What no jeremy cobyn thread?

rjbell said:
Its ideology driving the government not the deficit. Thsts just a convenient excuse.

I wasn't referring to the deficit when I said burdening the young.
Click to expand...

Surely ideology drives all parties? Corbyns ideology will drive labour if he wins!
 
Yves Geza said:
85% of the £3 associates, apparently.

So let's talk realpolitik, Hugh! Will you be tempted to vote for Tom Watson for Prime Minister in 2020? ;)
Click to expand...


Possibly not....but locally labour consistently come 3rd so they never bother fielding a credible local candidate for my mp either
 
boyfalldown said:
Blimey, that was a very convincing victory
Click to expand...
crofter said:
Excellent,the labour party comedy show goes on.
Click to expand...

*Yawn* & *Stretch*
OK so did I miss anything important?

Yves Geza said:
85% of the £3 associates, apparently.
Click to expand...
Ah so JC ( interesting initials btw :D) seems to have won, next stage, bring down the government with a vote of no confidence
( well it seems that half the conservatives voted for him)
1) Coalition formed with UKIP
2) All the countries ills are ended in one foul [sic] swoop. :thumbs:
 
I hope I'm wrong but I see this as a sad day for the Labour party.

If the public vote for this buffoon and he gets into No.10 I predict interesting times.

PS. On the news at the moment they're talking about refugees and of course JC is all for them and he should be as some of his best buddies have been running around raping, murdering, torturing and oppressing and creating the very refugee problem JC wants solving.

Nice one JC.
 
Last edited:
Labour is dead. In fact it died a long time ago but now it's truly buried. Happy days.
 
rjbell said:
Typical baby boomer comment.

Thanks to the socialist government in the 40s, were lucky enough to have the best social mobility in history, and enjoyed everything that brought, but no one handed them anything. Then vote away all the policies that got them where they are in the first place. Burden the young to protect their wealth.
Click to expand...

Baby boomer comment? Care to expand or just make facile comments like that?

I was born in 1961 and set out to get a job at a time when being able to do so was by no means easy and I've lived and worked through boom and bust. During my working years I worked hard when many were more than willing not to and I see plenty not willing to try harder to support themselves today.

When working 14 hours a day 7 days a week it's a bit of a killer when others don't try as hard as they could and when seeing people in real need it's a bit of a killer to see people who could be giving taking instead. As I said in an earlier post every penny that's given to someone who could be doing more to look after themselves is a penny less for those in genuine need.

Socialism and wider do gooding has to be done in the real world not in some fantasy land where vague groups such as big business and the rich can always be taxed more. GIve me a just and socialist society which is sustainable over some university student union short term immature wet dream any day.
 
woof woof said:
GIve me a just and socialist society which is sustainable over some university student union short term immature wet dream any day.
Click to expand...
Quality comment Alan.........(y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mex
woof woof said:
Socialism and wider do gooding has to be done in the real world not in some fantasy land where vague groups such as big business and the rich can always be taxed more. GIve me a just and socialist society which is sustainable over some university student union short term immature wet dream any day.
Click to expand...
:thumbs: Nice one :)

We'll have to see how this ends up, one important point I take from it is that it is clear that people want something different. Straight talking, regardless (it seems?) of what is being said is being appreciated. It could be a very interesting few years.
 
rjbell said:
Typical baby boomer comment.

Thanks to the socialist government in the 40s, were lucky enough to have the best social mobility in history, and enjoyed everything that brought, but no one handed them anything. Then vote away all the policies that got them where they are in the first place. Burden the young to protect their wealth.
Click to expand...

Oh dear! That's simply naive and wrong. Perhaps that is typical of you?

My late father was an East End Grammar School boy in the 1930s who went on to be knighted. His school mates went on to win a Nobel Prize, went on to be much-published writers, went on to be scions of the Communist Party, went on to be long-standing Treasury ministers ...

He sent me to a minor Public School, one of whose old boys was the Labour Cabinet Minister who famously said "If it's the last thing I do, I'm going to destroy every f*****g grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland" and tried to! Because the Labour Party has never really wanted to diminish its client base through social mobility.

There is a glorious irony in your post though, because the greatest single diminution of the British class system did indeed come after World War II as part of a response to the National Socialist government in Germany in the 1940s, But I bet that's not what you had in mind
 
crofter said:
Trouble is the scruffy little oik will be on the news every effin day boring us to death until he gets the boot.
Click to expand...
Why is that a bad thing? He won fair and square? Surely if the majority wants him in then he should have a say?
 
This maniac is not a fan of the Armed Forces, has no idea on strategic defence and I can see major problems on the horizon for the country if this idiot gets his way.
 
This can only be a good thing for politics. Regardless of whether you agree with him or not people are actually talking about politics, a far cry from recent elections where people were saying they couldn't tell a difference between the parties.

SO what if he never gets in, surely politics isn't about winning at all costs but actually about debating (and representing) the different points of view and ultimately doing what's right for the masses?

Oh, how naive of me...
 
Nawty said:
This can only be a good thing for politics. Regardless of whether you agree with him or not people are actually talking about politics, a far cry from recent elections where people were saying they couldn't tell a difference between the parties.

SO what if he never gets in, surely politics isn't about winning at all costs but actually about debating (and representing) the different points of view and ultimately doing what's right for the masses?

Oh, how naive of me...
Click to expand...
I think you are right, and not just that but standing for your principles opposed to stand for those that may win the most votes. And funnily he wins by doing just that.

I'd like to see many more "individuals" who stand for their own views. And he may win the general election.
 
dejongj said:
Why is that a bad thing? He won fair and square? Surely if the majority wants him in then he should have a say?
Click to expand...

