If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

Which policies? The one that are for fairness and against greed?

In general yes. The working poor and unemployed want and need a voice. A lot of people who aren't necessarily Labour supporters support the idea of basic fairness in society - primarily that the 'have nots' should not be destitute. The design and implementation of actual detailed policies that try to create that fairness are not easy, and not something that can be brought into existence by marches or waving placards.

But if the main party that espouses such causes in a two-party system has a leader who cannot convince those directly around him to back him up, why should or would the general electorate? And why does Corbyn's awful leadership arouse incredibly strong feelings for him amongst his supporters? It seems that his core supporters blame the Tory press and the Blairite Labour MPs, rather than the man himself. Any Labour leader will be subjected to attack from parts of the media. Any political leader except in North Korea will (and should) face internal opposition - from those with ambition of leadership themselves and particularly when its clear that the party is headed for continued electoral oblivion. Corbyn has dealt with these both incredibly badly.

Corbyn supporters just remind me of the Labour left of the 80s and 90s (Militant Tendency and their ilk), who seemed perpetually enraged by the fact a large part of the population didn't 'get' their message and found their marches and shrill moral superiority an absolute turn off.

If any Labour MP wants to mount a Leadership challenge, they can gain the support from MP's and do so. The way they've gone about it with the attempted 'coup' & trying to force Corbyn to resign, is the type of crafty, underhand tactic that the majority of the electorate loathe about politicians. Ambitious, career-driven, self-serving people IMO.

At this moment in time, the party should be uniting and tearing the Tories to shreds, but since Corbyn was elected this has been in the pipeline.

I agree about your comment on the media. Every leader should face criticism and have their policies/actions questioned, but it's pretty obvious that Corbyn gets a great deal more scrutiny than the others, and faced almost no coverage of his own campaign & the positives surrounding that. I agree that while what he says, he needs to refine his policies and get the message out there to the voters. His PR/marketing etc is pretty poor.

The thing is, is there a credible candidate out there that would have more chance of winning an election for Labour? I'm not sure there is.

Andy Burnham has that polished look that drives the superficial to vote, I know he was looked over in the last leadership race, but I think he could take it to them.
Personally being a Green voter I wouldn't mind if Caroline Lucas defected over, she is strong, principled with the ability to tap into the leftwing, being in a more mainstream party. Granted it would weaken the Greens but it already became significantly weaker when she stepped down from the leadership and left Natalie Bennett in charge.

Andy is well out of all these shennanigans , yes he does have the ' look ' of a modern politician , probably the best of who is now available , but he has timed his Manchester bid to perfection , maybe he'll have one last chance in 5/6 years time

Maybe Corb's will call it a day now he's had his '15 mins of fame' on the Iraq stage which he's waited years for.

The conspiracy theorist in me always wondered if they wanted him out before this so that he wouldn't have 'apologised' on behalf of the Labour party.
All those MP's still protect that grining gobe

Best thing Labour could do is encourage Gove to cross the floor assuming his Tory leadership bid fails. Given his desire for social mobility and justice, he could give Labour some purpose. Not only that he is a good operator and would destroy May in the Commons.

And then you go and spoil it.
Sad!

How anyone can like or believe a word that odious little sh/t says or even find a speck of likability in his horrifically patronising demeanour is beyond me.

Gove makes Theresa May seem likeable and Tony Blair seem trustworthy.

Quote ="Him"How anyone can like or believe a word that odious little sh/t says or even find a speck of likability in his horrifically patronising demeanour is beyond me. Gove makes Theresa May seem likeable and Tony Blair seem trustworthy.'" As for Andrea Leadsom, this, from her own blog, is priceless (via metro.co.uk/2016/07/07/here-are- ... s-5993147/).

Quote ="Him"How anyone can like or believe a word that odious little sh/t says or even find a speck of likability in his horrifically patronising demeanour is beyond me. Gove makes Theresa May seem likeable and Tony Blair seem trustworthy.'" As for Andrea Leadsom, this, from her own blog, is priceless (via metro.co.uk/2016/07/07/here-are- ... s-5993147/).

Quote ="Mintball"As for Andrea Leadsom, this, from her own blog, is priceless (via metro.co.uk/2016/07/07/here-are- ... s-5993147/). '" Holy Moley. That's just...I mean...what world is she...oh dear.

Quote ="Mintball"As for Andrea Leadsom, this, from her own blog, is priceless (via metro.co.uk/2016/07/07/here-are- ... s-5993147/). '" Holy Moley. That's just...I mean...what world is she...oh dear.

Christ on a bike - it doesn't get more twee than that; from the ever so humble (former hedge fund exec) 'Tory Mum.'

I note that she doesn't add any gay ingredients to her delightful recipe - she's not at all keen on them.

