Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 General Kroll wrote:


The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?
It was very deliberate and very obvious what he was doing.

Lets be fair here. Red Ken handed it to the right on a plate. If he hadn't wanted to get on front of the media after a spell on the sidelines the original story would have been much weaker.

 General Kroll wrote:

The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?

Don't be so naive. The bigotry was exposed by a bunch of journalists digging into the past histories of various elected Labour party members, some posted as little as six months before they were elected. The kind of bigotry that'd fit right home in the BNP.

And as for "Suspicious that they came out", what are you on about? Saying that they were set up is just as ridiculous. They harboured these vile views and were rightly exposed as the bigots they were. They set themselves up for a fall. Corbyn was shown to be extremely week and, during the digging and rooting out of these antisemites, some of the broadcasts and speeches he gave over the years were found and lead to accusations of his tacit approval from some quarters. He failed to act decisively and dithered about what to do when Naz Shah was shown to have posted about the forced relocation of Jews to the US. Then a bunch of Labour Councillors, advisers and other figures were found and exposed. The fact that they took more than 5 minutes to give them the boot damaged the Labour claim to be against discrimination and robbed them of any remaining moral high ground now and in the future.

Mr. Burning wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:


The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?
It was very deliberate and very obvious what he was doing.

Lets be fair here. Red Ken handed it to the right on a plate. If he hadn't wanted to get on front of the media after a spell on the sidelines the original story would have been much weaker.

Well Ken sees a camera and an opportunity to get his face out. The guys a complete self publicist, not a great loss frankly.

zedmeister wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?

Don't be so naive. The bigotry was exposed by a bunch of journalists digging into the past histories of various elected Labour party members, some posted as little as six months before they were elected. The kind of bigotry that'd fit right home in the BNP.

And as for "Suspicious that they came out", what are you on about? Saying that they were set up is just as ridiculous. They harboured these vile views and were rightly exposed as the bigots they were. They set themselves up for a fall. Corbyn was shown to be extremely week and, during the digging and rooting out of these antisemites, some of the broadcasts and speeches he gave over the years were found and lead to accusations of his tacit approval from some quarters. He failed to act decisively and dithered about what to do when Naz Shah was shown to have posted about the forced relocation of Jews to the US. Then a bunch of Labour Councillors, advisers and other figures were found and exposed. The fact that they took more than 5 minutes to give them the boot damaged the Labour claim to be against discrimination and robbed them of any remaining moral high ground now and in the future.

I don't think I'm the one being naive here....

 General Kroll wrote:

I don't think I'm the one being naive here....

You're going to need to post more than that to rebut my statements.

Naz Shah was first exposed by the Guido Fawkes blog and was subsequently picked up by the press. Ken poured petrol onto the story with his usual flair and attracted condemnation across the full spectrum of the press from right to left. The Guido Fawkes blog then exposed a string of further antisemites from Cllr Shabbir of Bradford, Cllr Ilyas Aziz of Nottingham and Burnley Labour councillor Shah Hussain and a few others to boot. The Jewish Chronicle then followed up digging up even more of them including Labour activists and fundraiser David Watson.

Nowhere do I see a "Blairite plot". I see journalists exposing twisted bigots. Labour need to give these loonies the boot and fast. To be fair they're getting quicker - they've had enough practice now. Blaming blairites doesn't solve the problem of Entryists and Extreme Left racists like Gerry Downing being admitted to the party.

Curious, how many of these are actual anti-semites (Kick all the jews out of Israel) and how many are merely critical of the Israeli government? (stop the human rights abuses in the West Bank)

 zedmeister wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

I don't think I'm the one being naive here....

You're going to need to post more than that to rebut my statements.

Naz Shah was first exposed by the Guido Fawkes blog and was subsequently picked up by the press. Ken poured petrol onto the story with his usual flair and attracted condemnation across the full spectrum of the press from right to left. The Guido Fawkes blog then exposed a string of further antisemites from Cllr Shabbir of Bradford, Cllr Ilyas Aziz of Nottingham and Burnley Labour councillor Shah Hussain and a few others to boot. The Jewish Chronicle then followed up digging up even more of them including Labour activists and fundraiser David Watson.

Nowhere do I see a "Blairite plot". I see journalists exposing twisted bigots. Labour need to give these loonies the boot and fast. To be fair they're getting quicker - they've had enough practice now. Blaming blairites doesn't solve the problem of Entryists and Extreme Left racists like Gerry Downing being admitted to the party.

