Is it time for Jeremy Corbyn to be replaced?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WayneMorse

Banned
The whole government review of pension age really made me think about it, but is the current government doing all of these vile things because they know the opposition is completely toothless? For as awful as the government is now the fact they're still leading in polling compared to Labour shows just how incompetent Labour is right now.

I said this in the UK poligaf thread, but I'd rather have a competent leader who'd be able to slap Cameron around in the House of Commons than someone ideologically pure like Corbyn who can't do shit.
 
Real Hero said:
What could a different leader do?
Click to expand...

Well nothing to change government policy but perhaps be a more skilled politician and media figure, not someone Cameron can just shrug off and pretend doesn't exist in the Commons.

Yes Labour doesn't have a chance to win an election until at least 2025, but that doesn't mean the opposition should be jettisoned.
 
WayneMorse said:
I said this in the UK poligaf thread, but I'd rather have a competent leader who'd be able to slap Cameron around in the House of Commons than someone ideologically pure like Corbyn who can't do shit.
Click to expand...

And who would be this magical labour candidate? All the others were even more willing to be amicable to the tories than he is.

Ah i see you mentioned Chuka. The guy who went into hiding as soon as Corbyn won. Can't quite see how he'd fare better.
 
The Tories would do whatever the fuck they want no matter who was in opposition, just like every non-coalition government. We could have Mandela's ghost as Leader of the Opposition and Cameron wouldn't give a shit.
 
Labour have been a shoddy opposition since 2010 - Corbyn just brings that to a head.

As a Lib Dem I want him around as long as possible, to give us time to rebuild locally without significant pressure from Labour.
 
WayneMorse said:
Well nothing to change government policy but perhaps be a more skilled politician and media figure, not someone Cameron can just shrug off and pretend doesn't exist in the Commons.

.
Click to expand...

They are arrogant and don't give a shit, changing the labour wouldn't stop that. Corbyn also has massive support from the party members, it would be a really bad idea to force him out
 
Pretty depressing that 'being able to slap' someone around the Commons is the only barometer of political worth. What about policies? There's plenty you could attack Corbyn on regarding those!
 
How would a different leader change that? And you do realise Corbyn got by far the most Labour votes right? That he has far more support from Labour voters than any other candidate? Replacing him would just fracture the Labour party even more, and end up losing them huge amounts of their supporters.
 
I mean I'm not following closely, but I'm very happy with the opposition job Corbyn is doing. What can the polls tell you about the job he's doing?
 
WayneMorse said:
The whole government review of pension age really made me think about it, but is the current government doing all of these vile things because they know the opposition is completely toothless? For as awful as the government is now the fact they're still leading in polling compared to Labour shows just how incompetent Labour is right now.

I said this in the UK poligaf thread, but I'd rather have a competent leader who'd be able to slap Cameron around in the House of Commons than someone ideologically pure like Corbyn who can't do shit.
Click to expand...

Oh so someone who agress with what the Tories do. How is:

Tories: Make 50% cuts
Labour: only 40% can be sustained! (when trying to appease some middleground, when the reality is closer to no cuts)
Tories: We will only cut by 30%, which Labour now has to embarrassingly try to not agree with.

Better than:

Tories: 50% cuts!
Corbyn: We need growth not cuts
Toriea: Only 30% cuts
Corbyn: A bit better but still bad

?
 
Moosichu said:
Oh so someone who agress with what the Tories do. How is:

Tories: Make 50% cuts
Labour: only 40% can be sustained! (when trying to appease some middleground, when the reality is closer to no cuts)
Tories: We will only cut by 30%, which Labour now has to embarrassingly try to not agree with.

Better than:

Tories: 50% cuts!
Corbyn: We need growth not cuts
Toriea: Only 30% cuts
Corbyn: A bit better but still bad

?
Click to expand...

So you need a skilled negotiator? There's a certain Drumpf who seems right up your alley.
 
Have we watched the same Jeremy Corbyn? The stuff he's poor at is when he's put on the spot on TV and you get shit like "Why don't we build nuclear submarines but not arm them?" that seems designed to appeal to absolutely nobody. He normally does very well in Commons head-to-heads with Cameron, unless your definition of "slapping around" is making snide personal attacks.

