RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:I think that, even if you utterly despise Corbyn, you are better off supporting him here as the lesser of the two evils. Corbyn, for all his flaws, even in the absolute worst case scenario, will not do the damage to the UK that Boris is promising. Even if you think he's despicable, a win for him would be as a minority government or coalition which would temper him and, even if by some miracle he won a majority, he doesn't have autocratic control over his MPs and would have to get anything he wants to do through Parliament.

Boris, on the other hand, is in charge of a party where near all of the moderate voices have been purged, not least because he summarily removed the whip from people who dared vote against him. The only potential coalition involves the DUP or Brexit, neither of whom will make his party less extreme. He has no beliefs or morals, except for wanting power, and is looking to Trump for inspiration.

I can understand why someone might despise Corbyn - I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand it. However, when you compare the risks of a Corbyn premiership, with the moderating effects of other parties and his own MPs, against a Johnson premiership, with a party that has been honed to remove moderating voices, I don't see that there's a choice.

Puja

This actually chimes with my current thinking. The best result is a minority Labour government that is heavily reliant on the Liberal Democrat’s and the SNP (notIng that the latter will want another indyref). In my constituency it’s a two horse race and it s aLabour seat with a sub 3K majority (Ruth Smeeth). I actually like Ruth so I can handle voting for her, but I’m hugely opposed to voting for Corbyn benefit. On the other hand a vote for the Lib Dem’s is one less for the Tories, indirectly helps Ruth and means I don’t need to wash my hands afterwards.

Stom wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:To be fair Stom, Corbyn has said and written enough in person to make many people question his politics. McDonnell too for that matter. Media bias might not favour him but the words recorded directly from his mouth are sufficient to raise serious concerns, and that’s before you start to look at the anti-semitiam issue that he blatantly didn’t think to be a problem.

I’m in the same boat as Diggers. Do I vote against the Conservatives as a protest vote whilst not wanting Corbyn in number 10?

If a moderately sensible soft left leadership were running Labour then it would be an easy decision, but that isn’t the case.

What has he actually said "firmly", without taking only part of his words, to make him even approach Boris Johnson?

We're not talking about comparing Stalin and Hitler here, we're comparing a literal narcissist with a theorist who often fails to get his head out of his arse.

One you can reason with, the other will agree with you absolutely and fully, and then do what pleases him anyway, even if it means going back on his word.

And on the anti-semitism argument, I understand where Corbyn was coming from. But he's not very good at articulating his thoughts under pressure.

The problem for him - and for others within the Labour party - has been labelling criticism of Israel as anti-semitism. Hell, I want to be able to criticise Israel without being labeled an anti-semite.

Because it's a fucking disgusting government they have there.

He just completely allowed his head to get stuck in his arse and because so many Labour party members have been playing stupid ass politics around Corbyn for so long, he didn't have enough close voices saying "Err, Jeremy, you need to be careful here, let's do it differently".


Guys, we're not saying you should be voting for the second-coming of Lenin.

We're just saying: vote whatever way it takes to remove a dangerous narcissistic abuser from power.

A narcissist vs a puppet might be a better description, after all McDonnell and Milne are huge influencers on Corbyn (and yes I have no time for Cummings either before you throw his name back).

I’m also not convinced that Corbyn wants to stop Brexit and when push comes to shove, if he were able to he would allow it to happen. Whilst the Labour Party membership might object, the current Labour government has demonstrated an ability to turn a deaf ear to that when needed.

McDonnels views on privatisation and taxation are not ones I share and. Milne seriously worries me. That lot being in power with a majority is very worrying, even a minority Labour government is something I’m not happy about but will need to balance against Brexit.

Which is why I detest this decision being via a General Election where there are more issues than Brexit yes/no to consider.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:To be fair Stom, Corbyn has said and written enough in person to make many people question his politics. McDonnell too for that matter. Media bias might not favour him but the words recorded directly from his mouth are sufficient to raise serious concerns, and that’s before you start to look at the anti-semitiam issue that he blatantly didn’t think to be a problem.