Nah I don't think I need to say much.

Who do you think briefed the press about the tweets? Guido Fawkes is hardly known for investigative journalism, they post right wing opinion pieces and stir trouble. They aren't exactly The Times or The Guardian.

You say twisted bigots. Sure some of the tweets exposed are very unseemly, but a lot of stuff just criticises Israel, not Jewish people as a whole. There's a big difference.

The party has suspended members quickly, it's launched an independent inquiry. That's more than any other parties have ever done. You only have to look at the rampant islamaphobia in the Tory party right now to see Labour aren't on their own here. And at least it's only the fringe members of the party partaking in it. The islamaphobia from the Tories comes from the very top.

It's nice to see the electorate in London didn't pay a damn but of notice to their dog whistle campaigns over the last few weeks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 feeder wrote:
Curious, how many of these are actual anti-semites (Kick all the jews out of Israel) and how many are merely critical of the Israeli government? (stop the human rights abuses in the West Bank)

Indeed. There's been several reports of exaggerated claims in the last couple of weeks, where criticisms of Israel have been conflated with anti semetism. Sure there are people who have crossed the line, but there are many who have simply criticised a very controversial regime and been called racist for it.

 feeder wrote:
Curious, how many of these are actual anti-semites (Kick all the jews out of Israel) and how many are merely critical of the Israeli government? (stop the human rights abuses in the West Bank)

See for yourself. Here's the four I mentioned:

Cllr Shabbir of Bradford
Cllr Ilyas Aziz of Nottingham
Cllr Shah Hussain of Burnley
Activist David Watson

There's more of them exposed in the Guido Fawkes blog all with similar views and posts

Reporting from Northern Ireland we are still in the middle of the count, just passed the half way point. We have PR system not first past the post so the count goes on for days! Some interesting results so far. We have kept our lovely first minister Mrs Foster

 General Kroll wrote:

Who do you think briefed the press about the tweets? Guido Fawkes is hardly known for investigative journalism, they post right wing opinion pieces and stir trouble. They aren't exactly The Times or The Guardian.

Exposing bigots and other unsavory characters holding elected positions is investigative journalism. As for stirring trouble

They did this to themselves, he just exposed them

 General Kroll wrote:

You say twisted bigots. Sure some of the tweets exposed are very unseemly, but a lot of stuff just criticises Israel, not Jewish people as a whole. There's a big difference.

See my links above. These aren't criticisms of Israeli military action, these are rants against Jews and the Jewish faith.

 General Kroll wrote:

The party has suspended members quickly, it's launched an independent inquiry. That's more than any other parties have ever done. You only have to look at the rampant islamaphobia in the Tory party right now to see Labour aren't on their own here. And at least it's only the fringe members of the party partaking in it. The islamaphobia from the Tories comes from the very top.

An independent inquiry will only see this debacle dragged out over the coming weeks and months, serving to keep the wounds fresh. You don't need an independent inquiry, you need decisive action - boot the loonies, one of which was high up (Naz) assistant to John McDonnell and sitting on the home affairs committee for antisemitism! As for any racism that may be happening in the conservatives, that needs to be sorted as well. Doesn't excuse Labour's current shambles though.

 zedmeister wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

Who do you think briefed the press about the tweets? Guido Fawkes is hardly known for investigative journalism, they post right wing opinion pieces and stir trouble. They aren't exactly The Times or The Guardian.

Exposing bigots and other unsavory characters holding elected positions is investigative journalism. As for stirring trouble

They did this to themselves, he just exposed them

 General Kroll wrote:

You say twisted bigots. Sure some of the tweets exposed are very unseemly, but a lot of stuff just criticises Israel, not Jewish people as a whole. There's a big difference.

See my links above. These aren't criticisms of Israeli military action, these are rants against Jews and the Jewish faith.

 General Kroll wrote:

The party has suspended members quickly, it's launched an independent inquiry. That's more than any other parties have ever done. You only have to look at the rampant islamaphobia in the Tory party right now to see Labour aren't on their own here. And at least it's only the fringe members of the party partaking in it. The islamaphobia from the Tories comes from the very top.

An independent inquiry will only see this debacle dragged out over the coming weeks and months, serving to keep the wounds fresh. You don't need an independent inquiry, you need decisive action - boot the loonies, one of which was high up (Naz) assistant to John McDonnell and sitting on the home affairs committee for antisemitism! As for any racism that may be happening in the conservatives, that needs to be sorted as well. Doesn't excuse Labour's current shambles though.