And no, the reason the Tories suddenly seem so aggressive is because they no longer have coalition partners, who they'd have to placate to keep their support, to keep them in check.
 
I like Corbyn. Most politicians will just spin and say whatever gets them votes, and then you don't really know what they will do if elected. Corbyn doesn't care what the media says or if his opinion isn't popular, he has integrity and will say what he believes in.

I do wish he was better at PMQs as Cameron gets away with non-answers every week, but again it's because Corbyn isn't agressive attacking type. He's all about the core politics and that doesn't play well with the media.
 
They're 8 months into a 5 year majority. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference who the opposition is because there's nothing anyone can do. So thank the voters for that.
 
Prime Ministers have been dodging straight answers at PMQs since the 1800s. Probably. I mean, at least since Thatcher. It's not unique to Corbyn/Cameron.
 
D4Danger said:
They're 8 months into a 5 year majority. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference who the opposition is because there's nothing anyone can do. So thank the voters for that.
Click to expand...

The Labour Party did this to themselves. They have many MPs and a sizeable chunk of the popular vote. They should be the convincing alternative to the Tories. Instead they're careening towards another SDP situation.
 
D4Danger said:
They're 8 months into a 5 year majority. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference who the opposition is because there's nothing anyone can do. So thank the voters for that.
Click to expand...

Some might say the voters did this because there was not a completely credible opposition to vote for. This country needs its opposition to be a unified coherent and electable entity.

Right now Labour are struggling to avoid conflict in it's own party, let alone challenging the Conservatives. And there ARE really good potential leaders in the party - eg: Dan Jarvis.
 
Look at the sacrificial lambs that Corbyn had to compete against, you'd think Labour were trying to throw the next election anyway. I can't believe Captain Scarlet was supposed to be a legitimate contender.
 
I'm torn. He is ineffective in many respects but he's fucking up the order of the house - his face doesn't fit, so the Conservatives are openly daily resorting to pretty much nigh on personal attacks about the pettiest of things.

He's been very successful in showing both sides of the house absolutely detest someone who doesn't peddle the same tow-the-line bullshit they both do. His inclusion of questions from the People at PMQs is a good one I feel and the House fucking HATES it.

He's not successful at many other things though so ultimately he will go sooner than later. I dearly wish Labour as a party would take some good learning experiences from his endeavour about what they should represent (if not practice) but I doubt they will
 
God no.

Last thing we need right now is another Media Savvy leader, who'll look ok at PMQ but do fuck all to do anything decent for the country.

Corbyn's labour has been decent opposition so far.
They have created enough fuss about certain things, but as someone here said, they are 8 months into it, another 4 and a bit years to go, no point going mental yet.
 
Huw_Dawson said:
As a Lib Dem I want him around as long as possible, to give us time to rebuild locally without significant pressure from Labour.
Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint you, but Jezza aint gonna be around for the next 50+ years...!

The Lib Dems are done! Clegg ruined any potential credibility that the party may have had for his 5 minutes.
 
He's alright. I like how the Tories scoff at answering questions from the public who they represent. It's like a Blackadder routine.

I also want him to stay around to the point where David Cameron responds with a high-pitched squeal of "buy a Saville row suit you pleb".
 
Replace the most popular Labour politician? With someone less popular?

Replace the only principled politician there is? The only many who throughout his whole career has never been bought. No, Corbyn is the only savior of the country.

The difference I would say between Corbyn and Sanders is foreign policy. Sanders is a pro war hawk, who is aligned with the rightwing when it comes to Israel and foreign policy. People will accept someone as long as their foreign policy aligns. But the British political system, whose number 1 lobby group is a rightwing Jewish one, will destroy anyone who isn't pro war, and pro Israel.

Corbyn created too many enemies by not kissing Israels ass, that's his main obstacle. Israeli money runs Westminister. He's not a pro war, racist Hawk, like all of the Labour and Tory party. And, the obvious, not bowing down to every single corporate interest, like Cameron.

