Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
13 Dec 19
10:18
Joined:
Date Joined:
10 Jan 02
"Given the worst choice in history, the public preferred him to his opponent. How bad did Labour have to be to let this sociopathic, narcissistic, glutton for power beat them? That’s the soul-searching question every Labour member, office-holder and MP has to ask.
Labour was disastrously, catastrophically bad, an agony to behold. A coterie of Corbynites cared more about gripping power within the party than saving the country by winning the election. The NEC, a slate of nodding Corbynite place-persons, disgraced the party with its sectarian decisions. Once it was plain in every poll and focus group that Corbynism was electoral arsenic, they should have propelled him out, but electoral victory was secondary.
Laugh or cry at Corbyn’s announcement he wouldn’t stand for another election? He should have gone before dawn. Any possible or impossible successor will clear out that Len McCluskey clique – Karie Murphy, Seumas Milne, Andrew Murray and others who propped up the old fellow to secure their own power base, with results worse than Michael Foot. Watch them try to divert blame onto “Corbyn-disloyalists”, “remainers” and ”Blairites”.
Corbyn is not an amoral man. He can never tell a lie: pretending to watch the Queen’s Christmas message in the morning showed he’s not used to fibbing. He is a man without any qualities required of a leader, mental agility, articulacy, strategy, good humour or charisma.
Yet his legacy is of historic importance: he did this country profound, nation-splitting, irreparable harm. Had he led his party and the unions full tilt against Brexit, the narrowly lost referendum could have been won. But he and his cabal refused outright: when beseeched, they said they were too busy with that May’s local elections. He wouldn’t share any remain platform. Festering Bennite 1970s ideologies blinded his sect from seeing Brexit was the far right’s weapon of buccaneering destruction. He could have saved us – but he obfuscated.
Corbyn came weighted with baggage too heavy for a Hercules to shift: the IRA, the Hamas friends, Venezuela. But antisemitism was accusation he could not shift. I am certain he sees no stain of it in himself, refusing to comprehend it and so could not apologise. Failure to purge every case left candidates on the doorstep dumbstruck when anyone said “I can’t vote for an antisemite”. And remember that early refusal to sing the national anthem? Voters’ first impression was his deep-seated aversion to expressing patriotism.
The campaign was chaotic, all front bench talent banished for fear of outshining the leader. Toe-curlingly bad performers and insignificants were punted up as loyalists, while serious heavyweights Keir Starmer and Emily Thornberry might as well have been shut in Johnson’s freezer. Even John McDonnell, better by far than Corbyn, was largely kept from the cameras. Corbyn’s sectarian grudges prevented any effort to heal the party’s rift, leaving immense talent wasted on the back benches.
Here’s the real tragedy. The manifesto was essentially magnificent. The vision was of a country freed from years of darkness with green investment, growth in places that most need it, salving the many wounds of marrow-deep cuts, restoring pride in the public sphere and hope in a future that was absolutely affordable. Why should we not tax and spend the same as similar north European countries? But if socialism is the language of priorities, these were lost in a profusion of never-ending promises too easily mocked. The political landscape was never prepared, soil untilled, last-minute policies falling on stony ground. Where was the simple five-point pledge card?
Credibility is everything and Corbyn lacked it like no other. Without credibility all was lost. Think on it, every Labour member. It will be a long, long road up from such a fall. There will be days to consider hope: today is for confronting reality."
Labour was disastrously, catastrophically bad, an agony to behold. A coterie of Corbynites cared more about gripping power within the party than saving the country by winning the election. The NEC, a slate of nodding Corbynite place-persons, disgraced the party with its sectarian decisions. Once it was plain in every poll and focus group that Corbynism was electoral arsenic, they should have propelled him out, but electoral victory was secondary.
Laugh or cry at Corbyn’s announcement he wouldn’t stand for another election? He should have gone before dawn. Any possible or impossible successor will clear out that Len McCluskey clique – Karie Murphy, Seumas Milne, Andrew Murray and others who propped up the old fellow to secure their own power base, with results worse than Michael Foot. Watch them try to divert blame onto “Corbyn-disloyalists”, “remainers” and ”Blairites”.
