Jeremy Corbyn

[Deleted member 16999]

I'm really struggling here to see what your point is ?

It is laughable but that's because of the MP's - that's because the people who voted in the leadership campaign voted in someone who is unable to unite the party and is so far behind the times he would struggle in the 60's.

Corbyn won't be able to get a grip because he hasn't got that ability or know how to see that he needs to change.

Labour are at the moment unelectable

My point Phil, the Labour membership had the chance to elect a leader, they have put there faith in Corbyn (rightly or wrongly) If the MP's are now stamping their feet it shows a complete lack of respect to the members who voted for him, if they are not happy they should be doing their business in private through correct procedures. All the problems are being labelled at Corbyn, there are more than him at fault and actually if you look closely at him, he's not changed because he's suddenly become leader.
Totally agree it's a shambles and totally unelectable.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Think about what Corbyn has done since becoming Labour leader. He's ploughed his own furrow, being his own man and pushing the far left's dogma. Cameron supported party policy, promoted party policy and listened to the party. that is how to unite a party. Not hard to see why so many Labour MP's don't support him, and its understandable why they are not cuddling up to him.

I like many of the guy's social policies, and I think he speaks really well in that area. But his foriegn policy is way too far left to find traction with the electorate or his own party.

Not disagreeing with anything you say, apart from this has always been Corbyn, and the MP's should not, in my opinion be so publicly vocal, basically they're saying they know better than the Labour members, maybe the mebers want to go backwards in there opposition, crazy yes! bu they can reap what they've sown.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

My point Phil, the Labour membership had the chance to elect a leader, they have put there faith in Corbyn (rightly or wrongly) If the MP's are now stamping their feet it shows a complete lack of respect to the members who voted for him, if they are not happy they should be doing their business in private through correct procedures. All the problems are being labelled at Corbyn, there are more than him at fault and actually if you look closely at him, he's not changed because he's suddenly become leader.
Totally agree it's a shambles and totally unelectable.

Again are the MP's supposed to go with what 200,000 want or their 9 million voters - it's quiet clear a good majority of MP's didn't want him as leader and each day goes by its seems it's clear why

Just because he was voted in by a small percentage of labour supporters ( around 5% ) doesn't mean they have to sit back and follow him blindly

What exactly is the correct procedure you speak off ? It's politics - it's always played out in the open

The blame for labour isn't just with Corbyn and I don't recall anyone saying it is

The blame lays with the people who voted for him - I'm not sure exactly what their thinking was because they caused their party to be unelectable even with the GE not until 2020

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Possibly Labour may look at how they elect future leaders, How much should the members (often die hard supporters and campaigners) views be taken into account , How much influence should the unions have?

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter which party you discuss, but If the party leader does not have the support of a good majority of that parties MP's , then that leader is not going to be a happy bunny.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Possibly Labour may look at how they elect future leaders, How much should the members (often die hard supporters and campaigners) views be taken into account , How much influence should the unions have?

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter which party you discuss, but If the party leader does not have the support of a good majority of that parties MP's , then that leader is not going to be a happy bunny.

Good point well made. I think the labour leadership battle highlighted that the process and the union vote may possibly be a little out of date. Whether it's right or wrong, they are where they are having got Corbyn into office. However as time goes on, if the party's MP's don't support him fully, Labour is going to be splintered and that cannot bode well when it transfers into votes and seats at the next election

 

[Tashyboy]

So red ken has to apologise, and eventually after political pressure and originally stating he wont, he does.

He was put into a position by Mr Corbyn as co chair of the defence review. Nowt wrong there. MR Livingstone is anti nuke, I don't have issue with that. The other co chair Maria Eagle is pro nuke. I don't have issue with that either.

What I do have issue with is that Mr Corbyn out of common decency did not consult with Ms Eagle, who is said to be livid re Mr livingstones appointment. Yup I know where she is coming from. Now I would like to think that you might of got a balanced review of our defence from labour, with them two co chairing. Not a cat in hells chance. They are both a million miles apart in there policy. Where's the thinking in that.

At this moment in time, Defence of this country is paramount in most people's thoughts and Mr Corbyn is once more making a pigs ear in the leading of his party.

 

[Old Skier]

Corbyn has spent his whole political career going against his party policies where it mattered, he was always a maverick along with the likes of Livingstone. He's now got a real problem as the majority of his MPs are the Mavericks and he has no answer to it.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Again are the MP's supposed to go with what 200,000 want or their 9 million voters - it's quiet clear a good majority of MP's didn't want him as leader and each day goes by its seems it's clear why

Just because he was voted in by a small percentage of labour supporters ( around 5% ) doesn't mean they have to sit back and follow him blindly

What exactly is the correct procedure you speak off ? It's politics - it's always played out in the open

The blame for labour isn't just with Corbyn and I don't recall anyone saying it is

The blame lays with the people who voted for him - I'm not sure exactly what their thinking was because they caused their party to be unelectable even with the GE not until 2020

You keep mentioning 9 million voters, it's irrelevant, he wasn't the leader, it's the next GE we will see his impact, if he is or is not still the leader, so Labour is a democratic party and your saying if MP's don't agree with those who vote they can ignore it! Not very democratic in my opinion.

 

[ColchesterFC]

You keep mentioning 9 million voters, it's irrelevant, he wasn't the leader, it's the next GE we will see his impact, if he is or is not still the leader, so Labour is a democratic party and your saying if MP's don't agree with those who vote they can ignore it! Not very democratic in my opinion.

Playing devil's advocate here but what if those MP's that are going against Jeremy Corbyn have been told by their constituents that they don't agree with Corbyn's policies? Surely in that case they are doing what they were elected to do and that is to represent their constituencies.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Possibly Labour may look at how they elect future leaders, How much should the members (often die hard supporters and campaigners) views be taken into account , How much influence should the unions have?

