Who do you support for Labour party leader?

[CarlSilva]

The way someone explained it me was this. Back when milk snatching Maggie was still prime minister, the conservatives realized they could still influence society and the economy, even if or when they lost a general election, so they prepared for it. The way they did it was to get enough of their own peopel into the labour party NEC. This gathered momentum and then Tony Blair appeared. It's been suggested many times all over the place that he was a tory in the wrong coloured tie. He was never a true labour man, and to be fair on the bloke, I don't think he pretended to be. The labour party became "New Labour" and it got into big money and basically became a watered down version of the conserviative party.

Neil Kinnock was never a true labour man either, and the labour party lost it's way a bit. He never even supported the miners. And whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

As for more recent times, Milliband is probably a nice enough fella, but really, labour with him at the helm was never an effective opposition party, so it made labour a waste of time, and even worse, it left the way oopen for the conservatives to run riot and asset strip the country even more.

I think Corbyn is the only true labour (as compared to 'new labour') canditate, (and the only hope we've got, whether you realize it or not) so I'm glad he's the leader. At least he asks the right questions and he isn't corruptible (we hope)

 

[AlterEgo]

Corbyn does not ask the right questions. The Tories are in total disarray yet Labour have failed miserably to hold them to account. The Tories' own internal fighting and insecurities led to the Brexit referendum yet Labour haven't even made this point, so Labour get the label of the disorganised party.

Corbyn is a ridiculous milquetoast. I do admire many of his principles, but he's never had a proper job in his life and he's never had to fight a national election before. He's played no part whatsoever in any Labour campaign before he became leader, and there's a good reason for that.

Claiming that the Tories deliberately infiltrated the Labour Party so they'd still effectively be running the country is a hilariously paranoid conspiracy theory.

 

[DarloRich]

The way someone explained it me was this. Back when milk snatching Maggie was still prime minister, the conservatives realized they could still influence society and the economy, even if or when they lost a general election, so they prepared for it. The way they did it was to get enough of their own peopel into the labour party NEC. This gathered momentum and then Tony Blair appeared. It's been suggested many times all over the place that he was a tory in the wrong coloured tie. He was never a true labour man, and to be fair on the bloke, I don't think he pretended to be. The labour party became "New Labour" and it got into big money and basically became a watered down version of the conserviative party.

Neil Kinnock was never a true labour man either, and the labour party lost it's way a bit. He never even supported the miners. And whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

As for more recent times, Milliband is probably a nice enough fella, but really, labour with him at the helm was never an effective opposition party, so it made labour a waste of time, and even worse, it left the way oopen for the conservatives to run riot and asset strip the country even more.

I think Corbyn is the only true labour (as compared to 'new labour') canditate, (and the only hope we've got, whether you realize it or not) so I'm glad he's the leader. At least he asks the right questions and he isn't corruptible (we hope)

that is tinfoilery of the highest order. :roll:

Shall we look at the things this alleged Tory Blair delivered for the country? I wonder how many of those an actual Tory would have delivered?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

Which of the various "socialist" parties did you have in mind?

 

[backontrack]

Which of the various "socialist" parties did you have in mind?

Isn't that obvious?

Neil Kinnock was never a true labour man either, and the labour party lost it's way a bit. He never even supported the miners. And whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Corbyn does not ask the right questions. The Tories are in total disarray yet Labour have failed miserably to hold them to account. The Tories' own internal fighting and insecurities led to the Brexit referendum yet Labour haven't even made this point, so Labour get the label of the disorganised party.

Corbyn is a ridiculous milquetoast. I do admire many of his principles, but he's never had a proper job in his life and he's never had to fight a national election before. He's played no part whatsoever in any Labour campaign before he became leader, and there's a good reason for that.

Claiming that the Tories deliberately infiltrated the Labour Party so they'd still effectively be running the country is a hilariously paranoid conspiracy theory.

The tories are in disarray? Nope. The majority (euroskeptics) are getting what they want and the minority will live with it as they have a strong leader. The Tories are more united now than at any time in the last 6 years.