Corbyn is not an amoral man. He can never tell a lie: pretending to watch the Queen’s Christmas message in the morning showed he’s not used to fibbing. He is a man without any qualities required of a leader, mental agility, articulacy, strategy, good humour or charisma.
Yet his legacy is of historic importance: he did this country profound, nation-splitting, irreparable harm. Had he led his party and the unions full tilt against Brexit, the narrowly lost referendum could have been won. But he and his cabal refused outright: when beseeched, they said they were too busy with that May’s local elections. He wouldn’t share any remain platform. Festering Bennite 1970s ideologies blinded his sect from seeing Brexit was the far right’s weapon of buccaneering destruction. He could have saved us – but he obfuscated.
Corbyn came weighted with baggage too heavy for a Hercules to shift: the IRA, the Hamas friends, Venezuela. But antisemitism was accusation he could not shift. I am certain he sees no stain of it in himself, refusing to comprehend it and so could not apologise. Failure to purge every case left candidates on the doorstep dumbstruck when anyone said “I can’t vote for an antisemite”. And remember that early refusal to sing the national anthem? Voters’ first impression was his deep-seated aversion to expressing patriotism.
The campaign was chaotic, all front bench talent banished for fear of outshining the leader. Toe-curlingly bad performers and insignificants were punted up as loyalists, while serious heavyweights Keir Starmer and Emily Thornberry might as well have been shut in Johnson’s freezer. Even John McDonnell, better by far than Corbyn, was largely kept from the cameras. Corbyn’s sectarian grudges prevented any effort to heal the party’s rift, leaving immense talent wasted on the back benches.
Here’s the real tragedy. The manifesto was essentially magnificent. The vision was of a country freed from years of darkness with green investment, growth in places that most need it, salving the many wounds of marrow-deep cuts, restoring pride in the public sphere and hope in a future that was absolutely affordable. Why should we not tax and spend the same as similar north European countries? But if socialism is the language of priorities, these were lost in a profusion of never-ending promises too easily mocked. The political landscape was never prepared, soil untilled, last-minute policies falling on stony ground. Where was the simple five-point pledge card?
Credibility is everything and Corbyn lacked it like no other. Without credibility all was lost. Think on it, every Labour member. It will be a long, long road up from such a fall. There will be days to consider hope: today is for confronting reality."
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 68
|
By:
The manifesto was essentially magnificent
Was it. Nobody believed all the free stuff. Must think we are all idiots. |
|
By:
All he's got left now is the Sharia Law vote. Not even the We Want Free Things voter group turned out in such decisive numbers as in 2017.
|
|
By:
The manifesto was essentially magnificent.
It was a bigger fairytale than anything the Grimm Brothers ever came up with. |
|
By:
It was an even longer Suicide Note than Worzel Foot's in 1983.
|
|
By:
I think "chicken" Corbyn and McDonnell ought to resign from their post immediately as I firmly believe they must not be involved with the "reflection" post this worst election ever result for over 3 decades. They must not have an input in this as they were the main architects and drivers of the election policies and strategies.
|
|
By:
OFFICIAL : Corbyn "NOT TO BLAME" for what happened. He just told us so on BBC1.
|
|
By:
don't forget children to be indoctrinoated , sorry I mean taught of the evils of the empire.
|
|
By:
Labour knew it and Corbyn knew it. Those appalling numbers were not state secrets. His admirers always describe him as a selfless, almost saintly man, devoid of ego. So why didn’t he take one look at his own ratings and say, “I am clearly a drag on this party’s prospects. Those who need a Labour government have a better chance of getting one if I step aside.” Not a chance.
Corbyn’s own vanity was too great for him even to consider such an act of self-sacrifice. Instead he was encouraged by his own devoted legions of supporters, for whom the idea of a change of leader was heresy. In their mind, it was better to lose under Corbyn than to have a shot at winning with someone – anyone – else. |
|
By:
above from the guardian
|
|
By:
He says it is only responsible for him to stay until a successor has been named. But, he's not admitted responsibility for the election implosion.
|
|
By:
The manifesto was idiotic, but apart from that The Guardian was spot on in their assessment of Corbyn and his clique.