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter which party you discuss, but If the party leader does not have the support of a good majority of that parties MP's , then that leader is not going to be a happy bunny.

Unions didn't have a block vote in this leadership campaign, it was changed from previous years to ome man one vote. None of the final 4 candidates had a majority of MP's backing them, Andy Burnham had the most with 68, Corbyn had 52 and I think the others were in the 20's, 3 were seen as similar to Miliband and each other, none of them would back down and lend their support to each other which meant it was stick to Miliband/Blair or vote left wing,

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You keep mentioning 9 million voters, it's irrelevant, he wasn't the leader, it's the next GE we will see his impact, if he is or is not still the leader, so Labour is a democratic party and your saying if MP's don't agree with those who vote they can ignore it! Not very democratic in my opinion.

Of course the 9 mil is relevant - that's how many people voted labour - that's how many supported the Labour Party not just the 400 thousand that voted for a leader. You are getting hung up on a small percentage

Again do you expect the MP's to follow him even when they don't agree with his policies ? Or do you expect them to show they are able to think for themselves and protect their constituency ?

Make your mind on what path you believe the MP's should follow because it appears you are mixing yourself up

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Of course the 9 mil is relevant - that's how many people voted labour - that's how many supported the Labour Party not just the 400 thousand that voted for a leader. You are getting hung up on a small percentage

Again do you expect the MP's to follow him even when they don't agree with his policies ? Or do you expect them to show they are able to think for themselves and protect their constituency ?

Make your mind on what path you believe the MP's should follow because it appears you are mixing yourself up

No I'm not getting mixed up, 9 million people did not vote with Corbyn in mind they voted on Miliband and his policies, are you saying Labour should've sent a letter to the 9 million and ask their opinion?
As for MP's they should be showing a united front and addressing any concerns about Corbyn to the Labour Party Chief Whip.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Playing devil's advocate here but what if those MP's that are going against Jeremy Corbyn have been told by their constituents that they don't agree with Corbyn's policies? Surely in that case they are doing what they were elected to do and that is to represent their constituencies.

Absolutely they should represent their constituents, but there is an expected way to behave and what if it works the other way, they might not support Corbyn but the constituents do, should the MP shut up and support him?

 

[Foxholer]

Playing devil's advocate here but what if those MP's that are going against Jeremy Corbyn have been told by their constituents that they don't agree with Corbyn's policies? Surely in that case they are doing what they were elected to do and that is to represent their constituencies.

An extremely rare/unlikely event!

As for the 9 mill vs a couple of hundred thousand....Cameron was elected leder on even less, but has united his party.

Corbyn's job is to unite his and get more than the 9 mill to vote for him - that was what he was elected to do, irrespective of how many actually voted for him! That's how democracy works (in UK). Cameron and the Conservatives are running the country because they won more seats, not because a majority of eligible voters voted for them!

 

[MegaSteve]

Think this thread kind of indicates there are far too many folk basing their vote on the colour of the rosette rather than the quality of the person wearing it... No surprise then we always get dross government...

 

[freddielong]

It does make the Labour party appear weak and pathetic if they cannot organise a leadership vote were they get a leader that they actually want, how can they run the country.

 

[Hobbit]

Possibly Labour may look at how they elect future leaders, How much should the members (often die hard supporters and campaigners) views be taken into account , How much influence should the unions have?

At the end of the day, it doesnt matter which party you discuss, but If the party leader does not have the support of a good majority of that parties MP's , then that leader is not going to be a happy bunny.

It does make the Labour party appear weak and pathetic if they cannot organise a leadership vote were they get a leader that they actually want, how can they run the country.

Is the right answer. Ed Milliband's election surprised many, and Corbyn's election more so. The 'experts' in parliament, i.e. the MP's, are almost sidelined in the leadership selection process by a system that places too much sway with those that don't necessarily understand party politics.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It does make the Labour party appear weak and pathetic if they cannot organise a leadership vote were they get a leader that they actually want, how can they run the country.

63% of the Country didn't vote for a conservative to lead the country, so the country must be weak and pathetic by your logic, the issue isn't the vote, it's the man.
Foxholer got it correct!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Is the right answer. Ed Milliband's election surprised many, and Corbyn's election more so. The 'experts' in parliament, i.e. the MP's, are almost sidelined in the leadership selection process by a system that places too much sway with those that don't necessarily understand party politics.

Sorry Brian but not factually correct, Milliband actually increased Labours vote from 2010, it was the impact of the SNP and the demise of Liberals that made the last election so different. To simply blame the voter because MP's are behaving petulant is a bit unfair.

 

[Hobbit]

Sorry Brian but not factually correct, Milliband actually increased Labours vote from 2010, it was the impact of the SNP and the demise of Liberals that made the last election so different. To simply blame the voter because MP's are behaving petulant is a bit unfair.

That's playing with numbers though. That's like saying scoring 4 out of 10 is way better than 2 out of 10. Doubled your score but still failed. In 2010 the Tories needed a Coalition. Labour did so well with the increased vote they lost all but one seat in Scotland, and ended up even further from being elected..

I'm not blaming anyone. What I am saying is the MP's understand how parliament works way better than those that voted for Corbyn. That's like us on here voting to oust Hodgson from the England job coz we don't like him yet he's qualified for the Euro's with 8 wins out of 8. As for the MP's being petulant; I don't think they are. They are being very Labour. They have always been more open and honest than the dodgy handshake in dark corners party. And just maybe they recognise they are unelectable with Corbyn in charge, and want him to either play ball with all the party or go.