Next Leader of the Opposition

[johnny the fox]

He speaks for me.

you must be a sad article as well..... perhaps you can put a gang together and bully me off the forum..ha ha ..

[Guest]

He speaks for me.

 hehe!

 

that's a "we"

[Buce]

you must be a sad article as well..... perhaps you can put a gang together and bully me off the forum..ha ha ..

Not at all.

I'm more than happy for you to post your tripe, but I doubt that there's anybody who considers it, or you, to be relevant.

[Guest Bilo]

Obviously he won't have the effect that corbynites claimed, sadly burnhamites and cooperites were even further out with their claims.

 

I keep repeating it because you keep poo pooing his right whilst the others have no mandate at all.

 

The quitters are doing him the favour of having to sack them. Not only are they too right wing they are also spineless.

 

Some would stay stop your crying and back the man that the PARTY members wanted to lead their party, Your martydom is pathetic.

 

Martyrdom? Crying?

 

That's the kind of nonsense response I'd expect from Claridge. The fact you look down on him is hilarious in light of that!

 

I am not poo pooing his right to lead. Please read what I've said. I've said that his mandate is clear and that even without the £3ers, he'd have won.

 

I accept the result, will continue to support the party and work towards a Labour government. Incidentally, I attended a branch meeting last night, will be attending a Labour led NHS meeting on Thursday and will be attending a CLP meeting in my capacity as Vice Chair of the CLP on Friday. That's not bad considering my very full-time job, so I can hardly be accused of not supporting the party sufficiently. I therefore feel I have the right to express my opinions on this result.

 

What I'm saying is that with people are with Labour today, because they're members, he has work to do in unifying the party. 

[Guest Bilo]

That's democracy.

If Labour were elected to government on 49% of the vote, I'm sure you would view that as an overwhelming mandate to govern; there would be no talk about the 51% who didn't vote for them, or about the percentage of non-voters.

You are starting to sound sour, Bilo, and it doesn't suit you.

 

Internal and General Elections are very different. Here, we had a choice of four candidates. The General Election had a choice of 68 parties, with 11 represented in Parliament. 49% hasn't been seen seen since Attlee was elected.

 

Again, and I'm getting a little tired of saying this, I don't deny Corbyn's mandate. I'm merely saying that with Labour members, it isn't as strong as it appears and it's important that the views of those who didn't vote for him are not discounted. Labour is and needs to remain a broad church. The 51% of members who didn't vote for him must still be allowed a voice. 

[The Doctor]

From twitter - Corbyns got his cabinet ready:

 

[Guest Bilo]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/jeremy-corbyn-becomes-labour-leader-today-is-our-darkest-hour--we-have-become-unelectable-10497770.html?icn=puff-2

 

Depressingly good article.

[Guest]

Martyrdom? Crying?

 

That's the kind of nonsense response I'd expect from Claridge. The fact you look down on him is hilarious in light of that!

 

I am not poo pooing his right to lead. Please read what I've said. I've said that his mandate is clear and that even without the £3ers, he'd have won.

 

I accept the result, will continue to support the party and work towards a Labour government. Incidentally, I attended a branch meeting last night, will be attending a Labour led NHS meeting on Thursday and will be attending a CLP meeting in my capacity as Vice Chair of the CLP on Friday. That's not bad considering my very full-time job, so I can hardly be accused of not supporting the party sufficiently. I therefore feel I have the right to express my opinions on this result.

 

What I'm saying is that with people are with Labour today, because they're members, he has work to do in unifying the party. 

Don't you think that resigning whilst the guy is being applauded by everyone for winning is a form of martyrdom. If he was a labour man he'd fight for the party however he was wanted just like cooper immediately said she'd do. He decided to throw a mardy! I'd call that pathetic, I'd have thought you would too.

 

All the leaders would have work to do unifying the party and clearly those with less support would have far more work to do.

 

Glad to hear that your actions are not as weak sounding as your words have been concerning Corbyn. Your party will need you over the coming months and years.

[Guest]

Internal and General Elections are very different. Here, we had a choice of four candidates. The General Election had a choice of 68 parties, with 11 represented in Parliament. 49% hasn't been seen seen since Attlee was elected.