He obviously wants to stay on in order to try and influence the picking of his sucessor and help keep the Momentum power base. |
|
By:
I thought the gruniad told people to vote for us (labour) or did I have my beer goggles on at the time
they are a two faced lot in that rag |
|
By:
theyre telling you about the fkn shambles that is lab under corbyn,its called journalism
|
|
By:
corbyn has inherted this mess from the blair era, thats whats really messed this country up, and thats why people wanted brexit etc
|
|
By:
I didn't want Corbyn to win but this is an awful article by Polly Toynbee.
It was the likes of Toynbee and Jonathan Freedland who urged Labour to a Remain position, against Corbyn's inclination, on the grounds it would be a vote winner. And now it was shown to be a disastrous move Toynbee and Freedland have columns up today, making no apologies and putting 100% blame on JC. Of course Corbyn and Freedlands pieces are closed for comments (which never normaly happens, and several people are using other threads to point out) while lefties on there like Gary Younge with articles acknowledging the abandonment of Leave voters as a big factor, have comments open. Cowardly move by Polly. |
|
By:
*Of course Corbyn and Freedlands piece
Toynbee and Freedland |
|
By:
Ignoring the immense talent on the backbenches??? This is ironic yes?
|
|
By:
tobe do you not think it was the cowardly mush of not having an opinion on brexit that partly sunk jc,no-ones fkn neutral ffs,awful thing to say but the mans dead inside,have an opinion you yellow b******d and argue your corner,now hes saying he had a great manifesto ffs,not after a fkn drubbing like that its not
|
|
By:
He's just managed a half apology but adamant Brexit and the media were Labour lost. What a fool to the end!
|
|
By:
Deluded old fool.
|
|
By:
my the hatred and the gloating on here is something else , mind you the suspects still at it
|
|
By:
Victim?
|
|
By:
He's playing victim when he was the offender of this thrashing by the Tories.
|
|
By:
flasher just because people do not agree with your vile political views that does not mean you can make it personal
|
|
By:
get the fool out now after that debacle,how the jester will have the gall to face ****,if the c gets up in the commons ill think even less of him
|
|
By:
bj*
|
|
By:
Rommel im suprised you have joined the hate mob on here
|
|
By:
Misrepresenting by victimisation.
|
|
By:
hating who anx?weve been betrayed by a fool,a vain fool,betrayal is not too strong a word,his vanity and lack of any self awareness has betrayed every one in this country
|
|
By:
dont hate the man,pity him
|
|
By:
'It was the likes of Toynbee and Jonathan Freedland who urged Labour to a Remain position, against Corbyn's inclination, on the grounds it would be a vote winner.'
Bullseye tobermory |
|
By:
Rommel brexit was the big issue , plus the vicious personal attacks on him were a disgrace but no suprise really with media controlled by foriegn bilionaires
|
|
By:
Anybody who offers real change is always attacked by the ruling class and the Capitalist mafia
|
|
By:
he never went to a remain position,the awful non-position of so many splinters up his jaxxi ffs
|
|
By:
If he actually had an opinion on Brexit (which we all know he wanted out of the EU but couldn't bring himself to say it), instead of being 'neutral', he may not have suffered such a disaster. Add to the fact the countless freebies which couldn't be afforded, is it any wonder they were trounced?
If they don't put a new leader in who isn't as far left as Corbyn and McDonnell, they will be in the wilderness for a very long time. Still not having the Lib Dems ever being forgiven for their betrayals in the coalition, so step forward The Social Democratic Party. Could be the next big thing. |
|
By:
it wasnt the big issue,his position on it was part of the issue,he was so much ammo for the rw press,so much baggage with him,poor sap
|
|
By:
HGS with a lot of the party pro remain he was in an impossible position , they should have respected the vote and they would have done better
|
|
By:
For sure anx.
|