The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[banjodeano]

3 minutes ago, Longcol said:

How is "splitting the party" warning that the leader is about to lead them over a cliff?

come again?

[Longcol]

1 minute ago, banjodeano said:

come again?

Should members blindly follow the leader when it's obvious to the majority of the known universe the leader is leading them to disaster?

[banjodeano]

Just now, Pettytom said:

I’m questioning that claim.

 

The election process is far from democratic.  It is dominated by disproportionately represented pressure groups. It is also very vulnerable to entryists and to vote rigging.

 

Its far from a democratic process.

what a load of old tosh.....pressure groups are involved in every elections,  are they not?

how is it vulnerable to vote rigging?

2 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Should members blindly follow the leader when it's obvious to the majority of the known universe the leader is leading them to disaster?

it was far deeper than that, he was a leftie, she is a tory lite, the membership voted Corbyn to lead the party, i guess you dont like democracy then...

[Longcol]

5 minutes ago, banjodeano said:

it was far deeper than that, he was a leftie, she is a tory lite, the membership voted Corbyn to lead the party, i guess you dont like democracy then...

I don't like blind obedience in following an obviously disastrous course of action (obvious to anyone who wasn't in the labour left echo chamber).

 

Many Labour members correctly openly disagreed with and protested against the democratically elected leader over Iraq.

[banjodeano]

1 minute ago, Longcol said:

I don't like blind obedience in following an obviously disastrous course of action (obvious to anyone who wasn't in the labour left echo chamber).

 

Many Labour members correctly openly disagreed with and protested against the democratically elected leader over Iraq.

but they didnt openly try to remove their democratically elected leader did they?? they voiced their concerns, but didnt plot to remove their leader...

19 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

I’m questioning that claim.

 

The election process is far from democratic.  It is dominated by disproportionately represented pressure groups. It is also very vulnerable to entryists and to vote rigging.

 

Its far from a democratic process.

so i guess you will agree that Johnson wasnt democratically elected then? i mean it wasn't exactly a level playing field, what with the media nearly 100% behind him...

[Longcol]

7 minutes ago, banjodeano said:

but they didnt openly try to remove their democratically elected leader did they?? they voiced their concerns, but didnt plot to remove their leader...

 

 

Because it would have been futile - Blair had won two general elections and the only remotely credible candidate was Brown.

 

Corbyn meanwhile was viewed as going nowhere fast and likely to end in disaster.

[banjodeano]

4 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Because it would have been futile - Blair had won two general elections and the only remotely credible candidate was Brown.

 

Corbyn meanwhile was viewed as going nowhere fast and likely to end in disaster.

viewed as going nowhere by the right wingers in the party who sowed  nothing but division from day one, do you think they actually gave him a chance? come on.... did they actually give him a chance?  thats a serious question for you Longcol

[tinfoilhat]

1 minute ago, banjodeano said:

viewed as going nowhere by the right wingers in the party who sowed  nothing but division from day one, do you think they actually gave him a chance? come on.... did they actually give him a chance?  thats a serious question for you Longcol

Forgive me if I butt in, but a lot of them did. Moreover, the tories were hugely divided as well. And they won.

[Longcol]

1 minute ago, banjodeano said:

viewed as going nowhere by the right wingers in the party who sowed  nothing but division from day one, do you think they actually gave him a chance? come on.... did they actually give him a chance?  thats a serious question for you Longcol

He was given every chance and had tight control over the party - hence the disastrous manifesto.

 

Look where it led.

[banjodeano]

1 minute ago, Longcol said:

He was given every chance and had tight control over the party - hence the disastrous manifesto.

 

Look where it led.

no he wasnt, Peter Mandelson admits attempting to undermine Corbyn ‘every day’, this was from day one, have another go Longcol....there were many like him in the party....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2017/feb/21/peter-mandelson-admits-attempting-to-undermine-corbyn-every-day-video