 

Again, and I'm getting a little tired of saying this, I don't deny Corbyn's mandate. I'm merely saying that with Labour members, it isn't as strong as it appears and it's important that the views of those who didn't vote for him are not discounted. Labour is and needs to remain a broad church. The 51% of members who didn't vote for him must still be allowed a voice. 

 

and I've seen nothing to suggest that won't be the case.

[Claridge]

Martyrdom? Crying?

That's the kind of nonsense response I'd expect from Claridge. The fact you look down on him is hilarious in light of that!

I am not poo pooing his right to lead. Please read what I've said. I've said that his mandate is clear and that even without the £3ers, he'd have won.

I accept the result, will continue to support the party and work towards a Labour government. Incidentally, I attended a branch meeting last night, will be attending a Labour led NHS meeting on Thursday and will be attending a CLP meeting in my capacity as Vice Chair of the CLP on Friday. That's not bad considering my very full-time job, so I can hardly be accused of not supporting the party sufficiently. I therefore feel I have the right to express my opinions on this result.

What I'm saying is that with people are with Labour today, because they're members, he has work to do in unifying the party.

Listen to the pair of you,don't be so mean to each other it's not nice.xxxxxxxx

[lavrentis]

Jeremy Corbyn is the man to vote for.

[Guest Bilo]

Don't you think that resigning whilst the guy is being applauded by everyone for winning is a form of martyrdom. If he was a labour man he'd fight for the party however he was wanted just like cooper immediately said she'd do. He decided to throw a mardy! I'd call that pathetic, I'd have thought you would too.

All the leaders would have work to do unifying the party and clearly those with less support would have far more work to do.

Glad to hear that your actions are not as weak sounding as your words have been concerning Corbyn. Your party will need you over the coming months and years.

What has been weak about my words? I've set out my concerns, my views have been consistent, I've debated with people who feel differently on the issues, have not been tempted to jump on the bandwagon and my support for the party has not wavered.

Also, I was the martyr not so long ago whereas now it's Jamie Reed. Make up your mind.

He said from an early stage he'd resign if Corbyn won because of JC's stance on nuclear power, something Reed found irreconcilable with the fact that Sellafield is a major employer within his constituency.

[Webbo]

Jeremy Corbyn is the man to vote for.

Farage fan boy to Corbynite in a matter of months. That's what happens when you work for the right wing BBC.

[Guest Bilo]

and I've seen nothing to suggest that won't be the case.

Then I would suggest you haven't seen the behaviour of many of his supporters.

[Claridge]

I think the fact that tory/media have allowed the unions to get to the state where the forthcoming Union review could see unions become irrelevant in the UK shows why Labour needs to move a little left and get discussion going.

 

Discussion is what is lacking in UK politics, populism is winning and politics is being led by the media not by the parties.

 

It's a catastrophe what has happened to trade unions in the UK. Yes they need to modernise but not to lose power. Unions came around because of the dire need for them, they were a revolution and they are still needed, hopefully the labour party can air some of the reasons that the tories shouldn't be allowed to move them to the scrapheap alongside the miners.

You really have no idea do you?

The link between working people and the unions was destroyed in the 70s with idiotic wage demands ,stupid political strikes and jumping on any cause around the world that many of their members couldn't care less about.

Today's union leaders are fat cats paying themselves massive wages out of members funds.

Most people in the unions don't even vote for strike action when asked. Even dear old Scargill has been having the NUMs pants down for years over his London flat.

Just like the Labour party, unions do not represent the average working person who couldn't care less about half the nonsense they waffle on about.

Its sad what happened to the miners, but it was the NUM being taken over by the hard left that finished them and the same is going to happen to Labour if they don't reconnect with the millions of people who class themselves as 'working class'

You need to get out of your political bubble and meet some 'real' people and listen to what their concerns are.

The idea that Murdoch  has a major influence on people's views is another way in which the left patronises the working class, I don't think i've met anyone who likes Murdoch , left or right.

The left believes that the main issues for working people are the NHS, education and poverty and have spent the last 30 years banging on about the Tory threat. In normal conversations(not being led by pollsters) people talk about their fears of immigration, benefit scroungers, political correctness ,Muslims etc..

