Jeremy Corbyn

[FairwayDodger]

I think some on both sides are determined only to hear what they want to hear.

For my part, what he's saying now seems fairly reasonable. I have no recollection of what he may have said or done 30-odd years ago but I keep an open mind. There are lots of allegations flying around here I guess there might be some basis of truth in some of them. Others are clearly being twisted to suit an agenda.

I'm not a fan, I wish he wasn't the labour leader as I think he hurts their chances but that alone wouldn't influence my vote.

 

[Old Skier]

I think some on both sides are determined only to hear what they want to hear.

For my part, what he's saying now seems fairly reasonable. I have no recollection of what he may have said or done 30-odd years ago but I keep an open mind. There are lots of allegations flying around here I guess there might be some basis of truth in some of them. Others are clearly being twisted to suit an agenda.

I'm not a fan, I wish he wasn't the labour leader as I think he hurts their chances but that alone wouldn't influence my vote.

His statement to the BBC was a clear indication that he felt SF were fair game in NI. First he tried to cover his talks with the IRA by suggesting he was involved in the peace process, then he claimed he never met with the IRA which was contradicted by Abbot in less than 2 hours.

His pure hatred of those that Parliament sent to try and maintain the rule of law beggars belief.

Perhaps one or two of us on here may seem to be abit OTT when this mans name pops up but I can assure you, I, and the others, may have good reason to.

Untill Labour Party kick this man out of the party I and many who I know will never vote for them again.

 

[Old Skier]

Adams and McGuiness were elected UK MP's and have shaken the Queens hand.

Unfortunatly if you look back over time she has had to shake hands with many undesirables. I suspect history, like geography isn't one of your strong points.

 

[Hobbit]

Did I completely make it up, or did he not unequivocally condemn both sides of the Troubles? How do you reconcile that with not condemning one of them?

He didn't condemn them, he said "I didn't support them." He also said he didn't meet with the IRA yet there is a long list of IRA members he met, including taking one of them(McLachlin?) into the HoC 2 weeks after the Brighton bombing.

That list was quoted to Diane Abbott earlier today in a radio interview. During that interview Abbott was asked why she, Corbyn and McDonnell refused to back a Bill outlawing Al Quaeda as they rose to power. That showed great judgement didn't it?

He also said in the Andrew Neil interview that he hasn't changed his mind on NATO being a Frankenstein. With a shrinking defence force he wants to alienate NATO? He did say if NATO were called to arms he might not support it.

He's soft on national security and he's an apologist for terror organisations.

 

[FairwayDodger]

His statement to the BBC was a clear indication that he felt SF were fair game in NI. First he tried to cover his talks with the IRA by suggesting he was involved in the peace process, then he claimed he never met with the IRA which was contradicted by Abbot in less than 2 hours.

His pure hatred of those that Parliament sent to try and maintain the rule of law beggars belief.

Perhaps one or two of us on here may seem to be abit OTT when this mans name pops up but I can assure you, I, and the others, may have good reason to.

Untill Labour Party kick this man out of the party I and many who I know will never vote for them again.

Problem is you and the others make no bones about how much you hate him, you cite numerous incidents but you have an agenda so a neutral reader can't take anything you say on the subject at face value. I'm not saying "show us a link" but I'd be interested in reading more about those times from a reliable source.

 

[Hobbit]

Problem is you and the others make no bones about how much you hate him, you cite numerous incidents but you have an agenda so a neutral reader can't take anything you say on the subject at face value. I'm not saying "show us a link" but I'd be interested in reading more about those times from a reliable source.

I don't hate him. I like his passion and, at times his honesty, albeit backhanded by refusing deny comments he made in the past. However, I very definitely don't like his far left politics.

Bring back David Milliband and Andy Burnham et al, and I'll vote Labour every day and twice on Sunday.