Labour on the other hand are a basket case.

This is the 80s all over again. I am waiting for the new gang of 4

 

[northwichcat]

The tories are in disarray? Nope. The majority (euroskeptics) are getting what they want and the minority will live with it as they have a strong leader. The Tories are more united now than at any time in the last 6 years.

How many Tory MPs were backing Leave? Out of the high profile ones there were relatively similar numbers on the Remain and Leave campaigns. It was only a couple of months ago a number of Tories were saying May was unsuitable to lead the government as she didn't back Brexit.

 

[CarlSilva]

that is tinfoilery of the highest order. :roll:

Shall we look at the things this alleged Tory Blair delivered for the country? I wonder how many of those an actual Tory would have delivered?

No it isn't. Don't be daft. At least if you'r going to say stuff like that, back it up with actual reasons, not just throwaway insults.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which of the various "socialist" parties did you have in mind?

Er, how about the labour party.? That's meant to have it's roots in socialism.

Labour on the other hand are a basket case.

They're not. That's just what the press wants you to believe.

 

[northwichcat]

John Prescott said in an interview yesterday he suggested 'New Labour' should have actually been called 'Old Labour' as it was returning the party to where they used to be not going off in a completely new direction.

 

[cjmillsnun]

They're not. That's just what the press wants you to believe.

They are. Why else would you have had the shadow cabinet debacle in the first place. You have the PLP and the membership in complete disagreement as to who should be leader. That's not media spin its fact.

Whether the PLP hold their noses and support Corbyn remains to be seen. Whether Corbyn will now grab the leaders role by the balls also remains to be seen. But right now Labour is tearing itself to pieces. They need strong leadership and Corbyn hasn't been that. This country needs strong opposition to a real threat by the Tories on the less well off and the most vulnerable in society. It currently does not have that.

Corbyn reminds me a lot of Michael Foot. His heart is in the right place however he isn't a leader. One of your previous posts intimates you weren't around or old enough to have remembered Thatcher and what she did to this country. Many of us here are and for us who are there is a strong sense of Deja vu

 

[DynamicSpirit]

No it isn't. Don't be daft. At least if you'r going to say stuff like that, back it up with actual reasons, not just throwaway insults.

DarloRich - time once again to dig out that long list of achievements of the Labour Government that we post every so often on rail forums?

 

[Phil.]

The way someone explained it me was this. Back when milk snatching Maggie was still prime minister, the conservatives realized they could still influence society and the economy, even if or when they lost a general election, so they prepared for it. The way they did it was to get enough of their own peopel into the labour party NEC. This gathered momentum and then Tony Blair appeared. It's been suggested many times all over the place that he was a tory in the wrong coloured tie. He was never a true labour man, and to be fair on the bloke, I don't think he pretended to be. The labour party became "New Labour" and it got into big money and basically became a watered down version of the conserviative party.

Neil Kinnock was never a true labour man either, and the labour party lost it's way a bit. He never even supported the miners. And whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

As for more recent times, Milliband is probably a nice enough fella, but really, labour with him at the helm was never an effective opposition party, so it made labour a waste of time, and even worse, it left the way oopen for the conservatives to run riot and asset strip the country even more.

I think Corbyn is the only true labour (as compared to 'new labour') canditate, (and the only hope we've got, whether you realize it or not) so I'm glad he's the leader. At least he asks the right questions and he isn't corruptible (we hope)

Would that be the same socialist Scargill who is being investigated by his own union for exercising the Thatcher introduced right to buy on his union funded flat in the Barbican?

