Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 59.9 % ❤ 1.6 % :thumbsup: 6.2 % 😯 1.8 % :grinning: 22.5 % 🧥 0.9 % 🙏 2.8 % 😟 1.1 % :cry: 2.3 % :shit: 0.9 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Boiler
Posts
#592469
You may not have noticed TWA, but I don't hold Miliband in much favour either - if anything, he enabled the current mess at the top of the PLP by resigning as soon as he lost the GE in addition to the ill thought out OMOV system. Owning your sh*t is something most politicians seem reluctant to do these days; see also Cameron, D.

However, Miliband never held power; nor did he show any messianic tendencies.

I'm sure someone can say there was something good about society in the 1970s which is where JC seems to wish to dwell, but we're not there now: we're about to enter the second decade of the 21st century.
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#592513
What did happen on Ed's watch was the desperately ill-advised reaction to the Unite shenanigans in Falkirk, which brought us the three quid Trots phenomenon, which in turn gifted us Corbyn (with the help of course of several MP such as Margaret Beckett, who "lent" Corbyn their nominations for the leadership ballot in order to propagate debate, but who ultimately gifted us the utter plank we find now bed-blocking the Labour leadership. To their eternal shame - as it should be.
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#592542
I note that potential leadership candidates like Starmer and Thornberry are sidelined and conspicuous by their absence from the debates in favour of inept Corbynistas such as Long-Bailey, Burgon and Pidcock. I can think of no reason for this other than the current leadership aren't focused on winning the GE but the subsequent leadership.
Malcolm Armsteen liked this
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#592545
One of the less-mentioned aspects of the Dunning-Kruger Effect is that people affected by it are likely to misjudge the ability, intelligence and expertise of others, and to overestimate them if they are generally in favour. In other words, Pidcock et al simply do not realise how limited their pards are.
youngian, oboogie liked this
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#592551
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:16 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:08 pm
I think that would look too much like a stitch up.
Do you think that would bother them?
They'd do it, but there could be a backlash, especially if this lot have really mucked up the election.
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#592555
oboogie wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:48 pm
I note that potential leadership candidates like Starmer and Thornberry are sidelined and conspicuous by their absence from the debates in favour of inept Corbynistas such as Long-Bailey, Burgon and Pidcock. I can think of no reason for this other than the current leadership aren't focused on winning the GE but the subsequent leadership.
It makes sense to play down London Remainers and I doubt Starmer and Thornberry needed much persuading not to have their dabs on this election. I lean towards the Dunning-Kruger theory. The clots mentioned above are seen as talented rising stars by Team Corbyn.
 
By crabcakes_windermere
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#592603
The Weeping Angel wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:42 pm
Even if Corbyn stands down, the contest will be fixed for his chosen successor.

That could, however, backfire. Put Longshot-Bailey in the public eye, and her awfulness would rapidly become apparent. Plus McDonnell is more ruthless and less daft than Corbyn - once he's in, even if temporary, I could see him changing his mind over the best way forward and also relieving a few people of their current roles...
  • 1
  • 832
  • 833
  • 834
  • 835
  • 836
  • 885
The Tories, Generally

I can't think of any other politician whose repu[…]

Priti Patel

Gammon with crushed nuts? Edit: :D https://[…]

Roll Call

Where they do that come dancing? The sequined[…]

Boris Johnson

"Fantastic year" obviously defined as &q[…]