 

[User62651]

For me whatever Corbyn has or hasnt done or said or not said in the past wrt British Imperialsim and his view of not liking it, they are or were his views, as we all know it has been a very divisive issue. Bottom line is May is going to win on 8th June but a strong opposition is more important than ever given the ineptitude and far right views of this leader and government so Corbyn has to get seats for Labour, the smaller May's majority the better for some temperance to the worst of Tory extremities. As long as cocky May's wings are clipped and Brexit is given the full parliamentary examination and consideration it needs as the process goes forward then that's a good thing. Giving May a free hand moving forward would be a terrible thing........... weak and wobbly etc etc

 

[Old Skier]

Problem is you and the others make no bones about how much you hate him, you cite numerous incidents but you have an agenda so a neutral reader can't take anything you say on the subject at face value. I'm not saying "show us a link" but I'd be interested in reading more about those times from a reliable source.

The man has lied, I may have an agenda but you would have heard his lies on Andrew Neil when he changed his story about only meeting those in the IRA to forward the peace process to "I've never met with the IRA" His contempt for those SF that went to NI is currently available on the BBC site and the Abbot interview is available on the tinternet.

So yes I have a personal agenda but all of his flip flopping is available to anyone who genuinly is interested on the BBC and genuine sites. You never know, our blogger might put it on his wings site.

 

[Hobbit]

For me whatever Corbyn has or hasnt done or said or not said in the past wrt British Imperialsim and his view of not liking it, they are or were his views, as we all know it has been a very divisive issue. Bottom line is May is going to win on 8th June but a strong opposition is more important than ever given the ineptitude and far right views of this leader and government so Corbyn has to get seats for Labour, the smaller May's majority the better for some temperance to the worst of Tory extremities. As long as cocky May's wings are clipped and Brexit is given the full parliamentary examination and consideration it needs as the process goes forward then that's a good thing. Giving May a free hand moving forward would be a terrible thing........... weak and wobbly etc etc

I don't disagree with any of that but having Corbyn as leader of the opposition just helps the Tories. Nicola Sturgeon is a more accomplished politician than Corbyn, and she'd definitely not on my Christmas card list.

There are any number of quotes from the current top 3 in Labour that send shivers down my spine. Enough to get a really good feel for how they will direct a Cabinet.

 

[User62651]

I don't disagree with any of that but having Corbyn as leader of the opposition just helps the Tories. Nicola Sturgeon is a more accomplished politician than Corbyn, and she'd definitely not on my Christmas card list.

There are any number of quotes from the current top 3 in Labour that send shivers down my spine. Enough to get a really good feel for how they will direct a Cabinet.

I agree leadership on all sides isn't great at the mo hence need some balance at least.
Re Corbyn for whatever reason he has handsomely won 2 labour leadership processes knocking out guys like Burnham with ease, to be frank from being a figure of almost ridicule he has risen above it, been a breath of fresh air in many ways and come out with a decent manifesto. He has a common touch that many have warmed to, even if they secretly think he's a bit of a liability, but disdain for May is so high (she's got the Thatchers about her) with a lot of people they will look past his faults I think.

I feel we're all coming together on here:clap:

 

[SocketRocket]

I agree leadership on all sides isn't great at the mo hence need some balance at least.
Re Corbyn for whatever reason he has handsomely won 2 labour leadership processes knocking out guys like Burnham with ease, to be frank from being a figure of almost ridicule he has risen above it, been a breath of fresh air in many ways and come out with a decent manifesto. He has a common touch that many have warmed to, even if they secretly think he's a bit of a liability, but disdain for May is so high (she's got the Thatchers about her) with a lot of people they will look past his faults I think.

I feel we're all coming together on here:clap:

Glad you are seeing the light :thup:

 

[Hobbit]

I agree leadership on all sides isn't great at the mo hence need some balance at least.
Re Corbyn for whatever reason he has handsomely won 2 labour leadership processes knocking out guys like Burnham with ease, to be frank from being a figure of almost ridicule he has risen above it, been a breath of fresh air in many ways and come out with a decent manifesto. He has a common touch that many have warmed to, even if they secretly think he's a bit of a liability, but disdain for May is so high (she's got the Thatchers about her) with a lot of people they will look past his faults I think.

I feel we're all coming together on here:clap:

But in terms of credibility as a leader May is still way out in front on 55%, with Corbyn miles away he's not even in the same street.

Everyone makes a big thing about Labour's membership being at an all time high of 520,000. The Tories is only 150,000 yet they're miles ahead in the polls. That clearly suggests that having a large % of the membership voting for him hides the fact he's unelectable as a PM.

