run amok with his own agenda. So much on the fringe he overwhelmingly crushed his opponents in two separate leadership elections and led his party back from the brink with a 40% vote share. That fringe? And lol persecuted for speaking out. He has been battered from pillor to post even before his first election by pundit and backbencher alike. He's tolerated this and even welcomed them in. The likes of Starmer and Ashworth have seen the bigger picture and are fighting for their constituents and this country. Be nice to see the 7 put their electoral confidence to the test and see what the people think now they are standing on their own so far unannounced platform.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 0:23:00 GMT 1
Note that the “usual character assassinations “ about Chuka are quotes of what he said and facts about the positions that he has taken. Pointing out facts about Chuka and quoting what he says is racism. Just like fundamentally disagreeing with someone is “bullying”. That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right - who call themselves centrists and moderates. But that is a prime example of their mindset. The hounding of Luciana Berger seems to have been rather more than a disagreement, wouldn't you say? Angela Rayner certainly seems to think so. Extraordinary that Corbyn did so little to stop it. Happy to be corrected but matters such as these are the responsibility of the general secretary. The leaders office really shouldn't intervene personally in these matters. And the deselection proceedings were dropped by Liverpool Wavertree CLP. Corbyn has called several times for the 'hounding' or whichever word is used to stop.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 0:24:34 GMT 1
Note that the “usual character assassinations “ about Chuka are quotes of what he said and facts about the positions that he has taken. Pointing out facts about Chuka and quoting what he says is racism. Just like fundamentally disagreeing with someone is “bullying”. That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right - who call themselves centrists and moderates. But that is a prime example of their mindset. The hounding of Luciana Berger seems to have been rather more than a disagreement, wouldn't you say? Angela Rayner certainly seems to think so. Extraordinary that Corbyn did so little to stop it. Extraordinary that you don’t think that disciplinary issues are the responsibility of the General Secretary and the NEC. Also I note the scattergun approach of Margaret Hodge to these matters - dismissing the General Secretary’s figures because she submitted complaints about 200 individuals. But 20 rather than 200 were Labour Party members. But no amount of response from the Labour Party will be sufficient.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 0:28:16 GMT 1
I notice that Tom Watson no longer recognises the Labour Party. I’m not surprised his fiefdom in West Midlands Labour has been taken from underneath him, so things must be a little disorientating. No more CLPs who haven’t had an AGM for fourteen years. He mustn’t know his arse from his elbow.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 1:25:49 GMT 1
The hounding of Luciana Berger seems to have been rather more than a disagreement, wouldn't you say? Angela Rayner certainly seems to think so. Extraordinary that Corbyn did so little to stop it. Extraordinary that you don’t think that disciplinary issues are the responsibility of the General Secretary and the NEC. Also I note the scattergun approach of Margaret Hodge to these matters - dismissing the General Secretary’s figures because she submitted complaints about 200 individuals. But 20 rather than 200 were Labour Party members. But no amount of response from the Labour Party will be sufficient. More extraordinary that you think anyone outside the Labour Party cares at all about its chain of internal disciplinary responsibilities. A faction leader, like Corbyn, falls back on such things. A potential national leader would have recognised that he should have publicly and visibly backed Berger.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 1:30:36 GMT 1
The hounding of Luciana Berger seems to have been rather more than a disagreement, wouldn't you say? Angela Rayner certainly seems to think so. Extraordinary that Corbyn did so little to stop it. Happy to be corrected but matters such as these are the responsibility of the general secretary. The leaders office really shouldn't intervene personally in these matters. And the deselection proceedings were dropped by Liverpool Wavertree CLP. Corbyn has called several times for the 'hounding' or whichever word is used to stop. Nobody outside the party cares whose responsibility it is - and a lot within it might not either. The point is the story was hugely damaging to Labour and a true leader in waiting would have recognised that and made sure he was very publicly seen to be on Berger's side. He didn't because he lacks that vision and, I suspect, won't risk upsetting the faction he leads.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 2:04:03 GMT 1
And by not caring can carry on using the same club. By not thinking Corbyn is considered a leader of a faction within the Labour Party.
This is something repeated in CLPs throughout the country. The right wing has been used to calling the shots and making decisions away from democratic accountability and contrary to party rules. The influx of new party members in 2016 leads to a change of Chair and Secretary and the. The right wing oscillate between boycotting meetings so they are not quorate or disrupting meetings so they cannot continue.
Having seen that that a few times over the last 12 months The benefit of doubt is given far less readily.