I’m in the same boat as Diggers. Do I vote against the Conservatives as a protest vote whilst not wanting Corbyn in number 10?

If a moderately sensible soft left leadership were running Labour then it would be an easy decision, but that isn’t the case.

What has he actually said "firmly", without taking only part of his words, to make him even approach Boris Johnson?

We're not talking about comparing Stalin and Hitler here, we're comparing a literal narcissist with a theorist who often fails to get his head out of his arse.

One you can reason with, the other will agree with you absolutely and fully, and then do what pleases him anyway, even if it means going back on his word.

And on the anti-semitism argument, I understand where Corbyn was coming from. But he's not very good at articulating his thoughts under pressure.

The problem for him - and for others within the Labour party - has been labelling criticism of Israel as anti-semitism. Hell, I want to be able to criticise Israel without being labeled an anti-semite.

Because it's a fucking disgusting government they have there.

He just completely allowed his head to get stuck in his arse and because so many Labour party members have been playing stupid ass politics around Corbyn for so long, he didn't have enough close voices saying "Err, Jeremy, you need to be careful here, let's do it differently".


Guys, we're not saying you should be voting for the second-coming of Lenin.

We're just saying: vote whatever way it takes to remove a dangerous narcissistic abuser from power.

A narcissist vs a puppet might be a better description, after all McDonnell and Milne are huge influencers on Corbyn (and yes I have no time for Cummings either before you throw his name back).

I’m also not convinced that Corbyn wants to stop Brexit and when push comes to shove, if he were able to he would allow it to happen. Whilst the Labour Party membership might object, the current Labour government has demonstrated an ability to turn a deaf ear to that when needed.

McDonnels views on privatisation and taxation are not ones I share and. Milne seriously worries me. That lot being in power with a majority is very worrying, even a minority Labour government is something I’m not happy about but will need to balance against Brexit.

Which is why I detest this decision being via a General Election where there are more issues than Brexit yes/no to consider.

Yep. Beyond Corbyn there are policy issues that need a proper debate and scutiny, ditto other parties.
While I'm here, the point above honing to remove moderate/dissenting voices is also applicable to Labour.
I really can't see myself putting a tick against either main party box.

It’s a sad state of affairs.

My biggest concern in Corbyn vs Brexit race to the bottom is that we could end up with both.

I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

Banquo wrote:Yep. Beyond Corbyn there are policy issues that need a proper debate and scutiny, ditto other parties.
While I'm here, the point above honing to remove moderate/dissenting voices is also applicable to Labour.
I really can't see myself putting a tick against either main party box.

The difference is that there's still 100 MPs in Labour who are in the Future Britain group of centrists/Blairites and Corbyn has not introduced widespread deselection nor removed the whip from anyone for disagreeing with him. Of course he's angling to get more influence for his wing and turn the party apparatus to his side, but I don't see it as at all comparable to the purge of One Nation Tories.

Sandydragon wrote:It’s a sad state of affairs.

My biggest concern in Corbyn vs Brexit race to the bottom is that we could end up with both.

I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

A referendum with Remain is in the manifesto and none of the potential coalition partners would pressure them to remove it; quite the opposite. Corbyn's definitely Eurosceptic, but he's in charge of a Europhilic party which is campaigning on a referendum, so how do you see him avoiding rescinding Article 50 (if the referendum goes Remain) without getting ousted?

Puja

Sandydragon wrote:I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

Labour's Manifesto says they have 6 months to renegotiate a deal with the EU - aiming for a customs union (so without May's red lines) and with freedom of movement.
Then the manifesto says to hold a referrendum on the new deal or remain; with official party position being to campaign for remain.

If there's anything in there about what they do if they fail to negotiate a new EU deal within 6 months; I've managed to miss it. Given that there already exist deals that satisfy Labour's negotiating targets, it should be doable - and will probably stand or fall on the level of contributions, and presence of absence of ECJ jurisdiction.