 

[larmen]

In 2005 a certain Angela Merkel seemed very unelectible in Germany. And even after the general election, when Schroeder lost the election against her, he said that she will never be chancellor of Germany. So why not Corbyn as well.

 

[FairwayDodger]

But in terms of credibility as a leader May is still way out in front on 55%, with Corbyn miles away he's not even in the same street.

Everyone makes a big thing about Labour's membership being at an all time high of 520,000. The Tories is only 150,000 yet they're miles ahead in the polls. That clearly suggests that having a large % of the membership voting for him hides the fact he's unelectable as a PM.

I disagree. When she called the election, despicable policies aside, I thought May was a much better potential pm than Corbyn and it was the work of an evil genius that would bury the Labour Party for years. Instead she's been revealed as unprincipled, inept and incapable. For all his faults JC now seems much better option than her. A complete own goal on her part.

 

[SocketRocket]

He will crucify Labour in the election. When people stand with their pencil poised they will turn away from Labour in their drones. Will Labour learn the lesson, I think they will have to ditch him pretty quick after.

 

[FairwayDodger]

He will crucify Labour in the election. When people stand with their pencil poised they will turn away from Labour in their drones. Will Labour learn the lesson, I think they will have to ditch him pretty quick after.

Funny as it would be for TM to end up with a smaller majority it could be the worst thing for labour in the long run if it means JC is able to hang on. Trouble is I'm not sure he would walk away even after a big defeat.

 

[Foxholer]

Funny as it would be for TM to end up with a smaller majority it could be the worst thing for labour in the long run if it means JC is able to hang on. Trouble is I'm not sure he would walk away even after a big defeat.

To me, Labour's JC problem is that their (520k+) members don't see things the same way as the Parliamentary arm - and in their attempt to make themselves 'more democratic' they made themselves unelectable!

JC certainly seems to reflect the 'better society' views/hopes/aspirations of party members. But, like it or not, UK politics is very 'presidential', where it's The Leader that is the focus of comparison. JC seems very much a weaker choice for anyone in that huge 'uncommitted' area! I'm sure he's just as capable as May, but UK seems to want far more pushy leaders - at least up to a point! Labour's parliamentary wing know this, but are, at least currently, impotent to change the rules!

That's not to say May is actually any good either! It seems to me that her attitude is too far the other way!

Still, I believe she'll get 'her' increased majority - and the Brexit process will be smoother because of it!

 

[FairwayDodger]

The main thing we've learned over the last few weeks is that May has flattered to deceive and is certainly not capable of providing the strong and stable leadership of which she so oft boasts.

 

[SocketRocket]

To me, Labour's JC problem is that their (520k+) members don't see things the same way as the Parliamentary arm - and in their attempt to make themselves 'more democratic' they made themselves unelectable!

JC certainly seems to reflect the 'better society' views/hopes/aspirations of party members. But, like it or not, UK politics is very 'presidential', where it's The Leader that is the focus of comparison. JC seems very much a weaker choice for anyone in that huge 'uncommitted' area! I'm sure he's just as capable as May, but UK seems to want far more pushy leaders - at least up to a point! Labour's parliamentary wing know this, but are, at least currently, impotent to change the rules!

That's not to say May is actually any good either! It seems to me that her attitude is too far the other way!

Still, I believe she'll get 'her' increased majority - and the Brexit process will be smoother because of it!

I agree with that

 

[Hobbit]

The main thing we've learned over the last few weeks is that May has flattered to deceive and is certainly not capable of providing the strong and stable leadership of which she so oft boasts.

I'm neither sure I agree nor disagree with that. More worrying, for me, is that behind May is a large political organisation that should run as a well oiled machine, including creating a manifesto that would not cause the furore we've seen in the last 2 weeks. To produce something so out of touch with the electorate is just plain ignorant, and maybe arrogant.

Is it that the country is in that much of a mess that it needs a radically painful manifesto? That would suggest that 7 years of Tory governance hasn't worked. But we could go back to a (Labour) party that would bankrupt the country again...

What a sad choice, a Tory party that has no real comforting answer for the social needs of the electorate, or a Labour party that WILL turn the UK economy into a pale shadow of the Greek economy.

At least I now get the opportunity to vote SNP, and independence.