Jeremy Corbyn

[Red-Robbo]

6 hours ago, SX225 said:

Well Robbo, December 3rd it is then.

A nearly 14,000 Labour majority in a safe seat, after Mr Meachers passing.

Will Labour select a strongly left wing candidate, or try a 'middle of the road' to prove Labour aren't veering west of Trotsky?

 

Ukip field Mr Bickey, he of the 'oh so close....' result in Heywood, whilst the Conseravtives really don't give a hoot, as their aim will be to give UKIP as clear a shot as possible at Corbyns first open electorate test.

By-elections are notorious for protests as we know, and I for one will be fascinated as this gets closer. UKIP, unlike last time are not fighting 2 at the same time (Clacton was on at the same time as M+H) so they are going to throw the kitchen sink at it.

So will Labour supporters reject the parties new direction, or rally around Mr Corbyn?

If the vote becomes close (good old opinion polls) then I would expect the Tories to do everything just short of driving UKIP supporters to the polling station to have a Labour defeat.

14,000 is a huge margin, but UKIP are using the same team and candidate as Middleton and Heywood - this is a real test for Corbyn.

The outcome is huge.

An increased majority will show Corbyn does, indeed, have the support of the rank and file voters, a reduced majority will be enough for the Right-Wing press to have a field day, and an unlikely defeat will have Simon Danczuk's stalking horse breaking into a canter...

 

What say you, Robbo?

I'd be surprised if the Conservatives "didn't give a hoot" and we're aiming to "give UKIP a clear shot". Firstly, surely all that "Northern powerhouse" bollocks was their attempt to pick up a Manchester area working class vote that had hitherto eluded them. Secondly, Ukip threaten more Tory seats than Labour. They'd rather it was strangled now, than prosper to muddy the waters if a Tory-held  seat is next contested..

Labour have picked up a few council seats recently in the area, and while I'm aware that there are many racial tensions in the Oldham area, it hasn't hitherto been a fruitful wellspring of Ukip support.

I'm going for a Labour hold with slightly reduced majority. 

As for Stefan Danczuk. His problem is that no-one likes him other than Stefan Danczuk. He faces move from within his CLP to deselect him due to the amount of money he takes for writing knocking articles in the Murdoch press.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

11 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

So your conclusion, based on this one anecdote, is that all socialists are corrupt. 

it was as i'm sure you are acutely aware an anecdote, not a conclusion, something I would expect you to get but not of course Colis.

 

2 hours ago, Collis1 said:

And you accuse me of twisting things?  Oh dear.

Can you only be a socialist if you are really poor?

 

Who mentioned the poor?, it has got nothing to do with my post whatsoever, my point was, his socialism is/was everybody should pay their due, well everybody except me, I just wonder which part of socialism that falls under?.

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

3 hours ago, Collis1 said:

And you and others have peddled a lot of misinformed rubbish and tried to pass it off as gospel. 

I have always stuck to my beliefs and never wavered.  If I have upset a couple of people along the way then that's fine.

You are a liar, please show examples of this 'gospel', myself and the 2 others mentioned have views on certain matters and that is all, if you don't agree with those views fine but then don't tag us with your scurrilous labels.

[Red-Robbo]

1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

it was as i'm sure you are acutely aware an anecdote, not a conclusion, something I would expect you to get but not of course Colis.

 

 

Well you did introduce the anecdote under the heading "socialism in a nutshell" implying that there was some wider implication to be drawn....

[...]

On 11/2/2015, 11:06:31, Collis1 said:

More rubbish mate.  Then what does this mean?

"Uncle TFR is right they are taking away from people who really are in need"

That statement is factually incorrect.

 

 

Someone who takes money they are not entitled to, is not taking it from people in need??

Are you are saying someone in need should, instead, be giving more money to a benefits cheat?

What sort of an immoral, twisted society are you hoping for?

"You nutter".

 

Uncle TFR

[BCFC Jimmer]

2 hours ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

Someone who takes money they are not entitled to, is not taking it from people in need??

Are you are saying someone in need should, instead, be giving more money to a benefits cheat?

What sort of an immoral, twisted society are you hoping for?

"You nutter".