Puja,

Corbyn and those around him have demonstrated already that they are quite capable of shutting down debate when it suits them. Much of the party is europhile but not all, so it wouldn’t surprise me if Corbyn suddenly sided with the old Labour leavers.

Having the liberals in coalition, in strength, makes me a lot happier.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:Yep. Beyond Corbyn there are policy issues that need a proper debate and scutiny, ditto other parties.
While I'm here, the point above honing to remove moderate/dissenting voices is also applicable to Labour.
I really can't see myself putting a tick against either main party box.

The difference is that there's still 100 MPs in Labour who are in the Future Britain group of centrists/Blairites and Corbyn has not introduced widespread deselection nor removed the whip from anyone for disagreeing with him. Of course he's angling to get more influence for his wing and turn the party apparatus to his side, but I don't see it as at all comparable to the purge of One Nation Tories.

Sandydragon wrote:It’s a sad state of affairs.

My biggest concern in Corbyn vs Brexit race to the bottom is that we could end up with both.

I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

A referendum with Remain is in the manifesto and none of the potential coalition partners would pressure them to remove it; quite the opposite. Corbyn's definitely Eurosceptic, but he's in charge of a Europhilic party which is campaigning on a referendum, so how do you see him avoiding rescinding Article 50 (if the referendum goes Remain) without getting ousted?

Puja

To me, and you seem to have studied it so could be crap, it seems that Labour have been discretely purging or alienating their moderates since 2015, so more chinese water torture than the quickfire removal of the whip over brexit voting....if that is the purge to which you refer? An awful lot of moderate MPs from both parties are stepping down, with a chunky number also moving to the LDs/Change thing from both camps. To my mind the Labour honing has been done in a more insidious and strategic way, whereas the Tories have done it very recently with blunderbus Boris at the helm, unless I've forgotten some other purge or mass de-delection from the Tories. Either way, there is clear blue water between the two parties politically now....though the Tories have also gone a bit borrow and spend today as well.

Sandydragon wrote:Puja,

Corbyn and those around him have demonstrated already that they are quite capable of shutting down debate when it suits them. Much of the party is europhile but not all, so it wouldn’t surprise me if Corbyn suddenly sided with the old Labour leavers.

Having the liberals in coalition, in strength, makes me a lot happier.

This is the potential flaw in the plan though.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:Yep. Beyond Corbyn there are policy issues that need a proper debate and scutiny, ditto other parties.
While I'm here, the point above honing to remove moderate/dissenting voices is also applicable to Labour.
I really can't see myself putting a tick against either main party box.

The difference is that there's still 100 MPs in Labour who are in the Future Britain group of centrists/Blairites and Corbyn has not introduced widespread deselection nor removed the whip from anyone for disagreeing with him. Of course he's angling to get more influence for his wing and turn the party apparatus to his side, but I don't see it as at all comparable to the purge of One Nation Tories.

Sandydragon wrote:It’s a sad state of affairs.

My biggest concern in Corbyn vs Brexit race to the bottom is that we could end up with both.

I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

A referendum with Remain is in the manifesto and none of the potential coalition partners would pressure them to remove it; quite the opposite. Corbyn's definitely Eurosceptic, but he's in charge of a Europhilic party which is campaigning on a referendum, so how do you see him avoiding rescinding Article 50 (if the referendum goes Remain) without getting ousted?

Puja

To me, and you seem to have studied it so could be crap, it seems that Labour have been discretely purging or alienating their moderates since 2015, so more chinese water torture than the quickfire removal of the whip over brexit voting....if that is the purge to which you refer? An awful lot of moderate MPs from both parties are stepping down, with a chunky number also moving to the LDs/Change thing from both camps. To my mind the Labour honing has been done in a more insidious and strategic way, whereas the Tories have done it very recently with blunderbus Boris at the helm, unless I've forgotten some other purge or mass de-delection from the Tories. Either way, there is clear blue water between the two parties politically now....though the Tories have also gone a bit borrow and spend today as well.

Studied is a strong word! I read a lot of articles about politics when I should be working.