Which majority, though, JP?

The majority of the £3 "Twitterati" associates? Or the majority of the party faithful who have spent the last twenty years licking stamps and knocking on doors and some of whom are being abused by those new associates? Or the majority of the party's private donors? Or [most importantly] the majority of the union members who were eligable to vote and who, because of forthcoming Parliamentary legislation will soon have to opt-in to their union dues being donated to the Labour Party?

The distribution of Corbyn's 59% majority makes for a fascinating read.

We all know the old aphorism "Socialism fails when it runs out of other peoples' money to spend". This time, they've cut their own party off from funding!
 
So he's won on the anti austerity vote, and will nationalise things again. Wonder where the money will come from that, labours always left the country short on cash.

Still - anyone else put money on him to win? Thanks to this thread I had £10 at 175-1 :D Apparently if I'd been quicker I could have had 200-1.
 
Yves Geza said:
Which majority, though, JP?
Click to expand...
As I see it, as someone with no political affiliations, just the man in the street fed up with all of the self serving bastes.
Over 60% of the voters didn't want a conservative government, but got one anyway.

Corbyn, the media will tell you that many "other party" members signed up to vote because they said it would destroy Labour from the inside.
But I wonder if the average man on the street actually paid £3 and voted, because they are p***ed off the the same old same old governments, which ever colours they fly
and seeing an opportunity for a radical shake up?
 
Irrespective of what his politics are he's definitely put the cat amongst the pigeons which can only be good for politics in general - the middle of the road has been quite full for a while.

I'm looking forward to see how labour now cope and how the conservatives react.
 
Byker28i said:
So he's won on the anti austerity vote, and will nationalise things again. Wonder where the money will come from that, labours always left the country short on cash.
Click to expand...
From taxing those that have made something of themselves probably. Or maybe as he would like the Argies to have The Falklands, perhaps he will sell them back to them. I really do hope he doesn't get into power, Britain will be FUBAR.
 
Loving the first thing he does in celebration... Singing "We'll keep the red flag flying"... Took me right back to Miners Strike, British Leyland heaps, Ford Strikes, Run down and unfunded British Railways, Dock strikes, Winter of discontent, 3 day working week, power cuts and all those other lovely things the 'real' Labour Party and its uncontrolled trade unions brought us.
It makes for interesting times I suppose.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
Or maybe as he would like the Argies to have The Falklands, perhaps he will sell them back to them.
Click to expand...
I believe we have a few pieces of rock / prime real estate laying around that we could sell off (y)
 
So Corbyn wants to welcome more refugees, He also doesn't want to bomb ISIS and wants to make peace with jihadis, who does he think the refugees are trying to escape and what gives him the idea that the jihadis actually want peace? What a f***wit.
 
nilagin said:
From taxing those that have made something of themselves probably. Or maybe as he would like the Argies to have The Falklands, perhaps he will sell them back to them. I really do hope he doesn't get into power, Britain will be FUBAR.
Click to expand...

Does he really? I would be very surprised if he actually said that.
 
nilagin said:
So Corbyn wants to welcome more refugees, He also doesn't want to bomb ISIS and wants to make peace with jihadis, who does he think the refugees are trying to escape and what gives him the idea that the jihadis actually want peace? What a f***wit.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, how would you go about bombing ISIS ?
 
nilagin said:
Well you get a drone with laser targeting and missiles and take 'em out.
Click to expand...


and you would identify them as ISIS by..........??? or might you end up bombing innocent people who then end up as refugees?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Snipers are another option and so far about 200 have been taken out !
Click to expand...

Nick, 200?......... the estimated number of ISIS followers is in the hundreds of thousands, it is going to take forever and a day to do the job.
 
Well, let's see...... The snipers are actually there and have the opportunity to establish who their targets are and what they have been up to, and the drone strikes hit the correct targets who had been identified and subject to on the ground surveillance by people prepared to put their lives in danger on our behalf so those people can be removed before doing us harm, Corbin would not have allowed that and would thus allow them to carry out their own acts on UK citizens.
 
Bombing isn't the answer to the whole issue but it can be used to degrade capability. The only real answer is troops on the ground but the danger of that is to create a situation that could be exploited by ISIS as a war on Muslims which is exactly the situation they have been trying to engineer.
 
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon to warn "Labour are now a serious risk to the nation's security."
 
  • Like
Reactions: mex
Yves Geza said:
Which majority, though, JP?

The majority of the £3 "Twitterati" associates? Or the majority of the party faithful who have spent the last twenty years licking stamps and knocking on doors and some of whom are being abused by those new associates? Or the majority of the party's private donors? Or [most importantly] the majority of the union members who were eligable to vote and who, because of forthcoming Parliamentary legislation will soon have to opt-in to their union dues being donated to the Labour Party?

The distribution of Corbyn's 59% majority makes for a fascinating read.

We all know the old aphorism "Socialism fails when it runs out of other peoples' money to spend". This time, they've cut their own party off from funding!
Click to expand...
Hold on a minute, this voting mechanism was introduced with agreement by all, it is a bit rich to then complain about it if it doesn't go 'your' way. They didn't have to change their system, they choose to do that. Very similar to the arguments of the general election, people had the chance in 2011 to vote for a different system which they overwhelmingly didn't want, yet then complain about the current system when the conservatives win.

Any voting system is very simple, don't play games in nominations or in your votes, vote for who you actually support.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon to warn "Labour are now a serious risk to the nation's security."
Click to expand...

And Murdoughs enterprises will no doubt spout the same propaganda too. It seems the government are trully concerned by the appointment of Corbyn, I wonder why?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top