The cakes will be sold at pride, it's a multi coloured cake too, it may end up resembling a rainbow

Maybe so - but they won't be wedding cakes; marriage is only for god-fearing opposite sex couples.

[url=https://medium.com/@ruthie_dee/no-longer-welcome-in-my-own-home-4672dc7a08a5#.630wevnv7“we are a political party, not a fan club.”[/url

That's an interesting read.

I've seen my union have the same issues in the past. It used to frustrate me when extremists who see everything in black and white take over. It ends up turning people off and those that are doing the shouting end up doing far more harm than good.

I also read it. I'll be honest, I'm now deeply suspect when I read accounts of people being abused, MPs receiving threats and intimidation. There have been too many cases where the reports are demonstrably untrue, going as far back as the leadership campaign itself. It's a very easy thing to set up an anonymous social media account and start sending abusive messages to your own "side" purporting to be from supporters of your enemy. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that there are feisty meetings up and down the land in the Labour Party at present. Yet it's also true - as any policeman will tell you - that no two people's accounts of the same events are ever the same. A similar account written by one of those red-T-shirted Momentum types would probably read that they saw people in the meeting denouncing them and their work, and being hostile and abusive to them, making them feel unwelcome in their own Party. It's a bit of a conundrum, and I'm not sure there's a solution.

For me, the problem the right of the party have is that they have a good riff on why holding power is important, but they are offering almost nothing on what they would do with power. On the very rare occasions when someone from Progress offers a policy opinion, it is either frighteningly Thatcherite (more cutting of benefits, more "crackdowns" on this that or the other), or it's warm and apolitical "identity politics" of the sort which has a cross-spectrum acceptance from Cameroonian Tories through LibDems.

The Right of the party (which is some 80% of the PLP, in truth) would do better to start to lay out some hard policies which they can compare with both the Tories' and Corbyn's. Instead, all I've heard now for 9 months is that Corbyn is unelectable, and should go. Fine. But who would replace him, and - more importantly - what would they stand for? Not vacuous warm words about helping the working class, but actual concrete policies that I can think about and weigh up. Corbyn's got loads - nationalising railways and power, increased Keynesian public spending, higher taxes on rich individuals and institutions etc. He also has some foreign policy obsessions and ideas which I don't always share, but I'm mature enough to know I'm never going to find a political party which subscribes to all my personal views! So what do Progress/Blairites/PLP have to offer, other than a clear and transparent desire for "electability"? What would they actually do?

Until they start to answer that question, they won't shift many Corbyn supporters.

This.

Surely the policy's of the party are led by the leader ?

The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.

The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.

Quote ="vbfg"The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.'" If you don't understand the nature of power and the state - or refuse to - you risk ending up like Syria: voluntarist romanticism without power or the ability to make any changes (even if you do get into government). Unfortunately, Syriza are a model for much of the 'new' left around Momentum - despite their failure to actually achieve anything in Greece.

Quote ="vbfg"The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.'" If you don't understand the nature of power and the state - or refuse to - you risk ending up like Syria: voluntarist romanticism without power or the ability to make any changes (even if you do get into government). Unfortunately, Syriza are a model for much of the 'new' left around Momentum - despite their failure to actually achieve anything in Greece.

Quote ="vbfg"The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.'" I have no idea what Lansman is talking about there. It's the dribblings of a student who isn't as clever as he thinks he is. But then, on the other hand, I remember waiting with decent anticipation for the outcome of the Cruddas Policy Review. Then it emerged and I searched and searched for anything concrete beyond meaningless touchstone words : "diversity", "devolution", "partnership", and all the rest of that cock. Hardly a policy to be seen. So we essentially now have one side who have policies but apparently don't feel the need to win power in order to implement them, while the other side very much wants to win power, but hasn't a bloody clue what it will do if it does. Pretty depressing, overall. And I STILL can't believe they chose Eagle as the opposition. Is she the only Labour MP who comes across worse on telly?

Quote ="vbfg"The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.'" I have no idea what Lansman is talking about there. It's the dribblings of a student who isn't as clever as he thinks he is. But then, on the other hand, I remember waiting with decent anticipation for the outcome of the Cruddas Policy Review. Then it emerged and I searched and searched for anything concrete beyond meaningless touchstone words : "diversity", "devolution", "partnership", and all the rest of that cock. Hardly a policy to be seen. So we essentially now have one side who have policies but apparently don't feel the need to win power in order to implement them, while the other side very much wants to win power, but hasn't a bloody clue what it will do if it does. Pretty depressing, overall. And I STILL can't believe they chose Eagle as the opposition. Is she the only Labour MP who comes across worse on telly?

Eagle sure as hell isn't getting my vote. Neither is Corbyn.

I'm not going to help fund its slow death and accelerating irrelevance either.

That tweet is the future and I'm done.