I agree that Corbyn is definitely shaping the party and MPs in his own image (which, to be fair, you can't blame him too much for considering the number of times the PLP has tried to stab him in the back). However, it's big enough that there's still a solid rump of moderates (even with defections, flounces, and retirements) and there's been no sign of the mass deselections that his opponents swore would occur - he's actually stepped away from any input on the selection of candidates and left it to the NEC (which to be fair, he has stacked with his supporters, but at least in a fairly democratic fashion). I can think of a lot of Labour MPs who are not Corbynites and a fair few who are actively anti-Corbyn.

Can you name me a rebel Conservative standing in this election, who would vote against Johnson?

I will note as well that I am neither a Labour, nor a Corbyn supporter. I've actually never voted for them, but have voted for every other major party in the elections since I turned 18. I'm defending him in the same vein that I sometimes defend Ben Youngs - he's got problems but a) he's not as bad as people paint them, b) does have a lot of good qualities, c) is alone in a howling void of options.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:
The difference is that there's still 100 MPs in Labour who are in the Future Britain group of centrists/Blairites and Corbyn has not introduced widespread deselection nor removed the whip from anyone for disagreeing with him. Of course he's angling to get more influence for his wing and turn the party apparatus to his side, but I don't see it as at all comparable to the purge of One Nation Tories.


A referendum with Remain is in the manifesto and none of the potential coalition partners would pressure them to remove it; quite the opposite. Corbyn's definitely Eurosceptic, but he's in charge of a Europhilic party which is campaigning on a referendum, so how do you see him avoiding rescinding Article 50 (if the referendum goes Remain) without getting ousted?

Puja

To me, and you seem to have studied it so could be crap, it seems that Labour have been discretely purging or alienating their moderates since 2015, so more chinese water torture than the quickfire removal of the whip over brexit voting....if that is the purge to which you refer? An awful lot of moderate MPs from both parties are stepping down, with a chunky number also moving to the LDs/Change thing from both camps. To my mind the Labour honing has been done in a more insidious and strategic way, whereas the Tories have done it very recently with blunderbus Boris at the helm, unless I've forgotten some other purge or mass de-delection from the Tories. Either way, there is clear blue water between the two parties politically now....though the Tories have also gone a bit borrow and spend today as well.

Studied is a strong word! I read a lot of articles about politics when I should be working.

I agree that Corbyn is definitely shaping the party and MPs in his own image (which, to be fair, you can't blame him too much for considering the number of times the PLP has tried to stab him in the back). However, it's big enough that there's still a solid rump of moderates (even with defections, flounces, and retirements) and there's been no sign of the mass deselections that his opponents swore would occur - he's actually stepped away from any input on the selection of candidates and left it to the NEC (which to be fair, he has stacked with his supporters, but at least in a fairly democratic fashion). I can think of a lot of Labour MPs who are not Corbynites and a fair few who are actively anti-Corbyn.

Can you name me a rebel Conservative standing in this election, who would vote against Johnson?

I will note as well that I am neither a Labour, nor a Corbyn supporter. I've actually never voted for them, but have voted for every other major party in the elections since I turned 18. I'm defending him in the same vein that I sometimes defend Ben Youngs - he's got problems but a) he's not as bad as people paint them, b) does have a lot of good qualities, c) is alone in a howling void of options.

Puja

I thought the point you were making was that the Tories were purging and de=selecting (they've fallen out over Brexit solely imo), but now you've asked a different question- and no I can't, because I haven't researched it- I suspect a lot, like moderate Labour MPs are holding their noses (and a lot consistently have voted with Corbyn, even Leavers). My point was that the re-shaping of Labour has been very radical and quite ruthless, but over a long period of time; look at the churn in the shadow cabinet for example. Probably a moot point....the outcome remains a party further left and another further right since 2015/7.

I understand the conclusion you've come to- Corbyn is a sheep in sheep's clothing....but he's heading up something I can't vote for, even if I could get past some of his fuzzy headed views and causes. and lack of leadership skills. He's a very good populist protester and campaigner no question.