Thatcher the milk snatcher? The truth is out there somewhere.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2010/08/09/name-the-milk-snatchers/

Kinnock did support the miners. What Kinnock realised and accepted was that the market for deep mined coal was disappearing. He didn't want the all-out war that Scargill and his cronies went for, he wanted a dignified withdrawal. After all, Labour closed more pits than the Conservatives, something that the left are always in denial about and Kinnock didn't want reminding of.
Proper Labour hypocrite is Kinnock - and fatty Prescott. The former vowed to close down the House of Lords, the latter continuously moaning how they kept wrecking Labour's plans.
Both of them couldn't get that ermine coat on quickly enough when it was offered.
Strange how we never heard hardly a peep from the left when the last three tin mines in Cornwall closed in the 1990s.
Strange how we heard hardly a peep from the left when the fishing fleet was decimated.
The Conservatives putting people into the Labour NEC? Wow, that really is a classic conspiracy theory. What size is your tinfoil hat?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Incidentally, Labour has now taken action - and been investigating instances of online abuse - although as far as I'm aware this is without Corbyn's involvement or explicit support. I think this action has been lead instigated by the NEC.

The "abuse" issue has been massively over-egged, and I say that as someone who really isn't in favour of Corbyn. It's mostly people on Twitter with a potty mouth, it's nothing more suspicious than that, and it's certainly not on a scale of what UKIP councillors- never mind their supporters- come out with.

The person whining most about "anti-semitism" appears to be Paul Staines, the Irish tax exile behind the Guido Fawkes website, who has numerous drink-driving convictions, among other things. Staines, a Conservative supporter, didn't seem to have the same issues with the former MP Aiden Burley going to a party dressed as an SS officer...

 

[DarloRich]

No it isn't. Don't be daft. At least if you'r going to say stuff like that, back it up with actual reasons, not just throwaway insults.

Your suggestion is so manifestly silly as to deserve a throwaway comment. You cant honestly believe that your statement is true. Surely?

What you are suggesting is that somewhere deep with the "establishment" bunker the Illuminati ( or whoever) were so threatened by the Labour party that decided to send their own sleeper agents deep under cover to subvert both a political party and the democratic process for their own ( unclear) ends.

To do that, in the timescale you suggests, means these dedicated sleeper agents must have been in position since at least the late 70's or early 80's meaning they were recruited/brainwashed by the Tory lizard men and indoctrinated as capitalist agents at an early age. There must also have been a well developed command and control system to ensure these agents, once activated, followed the agreed plan. Luckily for us you were able to decipher this nefarious work by the evil free marketeers and bring it to our attention. How deluded we were :roll:

You do overlook the fact that for much of the time it would have taken to put these deep cover agents into position the Labour party hardly troubled the electoral scorers and was perfectly capable of keeping itself out of power

Pass me the tin foil..................

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

That's not the same thing and you know it. Are you for or against deselection of Mp's who dare to criticise Saint Jeremy?

I know the difference between them thanks. The issue is that Momentum will be the means by which the other crackpots and fellow travelers get back into the party.

TUSC, SWP, Left Unity,SP & AWL are, seemingly, all friends of Momentum. With friends like those................

I believe that the constituency party, who selected the MP in the first place, has the right to de-select the MP or candidate if they feel it necessary. (as allowed in the rule book) That is democracy. Being an MP is not a sinecure. All parties should have this option, and all parties can and do exercise it. I don't know how this will pan out, but I can see that those MPs who have been totally disrespectful to the leadership in the media and elsewhere should be held to account by their constituency party. They may, of course, be able to convince them that they have acted honourably, so be it. ( and before you say that Jeremy Corbyn and his allies were serial rebels, my take on that is that they voted against some of New Labour's policies in Parliament....they didn't fill the right-wing press with their critique of New Labour's leaders, as many of today's lot are doing. They should be concentrating on the Tories.)

Have you read what Peter Kilfoyle has said?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Isn't that obvious?

Go on then. Which "socialist" party (obviously not the Labour Party) do you think the writer of the post was referring to in the time period of his posting?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Er, how about the labour party.? That's meant to have it's roots in socialism.

I refer you to the last three elected Labour Governments which did tend to move with the times and away from the arcane dogma espousement of eons ago to be a political party ready to accept the challenges faced in the start period of the 21st century,

We all saw what happened to the Warsaw Pact countries and their blind adherence to outdated socialist dogma.