 

Uncle TFR

That's not how it works. LondonBristolian summed it up perfectly above.  In an ideal world I wouldn't want any benefit cheats, but the only way to eradicate them would almost certainly mean honest vulnerable people would lose out.

What kind of society am I hoping for?  One that cares about climate change, equality, good chances in life for young people, corporations paying their fair share of tax, renationalisation of private companies that are topped up by tax payer money.  None of this will be achieved by the current government. The free market is destroying this country in so many ways.

 

 

 

 

[...]

3 hours ago, Collis1 said:

That's not how it works. LondonBristolian summed it up perfectly above.  In an ideal world I wouldn't want any benefit cheats, but the only way to eradicate them would almost certainly mean honest vulnerable people would lose out.

What kind of society am I hoping for?  One that cares about climate change, equality, good chances in life for young people, corporations paying their fair share of tax, renationalisation of private companies that are topped up by tax payer money.  None of this will be achieved by the current government. The free market is destroying this country in so many ways.

 

 

 

 

You worry me.

I don't know about me old mucker EMB, but I think this almost constitutes stalking.

If it's sexual, and not a simple case of stalking, you should have sent me a PM with your picture.

It's too late for that now, as we are clearly incompatible.

If I can give you one piece of advice, it is this: get help sooner rather than later. We might not care but there are health professionals out there just for people like you.

Good luck, Tony.

 

Uncle TFR

[BCFC Jimmer]

53 minutes ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

You worry me.

I don't know about me old mucker EMB, but I think this almost constitutes stalking.

If it's sexual, and not a simple case of stalking, you should have sent me a PM with your picture.

It's too late for that now, as we are clearly incompatible.

If I can give you one piece of advice, it is this: get help sooner rather than later. We might not care but there are health professionals out there just for people like you.

Good luck, Tony.

 

Uncle TFR

Thanks for yet another unfunny and shit post.

Remember to shut the door on the way out please.  

[...]

1 minute ago, Collis1 said:

Thanks for yet another unfunny and shit post.

Remember to shut the door on the way out please.  

Do you mean the door I paid for out of my hard earned AFTER tax earnings?

 

Uncle TFR

[...]

(Invisible post)

If Collis1 replies within the hour, I recon he would give out on a first date.

"Shhhhhhh"

 

Uncle TFR

[BCFC Jimmer]

12 minutes ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

(Invisible post)

If Collis1 replies within the hour, I recon he would give out on a first date.

"Shhhhhhh"

 

Uncle TFR

My friends 4 year old has better banter than you. 

[Moloch]

36 minutes ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

28 minutes ago, Collis1 said:

 

 

I think that this thread should close now. It has descended to petty abuse and nothing is being gained from it.

You might want to have a little word with yourselves about the importance of "winning" an argument in a (supposedly) friendly forum.

[BCFC Jimmer]

10 hours ago, Moloch said:

I think that this thread should close now. It has descended to petty abuse and nothing is being gained from it.

You might want to have a little word with yourselves about the importance of "winning" an argument in a (supposedly) friendly forum.

Agree to an extent but there has been some good debate on here and I'm pretty sure most of us can take it.

TFR is just a wind up merchant.  When he knows you have disproved his argument he comes out with a facetious comment like above.

 

[...]

20 hours ago, Moloch said:

I think that this thread should close now. It has descended to petty abuse and nothing is being gained from it.

You might want to have a little word with yourselves about the importance of "winning" an argument in a (supposedly) friendly forum.

I totally agree - best post so far.

MODS? Please close this thread immediately.

 

Uncle TFR

[BCFC Jimmer]

3 hours ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

I totally agree - best post so far.

MODS? Please close this thread immediately.

 

Uncle TFR

Better had. I would hate for you to embarrass yourself more than you already have.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

At the risk of upsetting the thread police, I decided to resurrect this one.

I see the latest from Corbyn's dream factory is "now is the time to negotiate with Isis".

So several questions on that one, 1). Do you have a contact number on your contacts list Jeremy?. 2). What exactly will you be negotiating about? especially with people who have said "we do not sit around tables talking to infidels" and 3). Will you please be volunteer as the chief negotiator?, no need to take a body bag because there will not be enough left of you to warrant one.