I'm also interested that you have focused on leadership as the key issue for you, whereas I'm looking at policies and their implementation reality.

Puja wrote:I think that, even if you utterly despise Corbyn, you are better off supporting him here as the lesser of the two evils. Corbyn, for all his flaws, even in the absolute worst case scenario, will not do the damage to the UK that Boris is promising. Even if you think he's despicable, a win for him would be as a minority government or coalition which would temper him and, even if by some miracle he won a majority, he doesn't have autocratic control over his MPs and would have to get anything he wants to do through Parliament.

Boris, on the other hand, is in charge of a party where near all of the moderate voices have been purged, not least because he summarily removed the whip from people who dared vote against him. The only potential coalition involves the DUP or Brexit, neither of whom will make his party less extreme. He has no beliefs or morals, except for wanting power, and is looking to Trump for inspiration.

I can understand why someone might despise Corbyn - I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand it. However, when you compare the risks of a Corbyn premiership, with the moderating effects of other parties and his own MPs, against a Johnson premiership, with a party that has been honed to remove moderating voices, I don't see that there's a choice.

Puja

Indeed.

Johnson has a clear lead in the polls at the moment, so we're heading for a no deal Brexit (after a show of "negotiation" with the EU, perhaps) if nothing changes.

Whereas I struggle to see Labour getting a majority; it's far more likely to be a coalition with the LibDems and/or SNP. And even if Corbyn did get a majority, he's simply not going to be able to turn the UK into a communist state in 5 years (and I don't think even he wants to ).

Banquo wrote:I'm also interested that you have focused on leadership as the key issue for you, whereas I'm looking at policies and their implementation reality.

It's insidious - our elections have been drifting ever more American for year, with "Leader's debates" and ever more personality-based campaigns. It's part of the polarisation of politics and is extremely shit, so I'm sorry to be part of it.

However, the problem is that the parties have become presidential, with policies being pushed through from the top and whipped through Parliament, without the slightest attempt to build consensus and everything done through party lines rather than what's best for the constituents they ostensibly represent. It's why I have such a visceral hatred for the removal of the whip from the 21. It formalised that there was no place in the party for someone voting with their conscience or for someone voting for what was best for their constituents. This was now a party where you agreed with the leadership or you were no longer part of the party.

It's despicable.

Puja

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:Yep. Beyond Corbyn there are policy issues that need a proper debate and scutiny, ditto other parties.
While I'm here, the point above honing to remove moderate/dissenting voices is also applicable to Labour.
I really can't see myself putting a tick against either main party box.

The difference is that there's still 100 MPs in Labour who are in the Future Britain group of centrists/Blairites and Corbyn has not introduced widespread deselection nor removed the whip from anyone for disagreeing with him. Of course he's angling to get more influence for his wing and turn the party apparatus to his side, but I don't see it as at all comparable to the purge of One Nation Tories.

Sandydragon wrote:It’s a sad state of affairs.

My biggest concern in Corbyn vs Brexit race to the bottom is that we could end up with both.

I doubt Corbyn will rescind A50, so it’s some form of Brexit then. But what does that look like?

A referendum with Remain is in the manifesto and none of the potential coalition partners would pressure them to remove it; quite the opposite. Corbyn's definitely Eurosceptic, but he's in charge of a Europhilic party which is campaigning on a referendum, so how do you see him avoiding rescinding Article 50 (if the referendum goes Remain) without getting ousted?

Puja

To me, and you seem to have studied it so could be crap, it seems that Labour have been discretely purging or alienating their moderates since 2015, so more chinese water torture than the quickfire removal of the whip over brexit voting....if that is the purge to which you refer? An awful lot of moderate MPs from both parties are stepping down, with a chunky number also moving to the LDs/Change thing from both camps. To my mind the Labour honing has been done in a more insidious and strategic way, whereas the Tories have done it very recently with blunderbus Boris at the helm, unless I've forgotten some other purge or mass de-delection from the Tories. Either way, there is clear blue water between the two parties politically now....though the Tories have also gone a bit borrow and spend today as well.