 

[DarloRich]

I believe that the constituency party, who selected the MP in the first place, has the right to de-select the MP or candidate if they feel it necessary. (as allowed in the rule book) That is democracy. Being an MP is not a sinecure. All parties should have this option, and all parties can and do exercise it. I don't know how this will pan out, but I can see that those MPs who have been totally disrespectful to the leadership in the media and elsewhere should be held to account by their constituency party. They may, of course, be able to convince them that they have acted honourably, so be it. ( and before you say that Jeremy Corbyn and his allies were serial rebels, my take on that is that they voted against some of New Labour's policies in Parliament....they didn't fill the right-wing press with their critique of New Labour's leaders, as many of today's lot are doing. They should be concentrating on the Tories.)

That isn't what the £3 army want and you know it. They want recall on demand and the removal of anyone who voices dissent. In any event Appendix 3 of the Labour party rules don't quite say what you think they do.

Moment types want to be able to trigger vote in the CLP ( which they or their chums will control) on demand to remove a sitting MP on trumped up charges, replace them with a stooge and then lose the by election this will create. It is lunacy, especially when we are so far behind in the polls.

BTW I see you think disloyalty is OK as long as it is only in parliament and so long as it is only against the red tory Blairite clique that is new labour. However, any disloyalty to Corbyn ( the current leader) is a heinous crime. Hypocrisy rules. :roll:

I guess we should overlook the legion disloyalty of Corbyn & co and their support for many less than civilised groups around the world.

Have you read what Peter Kilfoyle has said?

In the Guardian? I read it. i think he was charitable to Momentum who I feel are out to create a party within a party and take control of the apparatus of the current party for their own ends. While they might not be wrong uns ( i am unsure as yet) they will very quickly allow all the other parasitical fellow travelers back into the party. They ARE wrong uns.

With people like this in charge of our party the ability to combat the inequalities in society will be lost for a generation. That is the truly sickening thing behind all this. The people the momentum types say they are trying to help will be utterly defenseless against the Tory party as the party who should protect them will be a toothless and un electable party formed of a rump of dogmatic loony lefties with little connection to the real world.

That is what angers me most - the casual rejection of any chance of ever fixing the problems in society in favour of a nice warm comradely talking shop.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

That isn't what the £3 army want and you know it. They want recall on demand and the removal of anyone who voices dissent. In any event Appendix 3 of the Labour party rules don't quite say what you think they do.

Moment types want to be able to trigger vote in the CLP ( which they or their chums will control) on demand to remove a sitting MP on trumped up charges, replace them with a stooge and then lose the by election this will create. It is lunacy, especially when we are so far behind in the polls.

BTW I see you think disloyalty is OK as long as it is only in parliament and so long as it is only against the red tory Blairite clique that is new labour. However, any disloyalty to Corbyn ( the current leader) is a heinous crime. Hypocrisy rules. :roll:

I guess we should overlook the legion disloyalty of Corbyn & co and their support for many less than civilised groups around the world.
.

That isn't what I said! For clarity, the Constituency party should have the right to request that the sitting MP (or candidate) explain their actions. I'm not talking about 'the £3 army' Momentum or anyone else that you care to bring up, that is my view and I believe that is what democracy is all about! It applies to all! You know that in the past many Labour constituencies were stitched up by the MP and a small coterie of supporters/officials, and all kinds of shenanigans went on...it's certainly one of the reasons why Plaid Cymru made advances in the valleys.
It's democracy...and if Jeremy Corbyn's or Dennis Skinner's constiuency party wished to question them about their actions in New Labour years...well, fine by me!

 

[AlterEgo]

The tories are in disarray? Nope. The majority (euroskeptics) are getting what they want and the minority will live with it as they have a strong leader. The Tories are more united now than at any time in the last 6 years.

Labour on the other hand are a basket case.

This is the 80s all over again. I am waiting for the new gang of 4

The fact you think the Tories are united says it all!

It was their own paranoia about UKIP, and some medium/high profile defections, that forced Cameron to promise a referendum in the first place.

 

[backontrack]

The fact you think the Tories are united says it all!

It was their own paranoia about UKIP, and some medium/high profile defections, that forced Cameron to promise a referendum in the first place.

