Jeremy Corbyn first 100 days

[banjodeano]

He hasn't exactly done a u turn deano,it will still come into being later on,regardless of what Corbyn says or does.

 

That is true, the cuts are still coming, just in a different form, but on what he proposed he was forced to make a U turn, there was a large momentum of people who realised that the Tories were not actually the party of the working people, only the party of the well off... and the same people who stand for fairness and compassion will have to force him to back down on the next round of cuts

[Eric Arthur]

i saw a poll conducted a few days back that showed he was closing the gap on the Tories....strange that there was little media coverage about it

 

Let's see your dead cat bounce.

[L00b]

I've said to many people that you may not like Corbyns policies, or even him, but he is shaking things up and showing people that politics can be played differently and whatever your political stance, that's surely a good thing?

With your permission, corrected your post/quote above (I think that's what you meant?)

 

He's not shaking anything politically (other than the Labour party itself of course, and maybe a few ribs through causing mirth), and won't be so long as he guides his policies by (allegedly) word on the street (Lynn from Stoke on Trent says <...>, Henry from Birmingham asks <...>, etc.).

 

Re. bit in bold: if your focus is solely on domestic issues and politics, you have a point.

 

But at his level (leader of the opposition), one would expect more awareness and smarts about the international dimension, and the relative position, of the UK within that context. The UK does not exist in a political vacuum on the global stage, and many political decisions taken here (and debated in the Commons with and by the opposition) have long- and far-ranging effects overseas.

 

He still strikes me as the arch-type Morris-dancing highly-principled Little Englander. Nothing wrong with that, you need a bit of every type to make a world and get it to go round. Just not at senior/top political level, because it sells the country well short. He still has to begin proving that he can be a statesman at all.

Edited December 22, 2015 by L00b

[sgtkate]

With your permission, corrected your post/quote above (I think that's what you meant?)

 

He's not shaking anything politically (other than the Labour party itself of course, and maybe a few ribs through causing mirth), and won't be so long as he guides his policies by (allegedly) word on the street (Lynn from Stoke on Trent says <...>, Henry from Birmingham asks <...>, etc.).

 

Re. bit in bold: if your focus is solely on domestic issues and politics, you have a point.

 

But at his level (leader of the opposition), one would expect more awareness and smarts about the international dimension, and the relative position, of the UK within that context.

 

He still strikes me as the arch-type Morris-dancing highly-principled Little Englander. Nothing wrong with that, you need a bit of every type to make a world and get it to go round. Just not at senior/top political level, because it sells the country well short. He still has to begin proving that he can be a statesman at all.

 

Yes, that was what I meant! My typing is getting as bad as my writing. And yes I half agree with you, but I'm honestly enjoying watching quite a few more established politicians getting a bit flustered. I'm sure they will adapt very quickly as that's what they do, but just changing PMQs into an actual question and answer session rather than schoolboy cheering has been lovely. He does need to improve his questioning techniques though, but he's come from nowhere really to lead a party, it will understandably take him a bit of time to get up to speed and I see he's improving in each interview without changing his basic principles. Only time will tell whether he has a positive impact or none at all. I can't see how he can have a negative one, unless another 5 years of the Tories is regarded as negative. I'm talking about politics as a whole rather than individual policies and parties.

[banjodeano]

Let's see your dead cat bounce.

I wish i had book marked it Eric, but i didnt, and for the life of me i cant recall what poll it was.....

[Eric Arthur]

I wish i had book marked it Eric, but i didnt, and for the life of me i cant recall what poll it was.....

 

Give it a go or we won't believe that it exists. It's not exactly a Corbyn narrowing the lead on the Conservatives needle in a Google haystack.

 

That's my Christmas gift to you

[banjodeano]

Give it a go or we won't believe that it exists.

 

It's not exactly a Corbyn narrowing the lead on the Conservatives needle in a Google haystack.

Eric..Eric..Eric, here you go again. with your petty point scoring, stop trying to be annoying all the time, like i just told you i never book marked it, if you think i made it up, ok that fine

 

OOOOPS, thanks for that Eric ..!!!!

[Mister M]

I was reading an interesting article in the Guardian a couple of days ago about the rise of New Labour in the 1990s; and it gives the context to the rise of Jeremy Corbyn.

It's written by Peter Hyams, former speechwriter to Tony Blair. As such it's a skewed analysis, it doesn't take into account of the changing circumstances between 1994 and the present day; it down plays New Labour's ever closer ties with Thatcherism, and it down plays the whole issue of Blair's lies about WMD.

Nevertheless it's worth a read:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/20/labour-party-directionless-political-future

[pacifica]

Yes, that was what I meant! My typing is getting as bad as my writing. And yes I half agree with you, but I'm honestly enjoying watching quite a few more established politicians getting a bit flustered. I'm sure they will adapt very quickly as that's what they do, but just changing PMQs into an actual question and answer session rather than schoolboy cheering has been lovely. He does need to improve his questioning techniques though, but he's come from nowhere really to lead a party, it will understandably take him a bit of time to get up to speed and I see he's improving in each interview without changing his basic principles. Only time will tell whether he has a positive impact or none at all. I can't see how he can have a negative one, unless another 5 years of the Tories is regarded as negative. I'm talking about politics as a whole rather than individual policies and parties.

 

I got more of the impression that he was stiring up the Labour Party than anything else. Most new party leaders experience a popularity boost when they take over a party before the public work out that they are just another tit. With Corbyn being a relatively unknown backbencher he should have got a double bounce. Instead he flatlined, and if anything is falling away.

But his biggest problem seems to be that he can't even convince his own MPs of his worth. He doesn't seem to be landing a punch on Cameron. Instead the headlines are all about Labour's internal strife.

[banjodeano]

I got more of the impression that he was stiring up the Labour Party than anything else. Most new party leaders experience a popularity boost when they take over a party before the public work out that they are just another tit. With Corbyn being a relatively unknown backbencher he should have got a double bounce. Instead he flatlined, and if anything is falling away.

But his biggest problem seems to be that he can't even convince his own MPs of his worth. He doesn't seem to be landing a punch on Cameron. Instead the headlines are all about Labour's internal strife.

 

and do you ask yourself why? could it be that 99% of the media dont want him elected?