The media are deselecting moderates. They aren't good copy.

Puja wrote: It's insidious - our elections have been drifting ever more American for year, with "Leader's debates" and ever more personality-based campaigns. It's part of the polarisation of politics and is extremely shit, so I'm sorry to be part of it.

However, the problem is that the parties have become presidential, with policies being pushed through from the top and whipped through Parliament, without the slightest attempt to build consensus and everything done through party lines rather than what's best for the constituents they ostensibly represent. It's why I have such a visceral hatred for the removal of the whip from the 21. It formalised that there was no place in the party for someone voting with their conscience or for someone voting for what was best for their constituents. This was now a party where you agreed with the leadership or you were no longer part of the party.

It's despicable.

Puja

Puja wrote:I think that, even if you utterly despise Corbyn, you are better off supporting him here as the lesser of the two evils. Corbyn, for all his flaws, even in the absolute worst case scenario, will not do the damage to the UK that Boris is promising. Even if you think he's despicable, a win for him would be as a minority government or coalition which would temper him and, even if by some miracle he won a majority, he doesn't have autocratic control over his MPs and would have to get anything he wants to do through Parliament.

Boris, on the other hand, is in charge of a party where near all of the moderate voices have been purged, not least because he summarily removed the whip from people who dared vote against him. The only potential coalition involves the DUP or Brexit, neither of whom will make his party less extreme. He has no beliefs or morals, except for wanting power, and is looking to Trump for inspiration.

I can understand why someone might despise Corbyn - I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand it. However, when you compare the risks of a Corbyn premiership, with the moderating effects of other parties and his own MPs, against a Johnson premiership, with a party that has been honed to remove moderating voices, I don't see that there's a choice.

Puja

I'm not planning though to support Boris. Also if you want to talk about moderate voices being purged I can think if another party bar the Tories that applies to

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:I think that, even if you utterly despise Corbyn, you are better off supporting him here as the lesser of the two evils. Corbyn, for all his flaws, even in the absolute worst case scenario, will not do the damage to the UK that Boris is promising. Even if you think he's despicable, a win for him would be as a minority government or coalition which would temper him and, even if by some miracle he won a majority, he doesn't have autocratic control over his MPs and would have to get anything he wants to do through Parliament.

Boris, on the other hand, is in charge of a party where near all of the moderate voices have been purged, not least because he summarily removed the whip from people who dared vote against him. The only potential coalition involves the DUP or Brexit, neither of whom will make his party less extreme. He has no beliefs or morals, except for wanting power, and is looking to Trump for inspiration.

I can understand why someone might despise Corbyn - I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand it. However, when you compare the risks of a Corbyn premiership, with the moderating effects of other parties and his own MPs, against a Johnson premiership, with a party that has been honed to remove moderating voices, I don't see that there's a choice.

Puja

I'm not planning though to support Boris. Also if you want to talk about moderate voices being purged I can think if another party bar the Tories that applies to

Yeah, covered that further down - I have less of a problem with Corbyn doing it as there's still circa 100 moderate MPs in Labour (they have an anti-Momentum group) and he's not deselected people, nor removed the whip from 21 MPs for not agreeing with him. Also covered further down - I'm not a Labour supporter or fan, so I'm not here to defend Labour as the paragons of virtue. Just here defending the lesser of the evils, cause that's the world we currently have.

Also, due to our highly shit electoral system, unless you're in a three-way marginal you are supporting Boris by not supporting the highest not-Boris option. It is a terrible system and I wasted valuable time campagining for it to change last time we had an option, but a referendum said that we had to keep this stupid system and, as we all know, a referendum is sacrosanct.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:I think that, even if you utterly despise Corbyn, you are better off supporting him here as the lesser of the two evils. Corbyn, for all his flaws, even in the absolute worst case scenario, will not do the damage to the UK that Boris is promising. Even if you think he's despicable, a win for him would be as a minority government or coalition which would temper him and, even if by some miracle he won a majority, he doesn't have autocratic control over his MPs and would have to get anything he wants to do through Parliament.