But they're more united now than they've been under Cameron. That was his point.

 

[AlterEgo]

No it isn't. Don't be daft. At least if you'r going to say stuff like that, back it up with actual reasons, not just throwaway insults.

Yes, Blair was such a Tory, wasn't he?

What Tory would have:

1) Instituted the minimum wage
2) Double funding for every school child
3) Devolved power to Scotland and Wales
4) Seen through the Good Friday Agreement
5) Introduced paternity leave
6) Introduced the EHRC
7) Scrapped Section 28
8) Banned fox hunting
9) Passed New Deal legislation
10) Doubled overseas aid

...?

I could go on and on and on. I am no Blair fanboy. Old Labour he was not, but he was not a Tory either.

The Tories infiltrating the PLP so they'd keep pulling the strings of power - pull the other one.

 

[DarloRich]

That isn't what I said! For clarity, the Constituency party should have the right to request that the sitting MP (or candidate) explain their actions. I'm not talking about 'the £3 army' Momentum or anyone else that you care to bring up, that is my view and I believe that is what democracy is all about! It applies to all! You know that in the past many Labour constituencies were stitched up by the MP and a small coterie of supporters/officials, and all kinds of shenanigans went on...it's certainly one of the reasons why Plaid Cymru made advances in the valleys.
It's democracy...and if Jeremy Corbyn's or Dennis Skinner's constiuency party wished to question them about their actions in New Labour years...well, fine by me!

I don't have an issue with that as long as the party CLP is run by sensible people who understand the political game, have the same (general) views as the MP and are committed to securing victory. That will not happen with a momentum led CLP. After all winning doesn't matter to Momentum. Well it matters to me.

BTW that "stitch up" you speak of is exactly what Momentum want only by favoring their candidates. Another case of Corbyinan hypocrisy eh?

 

[AlterEgo]

But they're more united now than they've been under Cameron. That was his point.

No, they simply appear more united.

May is a temporary PM. Watch closely as the next election approaches.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Whatever you might think or say about Scargill, he was more of a socialist than Kinnock. Shame he didn't lead the party.

To be fair to the matter that you raise about Arthur Scargill, I have sat back and considered him as the leader of a political party.

Unfortunately, the only image this conjures up is the role played by Robespierre and the Jacobins and the subsequent Reign of Terror...

 

[Tetchytyke]

But they're more united now than they've been under Cameron. That was his point.

Nah, give it time. For now everything is happy-clappy, but just wait until the Eurosceptics realise May isn't cautiously not showing her Brexit hand but, rather, simply has no intention of carrying out Brexit. It'll be open warfare.

 

[backontrack]

No, they simply appear more united.

May is a temporary PM. Watch closely as the next election approaches.

Then who do you think will be next?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Nah, give it time. For now everything is happy-clappy, but just wait until the Eurosceptics realise May isn't cautiously not showing her Brexit hand but, rather, simply has no intention of carrying out Brexit. It'll be open warfare.

In Johnson, Davis & Fox, she has MPs that can mess up Brexit without giving her any of the blame.

 

[AlterEgo]

Then who do you think will be next?

I have no idea. It could be anyone, couldn't it? That's exactly the point. Lots of opportunity there for Tory MPs/ministers, who will have had 10 years of government under their belt already.

 

[RichmondCommu]

That isn't what I said! For clarity, the Constituency party should have the right to request that the sitting MP (or candidate) explain their actions.

However at the same time MP's should be able to have their own opinions on the policies of the party, just like Jeremy Corbyn had his own opinions when he was on the back benches.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

However at the same time MP's should be able to have their own opinions on the policies of the party, just like Jeremy Corbyn had his own opinions when he was on the back benches.

...and presumably Jeremy Corbyn's constituency party was happy with his opinions at the time.

 

[RichmondCommu]

...and presumably Jeremy Corbyn's constituency party was happy with his opinions at the time.

Well we have no way of knowing that! Nevertheless if it was good enough for Jeremy surely its good enough for all the other MP's.