How are they not dealing with it? They've suspended members and they will no doubt be kicked out once due process has been followed, that's not unreasonable. Or would you rather a democratic organisation didnt follow their own rules and took carte Blanche, knee jerk action? Because that's not something I look for in a party that wants to run the country. A calm reasoned response it's what is required. Not trial by media.

An inquiry is exactly the right thing to do, unless you'd rather Labour ignored a problem and swept it under a carpet? Sure it will drag things out a bit, but isn't it better to shine a light on the truth of the matter?

As for the Guy Fawkes blog being some paragon of anti racism, and being investigative journalists, I've not laughed so much all week. They've clearly been briefed, and clearly couldn't give a fig about racism, otherwise the site would be blanketed in coverage about the Tories dog whistle campaign in the London mayoral elections. But there's not a squeak on there. So they can't be THAT bothered about bigots now, can they?

 General Kroll wrote:
The losses in Scotland can't be blamed on Corbyn. Labour have been in decline there for years, well before he had a sniff of the leadership.

In Wales too Labour have many problems that opposition parties have been able to exploit. Don't forget they've been in power for 17 years here. When a government has been in power that long it gets harder to maintain your grip. The fact they only lost ONE seat to the very popular Leanne Wood, who herself is very left wing, isn't really an indication that the electorate in Wales don't support Corbyn's policies.

Frankly, even if you ignore Scotland/Wales, what are you left with? Minor losses. He hasn't gained an inch, politically speaking. Which is my point. 'Holding the line', against a deeply unpopular government, is not an achievement, whichever way you spin it.

You say that holding the line isn't indicative of the unpopularity of Corbyn and his ideas. Alright then. Are you claiming here that they are indicative of indifference (which I also said), or active support? Because if you're seriously claiming that people are demonstrating their active support for Corbyn and his policies by NOT voting for him, I don't think there's much I can do to argue this one.

Yes Corbyn is up against an unpopular and fractured Tory government, but let's not forget he has a right wing element within his own party that seem desperate for him to fail.

And it's the job description of the leader to inspire, cajole, persuade, manipulate, and (in final circumstances whip) that element into line. Another thing he's failed at on every level.

The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?
It was very deliberate and very obvious what he was doing.

Pull the other one, Ken's been anti-semitic for God knows how long, but he's hard left through and through. If you're trying to insinuate Ken's working for the Blairites to damage Corbyn, you should go and read something about the man. Vain? Yes. Self-obsessed? Yes. Out to get Corbyn? Christ no. That's just a by-product of his own hubris. Ken Livingstone isn't working for anyone but Ken Livingstone, and never has been. I dislike the man intensely, but you're doing him a disservice here.

We were told the sky was going to fall in on labour last night, it didn't. There were significant losses for the Tories up and down the country, here in Wales the party has descended upon itself with RT Davies being blamed for their poor showing in Wales.

We were also told that Corbyn the messiah was descending from on high with his engraved stone tablets to sweep out the neo-liberal conmen Cameron and Osborne, and that finally there was a politician who would listen to all, be feted by all, and succeed in the face of all odds (just like the Labour leadership election). It really depends on what you read and where.

Yet the results are, as most people say, in the pudding. Judging by the votes, him and his policies are about as palatable to the public as what came before, i.e. not much. I would speculate that for every fervent new Corbynista, there's another old Labour voter who thinks he's a bit of a tit and a seventies throwback.

 Ketara wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
The losses in Scotland can't be blamed on Corbyn. Labour have been in decline there for years, well before he had a sniff of the leadership.

In Wales too Labour have many problems that opposition parties have been able to exploit. Don't forget they've been in power for 17 years here. When a government has been in power that long it gets harder to maintain your grip. The fact they only lost ONE seat to the very popular Leanne Wood, who herself is very left wing, isn't really an indication that the electorate in Wales don't support Corbyn's policies.

Frankly, even if you ignore Scotland/Wales, what are you left with? Minor losses. He hasn't gained an inch, politically speaking. Which is my point. 'Holding the line', against a deeply unpopular government, is not an achievement, whichever way you spin it.

You say that holding the line isn't indicative of the unpopularity of Corbyn and his ideas. Alright then. Are you claiming here that they are indicative of indifference (which I also said), or active support? Because if you're seriously claiming that people are demonstrating their active support for Corbyn and his policies by NOT voting for him, I don't think there's much I can do to argue this one.