Boris, on the other hand, is in charge of a party where near all of the moderate voices have been purged, not least because he summarily removed the whip from people who dared vote against him. The only potential coalition involves the DUP or Brexit, neither of whom will make his party less extreme. He has no beliefs or morals, except for wanting power, and is looking to Trump for inspiration.

I can understand why someone might despise Corbyn - I don't necessarily agree, but I can understand it. However, when you compare the risks of a Corbyn premiership, with the moderating effects of other parties and his own MPs, against a Johnson premiership, with a party that has been honed to remove moderating voices, I don't see that there's a choice.

Puja

I'm not planning though to support Boris. Also if you want to talk about moderate voices being purged I can think if another party bar the Tories that applies to

Yeah, covered that further down - I have less of a problem with Corbyn doing it as there's still circa 100 moderate MPs in Labour (they have an anti-Momentum group) and he's not deselected people, nor removed the whip from 21 MPs for not agreeing with him. Also covered further down - I'm not a Labour supporter or fan, so I'm not here to defend Labour as the paragons of virtue. Just here defending the lesser of the evils, cause that's the world we currently have.

Also, due to our highly shit electoral system, unless you're in a three-way marginal you are supporting Boris by not supporting the highest not-Boris option. It is a terrible system and I wasted valuable time campagining for it to change last time we had an option, but a referendum said that we had to keep this stupid system and, as we all know, a referendum is sacrosanct.

Puja

Not deselected people? There are multiple people who've quit the party in disgust with him and his leadership cabal, indeed only this morning Ian Austin who's about as Labour as it gets and has served in cabinet and as an MP for Labour (and ended Blair which might please the odd Corbyn fan) was advising people to vote for Boris as Jeremy in his experience of knowing the man is simply unfit to lead the country

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:I'm also interested that you have focused on leadership as the key issue for you, whereas I'm looking at policies and their implementation reality.

It's insidious - our elections have been drifting ever more American for year, with "Leader's debates" and ever more personality-based campaigns. It's part of the polarisation of politics and is extremely shit, so I'm sorry to be part of it.

However, the problem is that the parties have become presidential, with policies being pushed through from the top and whipped through Parliament, without the slightest attempt to build consensus and everything done through party lines rather than what's best for the constituents they ostensibly represent. It's why I have such a visceral hatred for the removal of the whip from the 21. It formalised that there was no place in the party for someone voting with their conscience or for someone voting for what was best for their constituents. This was now a party where you agreed with the leadership or you were no longer part of the party.

It's despicable.

Puja

Fair. Sh@t show indeed- not sure Labour are tolerant or averse to whipping either, but whataboutery is pointless in this stinky mess!!

Digby wrote: Not deselected people? There are multiple people who've quit the party in disgust with him and his leadership cabal, indeed only this morning Ian Austin who's about as Labour as it gets and has served in cabinet and as an MP for Labour (and ended Blair which might please the odd Corbyn fan) was advising people to vote for Boris as Jeremy in his experience of knowing the man is simply unfit to lead the country

I'm still not seeing any labour MPs who've been deselected for voting against the party line.

Quitting =/= Being deselected (and I think still has more ex-tories than ex-labour - not that that's the point)

If you're going to make they "they desekect people too" argument, it works better with examples of people being deselected.

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote: Not deselected people? There are multiple people who've quit the party in disgust with him and his leadership cabal, indeed only this morning Ian Austin who's about as Labour as it gets and has served in cabinet and as an MP for Labour (and ended Blair which might please the odd Corbyn fan) was advising people to vote for Boris as Jeremy in his experience of knowing the man is simply unfit to lead the country

I'm still not seeing any labour MPs who've been deselected for voting against the party line.

Quitting =/= Being deselected (and I think still has more ex-tories than ex-labour - not that that's the point)

If you're going to make they "they desekect people too" argument, it works better with examples of people being deselected.