But it’s all about Corbyn and his faction. Sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 7:35:01 GMT 1
You've seen Tom Watson's comments? It's probably too late to change Brexit, this is about the ongoing battle to oust Corbyn that has been ticking along nicely since 2015. Tom Watson sounds like he's not so far off making this move himself, as Newsnight just reported. I can't believe this is about ousting Corbyn when the seven have resigned from the party. That sounds like paranoid, fortress thinking. If you think it's probably too late to change brexit, what does brexit look like? I don't know of anyone that knows, or even seriously claims to know, on any side of the argument. It's all still up for grabs, never mind too late to be changed! Just to be clear, I am a Green Party voter, soon to be member. I binned off Labour when Blair became leader. I am looking from the outside in and again Sean in owning this thread. Just like the printed media own the narrative.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 8:27:18 GMT 1
He associates with Hamas, the IRA and numerous other groups. He is a terrorist sympathiser and has dragged the Labour party in such a terrible direction that some long standing MPs are leaving stating the party is inherently racist and anti-Semitic. Well, various governments over the years, including Thatcher's, have "associated" with the IRA and other groups. That's the only way peace ever comes about and it doesn't make anyone a "terrorist". I'm dissatisfied with a few things about Corbyn but the nonsense about him being a terrorist or terrorist sympathiser isn't one of them. Really not sure how you can you can equate the two. It's one thing to open dialogue with a terrorist organisation and quite another to attend events where people who have fought and died for a terrorist group were honored, to lay a wreath at the graves of those involved in terrorism, to called terrorist groups 'friends' and to sing their songs. The latter looks to celebrate or honor or show solidarity to that group. Why else would you do so? You then have the words of his good friends and allies Abbott and McDonnell. A terrorist? No of course not. But a terrorist sympathizer...Many people are not as quick to dismiss that as nonsense, with good reason. And of course considering this is the IRA we are talking about, a terrorist organisation that is not far and distant, but one that is on our doorstep and has been responsible for some truly awful actions within the UK itself then it was inevitable that this would have a huge impact on his chances of becoming PM. Labour and Corbyn supporters will point to the 40% and the huge turnout in the last election but they seem to miss the fact that an even larger amount of people turned out, I believe in no small part, to stop him making it into number 10. And that was to back one of the worst, if not the worst, governments in living memory. And that is still the case today where he is only level at best in the polls when anyone else would be romping it. Corbyn's past is toxic.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Feb 19, 2019 8:31:55 GMT 1
Well, various governments over the years, including Thatcher's, have "associated" with the IRA and other groups. That's the only way peace ever comes about and it doesn't make anyone a "terrorist". I'm dissatisfied with a few things about Corbyn but the nonsense about him being a terrorist or terrorist sympathiser isn't one of them. Really not sure how you can you can equate the two. It's one thing to open dialogue with a terrorist organisation and quite another to attend events where people who have fought and died for a terrorist group were honored, to lay a wreath at the graves of those involved in terrorism, to called terrorist groups 'friends' and to sing their songs. The latter looks to celebrate or honor or show solidarity to that group. Why else would you do so? You then have the words of his good friends and allies Abbott and McDonnell. A terrorist? No of course not. But a terrorist sympathizer...Many people are not as quick to dismiss that as nonsense, with good reason. And of course considering this is the IRA we are talking about, a terrorist organisation that is not far and distant, but one that is on our doorstep and has been responsible for some truly awful actions within the UK itself then it was inevitable that this would have a huge impact on his chances of becoming PM. Labour and Corbyn supporters will point to the 40% and the huge turnout in the last election but they seem to miss the fact that an even larger amount of people turned out, I believe in no small part, to stop him making it into number 10. And that was to back one of the worst, if not the worst, governments in living memory. And that is still the case today where he is only level at best in the polls when anyone else would be romping it. Corbyn's past is toxic. You make some great points. Thankfully, I think Corbyn is finished and hopefully his vile version of politics is too. We need a decent opposition government in this country.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 8:32:56 GMT 1
Do feel that's a little unfair considering the reasons given for leaving. These are not trivial matters. Indeed these are not trivial matters. It’s called class politics - which are never trivial. If they were trivial there wouldn’t be a civil war currently in the Labour Party instigated by the right using whatever weapon comes to hand. Maybe I'm just not getting this, so are you saying it has nothing to do with the direction the Labour party are talking on Brexit, has nothing to do with the antisemitism in the party, its not that many within the party now see it as toxic because of the abuse and intimidation that people are saying is now happening within the party? This is all down to their 'puppet masters' who deem it better they are out than in and because of funding each is compliant and made the decision to leave? You are saying the reasons they are leaving are untrue or that they using them as an excuse to leave? Or have I missed something?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 8:45:10 GMT 1
That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right It's exactly what Abbott and her supporters do. Time and time again. So that isn't just confided to the Labour right. The left of the Labour party and its supporters are more than happy to do the same. And reports about abuse and bullying have become a constant since Corbyn became leader and seemingly emboldened the far left to get involved and look to shape the party to their will.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 8:55:21 GMT 1
When you look to who is voting for who these days I think there are many people out there who don't now recognize what the Labour party has become. Didn't more working class people vote for the Tories the last time around? According to YouGov...