Yes Corbyn is up against an unpopular and fractured Tory government, but let's not forget he has a right wing element within his own party that seem desperate for him to fail.

And it's the job description of the leader to inspire, cajole, persuade, manipulate, and (in final circumstances whip) that element into line. Another thing he's failed at on every level.

The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?
It was very deliberate and very obvious what he was doing.

Pull the other one, Ken's been anti-semitic for God knows how long, but he's hard left through and through. If you're trying to insinuate Ken's working for the Blairites to damage Corbyn, you should go and read something about the man. Vain? Yes. Self-obsessed? Yes. Out to get Corbyn? Christ no. That's just a by-product of his own hubris. Ken Livingstone isn't working for anyone but Ken Livingstone, and never has been. I dislike the man intensely, but you're doing him a disservice here.

We were told the sky was going to fall in on labour last night, it didn't. There were significant losses for the Tories up and down the country, here in Wales the party has descended upon itself with RT Davies being blamed for their poor showing in Wales.

We were also told that Corbyn the messiah was descending from on high with his engraved stone tablets to sweep out the neo-liberal conmen Cameron and Osborne, and that finally there was a politician who would listen to all, be feted by all, and succeed in the face of all odds (just like the Labour leadership election). It really depends on what you read and where.

Yet the results are, as most people say, in the pudding. Judging by the votes, him and his policies are about as palatable to the public as what came before, i.e. not much. I would speculate that for every fervent new Corbynista, there's another old Labour voter who thinks he's a bit of a tit and a seventies throwback.

I think you have the wrong end of the stick with what I was saying about that berk livingstone. He's not the one involved in the plot, John Mann is. I thought that was pretty obvious from what I said.

And I think you'll find it was Milliband who got the Stone tablets out...

 General Kroll wrote:

How are they not dealing with it? They've suspended members and they will no doubt be kicked out once due process has been followed, that's not unreasonable. Or would you rather a democratic organisation didnt follow their own rules and took carte Blanche, knee jerk action? Because that's not something I look for in a party that wants to run the country. A calm reasoned response it's what is required. Not trial by media.

An inquiry is exactly the right thing to do, unless you'd rather Labour ignored a problem and swept it under a carpet? Sure it will drag things out a bit, but isn't it better to shine a light on the truth of the matter?

As for the Guy Fawkes blog being some paragon of anti racism, and being investigative journalists, I've not laughed so much all week. They've clearly been briefed, and clearly couldn't give a fig about racism, otherwise the site would be blanketed in coverage about the Tories dog whistle campaign in the London mayoral elections. But there's not a squeak on there. So they can't be THAT bothered about bigots now, can they?

An inquiry is an excellent tool for politicians to pass the decisions onto someone else. It'll keep memories of this incident fresh as papers report on the progress. Doubly so for when livingtstone is hauled up allowing his Hitler obsessed Tourette's tic airtime.

You obsesses about briefing and conspiracie from embittered blairites, but have yet to provide proof. And, even if that were he case, they still exposed bigotry and wrongdoing. Bravo to them for exposing such turds. As for John Mann, his expletive laden tirade was a long winded way of saying "Not in my name" and quite right too.

 zedmeister wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

How are they not dealing with it? They've suspended members and they will no doubt be kicked out once due process has been followed, that's not unreasonable. Or would you rather a democratic organisation didnt follow their own rules and took carte Blanche, knee jerk action? Because that's not something I look for in a party that wants to run the country. A calm reasoned response it's what is required. Not trial by media.

An inquiry is exactly the right thing to do, unless you'd rather Labour ignored a problem and swept it under a carpet? Sure it will drag things out a bit, but isn't it better to shine a light on the truth of the matter?

As for the Guy Fawkes blog being some paragon of anti racism, and being investigative journalists, I've not laughed so much all week. They've clearly been briefed, and clearly couldn't give a fig about racism, otherwise the site would be blanketed in coverage about the Tories dog whistle campaign in the London mayoral elections. But there's not a squeak on there. So they can't be THAT bothered about bigots now, can they?

An inquiry is an excellent tool for politicians to pass the decisions onto someone else. It'll keep memories of this incident fresh as papers report on the progress. Doubly so for when livingtstone is hauled up allowing his Hitler obsessed Tourette's tic airtime.