I dunno, Britain is a utopian nightmare. A bought and paid for country, by special interests. In America, this is shameful, allowing money and politics to mix. But in Britain, its not hidden. We proudly mix money, class and politics. In America, their leaders can come from any walk of life. Over here, you have to be part of the white Eton class.
 
Corbyn is literally unelectable. He needs to go. Anything else is just delaying the inevitable. He may have the support of the members but the PLP despise him and a huge chunk of labour voters won't vote for him.
 
Considering he's faced possibly more adversity than almost any major British party leader in history, he is doing an exceptional job. Far better than any opposition in recent memory. He's ignored everything that has been thrown in his direction and has continued to make his voice heard loudly and clearly. If Labour continues to move towards reuniting and fully embracing his leadership, we're going to see an even more aggressive opposition into the later years of this Conservative term.
 
kang-and-kodos-300x232.jpg
 
People keep harping on about Labour being unelectable thanks to Corbyn when he received the most amount of votes for leader by far and even increased the Labour share of the vote in the Oldham by-election. For someone so unelectable he seems to be doing pretty well at being elected.
 
Jazzy Geoff said:
Corbyn is literally unelectable. He needs to go. Anything else is just delaying the inevitable. He may have the support of the members but the PLP despise him and a huge chunk of labour voters won't vote for him.
Click to expand...

The guy who won the most Labour votes is unelectable? The most popular Labour leader is unelectable?

He has energised long lapsed Labour areas. Here's the truth, the Blairites are the ones that are unelectable, because they are all Tory-lite. There is literally no point of new Labour, of anyone Labour outside of a few people like Corbyn.

This is why no one supported the other candidates, because they are astonishingly similar to the Tory party. Like I said, why would anyone bother voting for Labour if they are spouting 95% of the same things as Tory are?

Whether or not Corbyn will win, he's the only person the reflects the politics of actual Labour voters. Frankly, I find it baffling to claim the most popular politician of the a certain party is its most unelectable. Kinda an oxymoron.
 
Yes he needs to go. This country is at its best when we have an effective opposition. Corbyn & Co are about as far away from that as possible.

I should be grateful for that as its making my job piss easy, as none of the Minister's in my department are getting tagged at all.

Seriously, the Lords is my only worry right now when it comes to questions challenging policy
 
I like Corbyn, until he got in I'd been on the edge about Labour for a while (I'd swung between Labour pre Milliband, Lib Dems pre Clegg and Greens who annoyingly have little chance). Now (whilst they have Corbyn, a proper Labour leader) then it's a no brainer for me, and most the people I know.

... I may be a leftie Northerner though..
 
Ding-Ding said:
Yes he needs to go. This country is at its best when we have an effective opposition. Corbyn & Co are about as far away from that as possible.

I should be grateful for that as its making my job piss easy, as none of the Minister's in my department are getting tagged at all.

Seriously, the Lords is my only worry right now when it comes to questions challenging policy
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing but the point Optimusdouche makes above you is valid - when most of the Labour party are indeed Tory-lite, they may play the game better but would they actually be an effective alternative in their current state.

I don't like the Tories but all I see in Labour is Corbyn getting shredded his party who are (largely but not all) Tory clones.
 
Why would he go? What would that achieve? He's done a far better job than someone like him has any right to have done, under so much scrutiny (that finally seems to have eased off). The problem is that the Labour vote has been completely split between the lifelong Labour supporters, the Labour voters that basically want a Tory-lite government and the ones who are considering UKIP, made worse by both Labour MPs counting themselves out of the running for a shadow post to save themselves for the next parliament where a Labour victory is more likely, Corbyn's unusual choice of shadow cabinet ministers, general infighting and their lack of respect given to potential UKIP defectors. The problem isn't Corbyn, it's Labour; they need to get a grip on things or many of them won't even get the CHANCE to be in the 2020+ Shadow Cabinet.
 
WayneMorse said:
The whole government review of pension age really made me think about it, but is the current government doing all of these vile things because they know the opposition is completely toothless? For as awful as the government is now the fact they're still leading in polling compared to Labour shows just how incompetent Labour is right now.