figures estimate that 42 per cent of C2DE (working class) people voted Labour at the last election, while 44 per cent voted Conservative.
A 2017 Ipsos MORI poll, also using the ABC1 and C2DE grades, showed the same pattern, concluding that “the middle classes swung to Labour, while working classes swung to the Conservatives”.
Tim Bale, Professor of Politics at Queen Mary’s, University of London, who runs the Economic and Social Research Council-funded Party Members Project. He told FactCheck: “Labour members are definitely more middle class than the average voter.”
Lets not pretend any more that the Labour party is the party of the working class. It's the party of the middle class. And I have no doubt that in no small part that is because of who is currently leading the Labour party and who is making up its membership. So it has changed, it is changing, people don't recognize it for what it was in more ways than one...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 9:05:08 GMT 1
When you look to who is voting for who these days I think there are many people out there who don't now recognize what the Labour party has become. Didn't more working class people vote for the Tories the last time around? According to YouGov... figures estimate that 42 per cent of C2DE (working class) people voted Labour at the last election, while 44 per cent voted Conservative.A 2017 Ipsos MORI poll, also using the ABC1 and C2DE grades, showed the same pattern, concluding that “the middle classes swung to Labour, while working classes swung to the Conservatives”.Tim Bale, Professor of Politics at Queen Mary’s, University of London, who runs the Economic and Social Research Council-funded Party Members Project. He told FactCheck: “Labour members are definitely more middle class than the average voter.”Lets not pretend any more that the Labour party is the party of the working class. It's the party of the middle class. And I have no doubt that in no small part that is because of who is currently leading the Labour party and who is making up its membership. So it has changed, it is changing, people don't recognize it for what it was in more ways than one... Stutty. Labour literally had its higher vote share in your quoted survey in the DE class.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 9:15:01 GMT 1
When you look to who is voting for who these days I think there are many people out there who don't now recognize what the Labour party has become. Didn't more working class people vote for the Tories the last time around? According to YouGov... figures estimate that 42 per cent of C2DE (working class) people voted Labour at the last election, while 44 per cent voted Conservative.A 2017 Ipsos MORI poll, also using the ABC1 and C2DE grades, showed the same pattern, concluding that “the middle classes swung to Labour, while working classes swung to the Conservatives”.Tim Bale, Professor of Politics at Queen Mary’s, University of London, who runs the Economic and Social Research Council-funded Party Members Project. He told FactCheck: “Labour members are definitely more middle class than the average voter.”Lets not pretend any more that the Labour party is the party of the working class. It's the party of the middle class. And I have no doubt that in no small part that is because of who is currently leading the Labour party and who is making up its membership. So it has changed, it is changing, people don't recognize it for what it was in more ways than one... Stutty. Labour literally had its higher vote share in your quoted survey in the DE class. Fair point, but in combination (C2DE) then it is the Tories who gained more votes. 'Skilled working class' are still working class. And where once they voted Labour, they now vote Tory. So as a whole, the majority of the working class voted for the Tories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 9:38:46 GMT 1
Stutty. Labour literally had its higher vote share in your quoted survey in the DE class. Fair point, but in combination (C2DE) then it is the Tories who gained more votes. 'Skilled working class' are still working class. And where once they voted Labour, they now vote Tory. So as a whole, the majority of the working class voted for the Tories. Can't argue with the yougov survey there but the differences are minimal which reflect how close the 2017 vote was. It's naive to make generalised statements that the Tories are the party of the working class and vice versa. The really apparent stat from the survey though is the difference in voting intention between young and old which imo is far more of a concern for the tories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 10:00:43 GMT 1
Happy to be corrected but matters such as these are the responsibility of the general secretary. The leaders office really shouldn't intervene personally in these matters. And the deselection proceedings were dropped by Liverpool Wavertree CLP. Corbyn has called several times for the 'hounding' or whichever word is used to stop. Nobody outside the party cares whose responsibility it is - and a lot within it might not either. The point is the story was hugely damaging to Labour and a true leader in waiting would have recognised that and made sure he was very publicly seen to be on Berger's side. He didn't because he lacks that vision and, I suspect, won't risk upsetting the faction he leads. Lost count of the amount of times he has called for any abuse or aggressive discourse to stop. And once again the responsibility of disciplinary matters lies with the General Secretary and NEC. Not the leaders office. Unless of course you are suggesting that the leaders office take this into their own hands and break with regulation and rule.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 19, 2019 10:25:10 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 10:30:00 GMT 1