You obsesses about briefing and conspiracie from embittered blairites, but have yet to provide proof. And, even if that were he case, they still exposed bigotry and wrongdoing. Bravo to them for exposing such turds. As for John Mann, his expletive laden tirade was a long winded way of saying "Not in my name" and quite right too.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with exposing bigots, however John Mann himself has tweeted about the fact that he's known about these allegations for a long time, he made a very public show of all this at a key time. If he truly wanted to shine a light on bigotry he would have reported these accusations to the party long ago and got the offenders suspended there and then. I'm incredibly dubious about his motives in doing so the week before a key election. Why wait until now? Other than of course to cause as much damage as possible to the party in the run up to an election.

I'm far from obsessed by the way, I'm just stating an opinion and defending it. Livingstone was a prat to say what he did, and incredibly misguided in trying to defend what Shah had been tweeting. What he said on the Daily Politcs show was stupid, but not anti semetic.

We really need to put paid to the idea that Israel = all Jewish people. I find it very disturbing that in a country that supposedly prides itself on free speech, that criticism of Israel is almost always conflated with racism. I abhor racism, but I'm also not keen on brutal imperialism and land grabs.

However, I fear we are getting well off track in this topic. Many people are keen to paint Thursday as a failure for the Labour Party, yet they are still by far and away the biggest party in Wales, and local authorities in England. Was it some glorious success? No. But no one in Corbyn's team is trying to make out it was. They were just pleased to have held on to what they had. The plan is clearly to build from here. There are elements inside the party that would love to get rid of Corbyn, he has an overwhelming mandate from his members however, and support for the Labour Party itself has grown tremendously since his election. (More people have joined the party since last summer, than make up the entire membership of the Conservative party)

Will this automatically translate to a majority in parliament? Of course not. But he deserves a chance to lead the party into the next general election, for better or worse. That's the only time we will know for sure if the country rejects his policies or not. Labour needs stability and growth right now, not infighting.

 General Kroll wrote:


I think you have the wrong end of the stick with what I was saying about that berk livingstone. He's not the one involved in the plot, John Mann is. I thought that was pretty obvious from what I said.

You used their names in the same sentence with no real priority assigned to either one. And considering it was Ken Livingstone who was all over the the headlines (as a result of his own actions), I find it somewhat extraordinary if you're asserting Mann was somehow secretly puppeteering Ken's performance to attack Corbyn.

And I think you'll find it was Milliband who got the Stone tablets out...

You know, I was just making a biblical reference, I'd completely forgotten that Ed Miliband ACTUALLY did that! Gave me a bit of a chuckle, both then and now.

However, I fear we are getting well off track in this topic. Many people are keen to paint Thursday as a failure for the Labour Party,

That's because it was. 'Holding ground' is not a success in politics unless you're the governing party (in which case, the de facto is what you wish to preserve). Any form of loss for Labour in this scenario is a failure, as is simply remaining static.

yet they are still by far and away the biggest party in Wales, and local authorities in England. Was it some glorious success? No. But no one in Corbyn's team is trying to make out it was.

The line being fed at the moment is that because the Labour Party wasn't reduced to wrack and ruin it equals success somehow.

The plan is clearly to build from here.

What's left to build on? Corbyn's policies clearly haven't drawn people in. He can't lead his own party. He's demonstrated he totally sucks at either inspiring the masses or challenging the current government. Build to where? If, when the Tories are tearing themselves over Europe, he's still in his honeymoon period, and the Government is quite unpopular, he can't capitalise in a bleeding council election, he's got a lot of building to do!

There are elements inside the party that would love to get rid of Corbyn, he has an overwhelming mandate from his members however, and support for the Labour Party itself has grown tremendously since his election.

How do you see this changing? You think the MP's are all going to leave that don't like him? You think all those new members are going to continue to increase and stay engaged after he's demonstrated since seizing the leadership that he seems incapable of politically punching his way out of a wet paper bag?


The stupid thing is that I'm a natural socialist (from a British perspective), so theoretically, I'm a natural Corbyn supporter. Unfortunately, in the same way that I'm politically aware enough to see the pros and cons of the Tories and their various policies, and ethical enough to disdain New Labour, I'm on the ball enough to see a) What Corbyn's faults are, and b) what his odds are of this changing.

Corbyn will either manage to gain control of his party through a purge which leaves it full of yes-men in a politically different direction and full to the brim of ridiculous policies, or he'll be ousted and someone else take his place (for better or worse). Whichever happens, Corbyn will never be what this country needs.

Largest party in England, largest party in Wales...and yet it's still classed as a failure.