This does feel a bit like arguing over whether someone has been fired or forced out by constructive dismissal when the pertinent thing is they don't have a job, but fine, if you want to call people being hounded out of the party by intimidation and threats and/or by disgust at the policies and behaviour of the loony left running the show something else that's all good, for the purposes of this conversation and in the context I'm fine calling a rose a rose.

Digby wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote: Not deselected people? There are multiple people who've quit the party in disgust with him and his leadership cabal, indeed only this morning Ian Austin who's about as Labour as it gets and has served in cabinet and as an MP for Labour (and ended Blair which might please the odd Corbyn fan) was advising people to vote for Boris as Jeremy in his experience of knowing the man is simply unfit to lead the country

I'm still not seeing any labour MPs who've been deselected for voting against the party line.

Quitting =/= Being deselected (and I think still has more ex-tories than ex-labour - not that that's the point)

If you're going to make they "they desekect people too" argument, it works better with examples of people being deselected.

This does feel a bit like arguing over whether someone has been fired or forced out by constructive dismissal when the pertinent thing is they don't have a job, but fine, if you want to call people being hounded out of the party by intimidation and threats and/or by disgust at the policies and behaviour of the loony left running the show something else that's all good, for the purposes of this conversation and in the context I'm fine calling a rose a rose.

Intimdation and threats?

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: I'm still not seeing any labour MPs who've been deselected for voting against the party line.

Quitting =/= Being deselected (and I think still has more ex-tories than ex-labour - not that that's the point)

If you're going to make they "they desekect people too" argument, it works better with examples of people being deselected.

This does feel a bit like arguing over whether someone has been fired or forced out by constructive dismissal when the pertinent thing is they don't have a job, but fine, if you want to call people being hounded out of the party by intimidation and threats and/or by disgust at the policies and behaviour of the loony left running the show something else that's all good, for the purposes of this conversation and in the context I'm fine calling a rose a rose.

Intimdation and threats?

Puja

Well yes, and even if not being done with Corbyn's direct approval, it might only be tacit, he's certainly doing little to stop them. And really the people doing them are the sort of people John Smith, Kinnock and so on fought so hard to kick out of the Labour Party and who Corbyn is delighted to see back so he can call them Comrade and sing We'll Keep the Red Flag Flying Here together. Lord only knows how many such reports there have now been, lord only knows how many haven't been reported. Broadly they seem to compromise of threats online, through phone calls and even people shouting things at MPs kids coming out of school, some vandalism against private property and constituency offices, and there's running throughout them and wider discourse in the Labour Party talk of deselection to bring in believers of the true faith.

Both major parties have sadly gone mad at the same time, and whilst there's a critical series of decisions in the offing

Digby wrote:This does feel a bit like arguing over whether someone has been fired or forced out by constructive dismissal when the pertinent thing is they don't have a job, but fine, if you want to call people being hounded out of the party by intimidation and threats and/or by disgust at the policies and behaviour of the loony left running the show something else that's all good, for the purposes of this conversation and in the context I'm fine calling a rose a rose.

A] Please, stop making me feel that I have to defend the current labour party - it makes me feel dirty.
B] Please show your evidence - so far, all your doing is repeating Daily Mail type headlines with absolutely no substantiation whatsoever.

We still have more ex-tory than ex-labour MPs - unles you can show me differently - whether they jumped or were pushed.
We still haven't found any ex-labour MPs who were deselected for disagreeing with the leadership.
We now have accusations of threats and intimidation - please show you're evidence.

Leaving of your own accord due to disagreements with the direction the party is taking is absolutely fair and normal (see all those ex-tories). Being deselected or constructive dismissals are another thing entirely (see those other ex-tory MPs).

Which Tyler wrote: A] Please, stop making me feel that I have to defend the current labour party - it makes me feel dirty.

As above. I'm not a Labour or Corbyn fanatic, so I'm not blind to the fact that they have problems. However, they're nowhere near as bad as the reputation some would give them, especially the press, and they are by a distance the least worst of the two viable options.

Puja