Fair point, but in combination (C2DE) then it is the Tories who gained more votes. 'Skilled working class' are still working class. And where once they voted Labour, they now vote Tory. So as a whole, the majority of the working class voted for the Tories. It's naive to make generalised statements that the Tories are the party of the working class and vice versa. I disagree. I think the point here is that there are now considerable swathes of the working class who no longer see or recognize Labour as he party of the working class. It's seen as the party of the middle class. That is looking to who now makes up its leadership, its membership and those who are now looking to vote for it. And that has seen a shift. I have seen a small sample of this myself; the difference in the voting patterns between my friends back home in the UK and those who I have met here in Stuttgart. It is the latter; the well off, with good careers and good jobs that have turned to Labour. My friends from the UK however, who do not find themselves in that situation, now look to the Conservatives. I just get the impression that there are parts of the UK that Labour in its current guise aren't going to be able to reach out to. That they do not understand them and have no desire to either. Small things matter and whilst you and many others may not care about such things an awful lot of people can't be doing with someone who has no issue singing IRA songs but can't bring himself to sing the national anthem. Labour at this current time are alien to an awful lot of people in the UK, that is why we are seeing such numbers of the working class turn to the Tories.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 10:46:58 GMT 1
I think that just goes to prove just how desperate so many people are for an alternative to the two main parties. Reports that more may look to join this new group, from both the Labour and the Tory party.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 10:52:22 GMT 1
It's naive to make generalised statements that the Tories are the party of the working class and vice versa. I disagree. I think the point here is that there are now considerable swathes of the working class who no longer see or recognize Labour as he party of the working class. It's seen as the party of the middle class. That is looking to who now makes up its leadership, its membership and those who are now looking to vote for it. And that has seen a shift. I have seen a small sample of this myself; the difference in the voting patterns between my friends back home in the UK and those who I have met here in Stuttgart. It is the latter; the well off, with good careers and good jobs that have turned to Labour. My friends from the UK however, who do not find themselves in that situation, now look to the Conservatives. I just get the impression that there are parts of the UK that Labour in its current guise aren't going to be able to reach out to. That they do not understand them and have no desire to either. Small things matter and whilst you and many others may not care about such things an awful lot of people can't be doing with someone who has no issue singing IRA songs but can't bring himself to sing the national anthem. Labour at this current time are alien to an awful lot of people in the UK, that is why we are seeing such numbers of the working class turn to the Tories. Once again. As a percentage of that class labours highest share proportionally was in the DE category. Such numbers of working class turning to tories is marginally more than those professional classes turning en masse to Labour. The difference in absolute vote share in 2017 was 2.4% or 800k. Your anecdotes aside sure numbers of working class are turning to the Tories. Perhaps some of them because of slights regarding the singing of IRA songs and for sure labour needs to do more to win these people's votes. There's no doubt of that. But the gaps you are trying to claim are simply not there. It's around 500k swing voters which decide parliamentary majorities or the largest parties. The only current reliable indicator of voting intention is age not class. Labour is much a party of the working class as it is middle class. That's healthy if it wants to secure a majority.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 19, 2019 10:59:15 GMT 1
Chuka Umunna, one of the seven MPs, today said he wanted to see a new political party born out of the defections by the end of the year.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 19, 2019 11:09:51 GMT 1
"Mr Umunna insisted he did not believe he and the other MPs should quit their seats and hold by-elections, as demanded by shadow chancellor John McDonnell.
He said: 'In a parliamentary democracy you elect a person and then their party after."
Pretty disingenuous from Umunna. As we already know, monkeys with either blue or red rosettes would be shoe-ins in a large number of constituencies. Very poor argument to justify staying on. Pure obfuscation.
|
|