Doesn't quite add up for me. Blair achieved similar results in 1995...that was considered a Land Slide.

Importantly Labour held councils in those key marginal areas like Nuneaton and the south east. Places that we were told would wholly reject Corbyn. It didn't happen.

There's plenty left to build on. I reject your assertion that Corbyn has failed to lead his party. A large number of Labour MPs are falling in line. But there are a number of very bitter blairites who aren't. They are the ones splitting the party, not him. Corbyn is ahead of Cameron in the polls and Labour are ahead of the Tories, if they were doing as badly as you are making out, they'd be well behind. So people clearly haven't rejected Corbyn's policies.

Labour have also been a far more effective opposition since his election, they've forced government u-turns on several very devicive issues.

It's not all sunshine and roses, but it's far from all doom and gloom. Personally I think a leadership election now would split the party even further. Especially considering the fact that Corbyn would likely just win it again.

 General Kroll wrote:
Largest party in England, largest party in Wales...and yet it's still classed as a failure.

Nonono. You're missing the point. The Labour Party didn't 'magically' pop into existence when Corbyn appeared. Every part of what you've just described is a direct result of leftover achievements/inertia of previous leaders. Remember. We're not talking about 'What has the Labour Party accomplished in the Last Fifty Years'.

No, we're talking about 'What has Corbyn achieved since he took over'. Two very, very different things. When I say that he failed to gain any traction because he's made minor losses on what the Labour Party had when he came to power, pointing out 'Well, the Labour Party still has a lot of seats' isn't something to his credit, no matter how many times you keep repeating it.

Doesn't quite add up for me. Blair achieved similar results in 1995...that was considered a Land Slide.

Importantly Labour held councils in those key marginal areas like Nuneaton and the south east. Places that we were told would wholly reject Corbyn. It didn't happen.

You keep going on about what 'we were told what would happen' and pointing to the fact the world didn't end as an achievement.

To reiterate again, what you were told was going to happen depends very heavily on what you choose to read. Yes, some people were predicting the end of existence and the Wyrm of the Worlds End, but others still the ascendance of Saint Corbyn, Saviour of the Free World.

Meanwhile, the rest of us, with more realistic expectations varied from 'minor losses' to 'a quantifiable gain'. Corbyn was an unknown factor to a large extent, and everyone was waiting to see if the fact he was elected with a large mandate would translate into actual victory at the polls. I personally was optimistic at first eight months ago, but have become less and less so as time has worn on. The poll results would appear to indicate that I'm not alone in that.

I reject your assertion that Corbyn has failed to lead his party. A large number of Labour MPs are falling in line. But there are a number of very bitter blairites who aren't. They are the ones splitting the party, not him. Corbyn is ahead of Cameron in the polls and Labour are ahead of the Tories, if they were doing as badly as you are making out, they'd be well behind. So people clearly haven't rejected Corbyn's policies.

Labour have also been a far more effective opposition since his election, they've forced government u-turns on several very devicive issues.

.....Christ, I think that's the most naive, optimistic, idealistic view of Labour over the last eight months I've read. Warms my heart slightly to know people like you still exist. Despite that, I'm afraid it doesn't jive even slightly with my awareness of the reality I exist in, so we may have to agree to disagree on this one. Time will prove one of us right. I wish it were you (because the world would probably be a better place if everything were that nice and wonderful), but call me Doubtful Thomas on that score.

Out of interest, does anybody know what happened to Miliband's stone tablets?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Out of interest, does anybody know what happened to Miliband's stone tablets?

Voted Labour, Tories won. Any kind of left-leaning vote in my constituency is pretty much just a protest vote.

Too early to attribute much to Corbyn one way or the other, as long as he wins in 2020 I'm happy.

Very sick of the current government, and any tory-led administrations.

Have spent the last month with my (ex-military, lots of mental issues) dad being kicked out of hospital too early, trying to get a social worker to help, being ignored repeatedly, having his (5 minutes walk away) GP hang up on me while asking for a home visit.

When someone did finally come to visit, it was a tory council goon who decided to hand him an eviction notice for his flat being untidy. Managed to find him somewhere private and everything is sorted, but I'm left even more bitter at the state of this country than ever.

It seems that anyone in any position of power in this country would prefer people to drop dead if they have problems rather than offering them help.

I expect things like ESA and working tax credit to be scrapped entirely in 2020 if the Tories win, along with the 1998 UK bill of human rights at some point in the next few years. Get rich or die.