You only have to look at the rise of UKIP in labour areas to see how detached labour has become from 'the people. I work for a housing association and speak to many people daily who should be labour supporters but they roll their eyes when you mention labour and see them as not representing them in any way. They say the same about the tories I admit but that is not the argument. These people won't identify with Corbyn as he won't talk about the real issues that concern them, it will just be more of the same waffle about the NHS,unions the poor blah,blah ,blah and when he loses the election it will be the tory press at fault

[Charl91]

 

The idea that Murdoch  has a major influence on people's views is another way in which the left patronises the working class, I don't think i've met anyone who likes Murdoch , left or right.

 

 

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that his newspapers have no effect on popular opinion. When (for example) "FEAR MUSLIMS!!!" is constantly re-iterated in Newspapers, there will be a lot of people who will be influenced by that. 

[Webbo]

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that his newspapers have no effect on popular opinion. When (for example) "FEAR MUSLIMS!!!" is constantly re-iterated in Newspapers, there will be a lot of people who will be influenced by that. 

Do you think that maybe the actions of ISIS and Al Qaeda might have an effect on that as well?

[bovril]

Farage fan boy to Corbynite in a matter of months. That's what happens when you work for the right wing BBC.

Two sides of the same coin?

[Guest]

What has been weak about my words? I've set out my concerns, my views have been consistent, I've debated with people who feel differently on the issues, have not been tempted to jump on the bandwagon and my support for the party has not wavered.

Also, I was the martyr not so long ago whereas now it's Jamie Reed. Make up your mind.

He said from an early stage he'd resign if Corbyn won because of JC's stance on nuclear power, something Reed found irreconcilable with the fact that Sellafield is a major employer within his constituency.

 

You misread or I wasn't clear. I never called you a martyr that and the other comment was aimed at Reed. As far as I know you've never said you'd leave the labour party.

 

I think you're a labour supporter who got a little carried away with Corbyn and have blown the thought of his election out of proportion that's all.

[Guest]

You really have no idea do you?

The link between working people and the unions was destroyed in the 70s with idiotic wage demands ,stupid political strikes and jumping on any cause around the world that many of their members couldn't care less about.

Today's union leaders are fat cats paying themselves massive wages out of members funds.

Most people in the unions don't even vote for strike action when asked. Even dear old Scargill has been having the NUMs pants down for years over his London flat.

Just like the Labour party, unions do not represent the average working person who couldn't care less about half the nonsense they waffle on about.

Its sad what happened to the miners, but it was the NUM being taken over by the hard left that finished them and the same is going to happen to Labour if they don't reconnect with the millions of people who class themselves as 'working class'

You need to get out of your political bubble and meet some 'real' people and listen to what their concerns are.

The idea that Murdoch  has a major influence on people's views is another way in which the left patronises the working class, I don't think i've met anyone who likes Murdoch , left or right.

The left believes that the main issues for working people are the NHS, education and poverty and have spent the last 30 years banging on about the Tory threat. In normal conversations(not being led by pollsters) people talk about their fears of immigration, benefit scroungers, political correctness ,Muslims etc..

You only have to look at the rise of UKIP in labour areas to see how detached labour has become from 'the people. I work for a housing association and speak to many people daily who should be labour supporters but they roll their eyes when you mention labour and see them as not representing them in any way. They say the same about the tories I admit but that is not the argument. These people won't identify with Corbyn as he won't talk about the real issues that concern them, it will just be more of the same waffle about the NHS,unions the poor blah,blah ,blah and when he loses the election it will be the tory press at fault

 

And you really don't understand why Trade unions were formed do you?

[Sharpe's Fox]

[Rincewind]

The knives are out for him already on Twitter. One a David Jones (I don't think related to Owen) said he  had extreme views then goes on to say he is a UKIP supporter.

[Claridge]

And you really don't understand why Trade unions were formed do you?[/quote

I agree with unions that work for their members.I just don't think you can say that about many unions today,they often have other agendas

[Charl91]

Do you think that maybe the actions of ISIS and Al Qaeda might have an effect on that as well?

 

You're being pedantic. It's one example of many, and while it's not the best, it's easy for the media to exaggerate a situation portray it as being far worse than it is. 

[Claridge]

You're being pedantic. It's one example of many, and while it's not the best, it's easy for the media to exaggerate a situation portray it as being far worse than it is.

Cutting a soldiers head off in London whilst shouting Islamic slogans doesn't help. Not sure how Murdoch reported it but I suppose he struggled for a positive light