I said this in the UK poligaf thread, but I'd rather have a competent leader who'd be able to slap Cameron around in the House of Commons than someone ideologically pure like Corbyn who can't do shit.
Click to expand...

Who?
 
Garjon said:
The problem isn't Corbyn, it's Labour; they need to get a grip on things or many of them won't even get the CHANCE to be in the 2020+ Shadow Cabinet.
Click to expand...

Yerp. The pragmatic approach is to realize that you simply will not be able to oust Corbyn, so you might as well try to work with the man to the best of your habilities. A fractured party benefits only the enemy.
 
Garjon said:
Why would he go? What would that achieve? He's done a far better job than someone like him has any right to have done, under so much scrutiny (that finally seems to have eased off). The problem is that the Labour vote has been completely split between the lifelong Labour supporters, the Labour voters that basically want a Tory-lite government and the ones who are considering UKIP, made worse by both Labour MPs counting themselves out of the running for a shadow post to save themselves for the next parliament where a Labour victory is more likely, Corbyn's unusual choice of shadow cabinet ministers, general infighting and their lack of respect given to potential UKIP defectors. The problem isn't Corbyn, it's Labour; they need to get a grip on things or many of them won't even get the CHANCE to be in the 2020+ Shadow Cabinet.
Click to expand...

100% this. Labour is being disrespectful and anti democratic. They are not following the will of their own voters. Why should they? Their master Blair showed them the way.

Sadly, this is all down the remnants of Blair stealing the soul of the party, and even till this day, hanging around, making racist comments worse than UKIP and the Tories.

The rest of Labour are throwing a hissy fit. Corbyn has a chance of beating the Tories, but only if his party, whose voters have chosen Corbyn, aid him, instead of spiting him by making the Labour party lose on purpose. This is what we are seeing here. Labour politicians loyal to Blair, deciding they will make Labour lose, because New Labours politics mirrors the Tory party, not the progressive, peaceful, and hopeful politics of Corbyn.

Blair poisoned the heart of Labour, Coryn is the antidote. Without him, it makes no difference which party leads. Post Miliband loss, the rest of Labour is so similar to Tory it's not even funny. There's genuinely no need for a Corbyn-less Labour party, because that's just the Tory party, with a different tie. Hell, even the current destruction and American takeover of the NHS was started by good old Tony Blair. The man more responsible than anyone else for the creation of ISIS. The man who till this day insists the Iraq War bears zero responsibility for the creation of ISIS.
 
liquidtmd said:
I'm not disagreeing but the point Optimusdouche makes above you is valid - when most of the Labour party are indeed Tory-lite, they may play the game better but would they actually be an effective alternative in their current state.

I don't like the Tories but all I see in Labour is Corbyn getting shredded his party who are (largely but not all) Tory clones.
Click to expand...

But what good is being something other than a 'tory lite' if as opposition you are ineffective and come the election, you are unelectable.

To 'win' a general election, Labour need to win in places like Basildon and hold other seats such as Hove. Corbyn will get you stomped in both guaranteed. There really is no point in energizing the Labour base when they largely live in seats the tories would never challenge in anyway.

Especially as the next boundry change is most likely to favour the tories, as their safe seats are high populations. Labour mostly hold the smaller population areas. Even out the seats for a more even spread, you would be looking at around 20 seats changing from Labour to the tories
 
I would have voted Labour if Corbyn was running for the last election, but I voted Green in a town where it didn't matter. I hope Corbyn sticks through the term and wins the election next time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Is time literally moving faster or is it an age thing?
2
75
3K
MastAndo replied
  • Locked
I think it's time we take off and nuke Reddit from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
3
659
Aesius replied
  • Locked
Time to bring back Politics forum?
6
1K
EviLore replied
It's time to move away from Firefox (UP: Mozilla clarified the language in the ToS)
2
59
4K
mitch1971 replied
Hypothetical: If the resistance reprogramed a T-X and sent it back in time to protect John......
25
1K
Ecotic replied
Top Bottom