Todays polls suggest tories now have a 15% lead, UKIP only 12% behind labour and only 17% of people would feel safe with Corbyn in charge. oh yes his satisfaction rating stands at minus 28%.

[BCFC Jimmer]

1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

At the risk of upsetting the thread police, I decided to resurrect this one.

I see the latest from Corbyn's dream factory is "now is the time to negotiate with Isis".

So several questions on that one, 1). Do you have a contact number on your contacts list Jeremy?. 2). What exactly will you be negotiating about? especially with people who have said "we do not sit around tables talking to infidels" and 3). Will you please be volunteer as the chief negotiator?, no need to take a body bag because there will not be enough left of you to warrant one.

 

 I'm afraid you have completly twisted what he said. Thus, all your questions don't make sense.

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

52 minutes ago, Collis1 said:

 I'm afraid you have completly twisted what he said. Thus, all your questions don't make sense.

 

Not at all, this is just more rhetoric but no actual framework whatsoever for achieving what he is suggesting, when can I expect to see his written plan to achieve this latest dream?.

[BCFC Jimmer]

35 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Not at all, this is just more rhetoric but no actual framework whatsoever for achieving what he is suggesting, when can I expect to see his written plan to achieve this latest dream?.

Ummm your post implied Corybn would try and sit around the table with Isis. That is incorrect.

Whether you think his methods of a poltical solution would work or not is a separate argument. He has mentioned working harder to cut off their funding etc which seem like perfectly logical approaches to me.

I think most people agree that war is unlikely to offer a permenant solution so surely other suggestions and ideas should be welcomed? 

It is bad for democracy that a lot of his views are taken out of context.  

[Esmond Million's Bung]

21 minutes ago, Collis1 said:

Ummm your post implied Corybn would try and sit around the table with Isis. That is incorrect.

Whether you think his methods of a poltical solution would work or not is a separate argument. He has mentioned working harder to cut off their funding etc which seem like perfectly logical approaches to me.

I think most people agree that war is unlikely to offer a permenant solution so surely other suggestions and ideas should be welcomed?

it is not incorrect.

I understand his argument about Syria and that seems to be the central plank of what Cameron must offer up to parliament to get a yes vote for the UK bombing of Isis in Syria and agreed by any coalition involved in any wider military response but then exactly what does he suggest to deal with Isis after the Syria issue is agreed?, I see nothing.

As for your 2nd sentence, he has not offered a political solution about how to deal with Isis because there is none, because a political solution would involve sitting around the table. I suspect everything possible is being done to cut off their funding because it is logical but already being done, so a moot point if ever there was one.

Agree with the last sentence, but apart from an interim solution to Syria, which is already in hand, I haven't seen one suggestion or idea from him only rhetoric and any political solution regarding Isis is going to have to result in people sat around a table, they are not just going to disappear, so at some stage people will have to sit around a table to reach a political solution to Isis and that would have to include Isis, so I repeat there is nothing he has said that will bring an end to the ultimate goal of defeating Isis, they will not stop even if the Syria problem is addressed.

 

[marshy]

1 hour ago, Collis1 said:

 

 

It will come as no surprise to you to see me comment that Farage has been right all along about this.

1).Right in saying the first migrant boats should have been towed back.

2). Right in saying at the outset that most of the so-called refugees were in fact economic migrants

3). Right in saying, again from the outset, that it was a wonderful opportunity for ISIS to plant who knows how many terrorists in amongst the migrants.

4). Right in saying that we should have no military involvement in Syria in what was essentially, before ISIS moved in, a Civil War. How Corbyn plans to bring about ''some kind of unity government'', the usual vague waffle, goodness only knows

After all everywhere we've moved in and tried to engineer regime change it has just resulted in a mess which becomes ever more difficult to sort out. We've been involved in Afghanistan since the 1830s, since the early days of the 'Great Game' for instance, supporting one puppet ruler after another and we don't appear to be much closer to stability in the region.

Of course with reference to 4). above the game has changed since the latest terrorist atrocities in France, Egypt , Tunisia and many, many others. It's a delicate balancing act, however, fighting ISIS on their own turf without getting involved in the Syrian Civil War.

[BCFC Jimmer]

9 hours ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

it is not incorrect.

I understand his argument about Syria and that seems to be the central plank of what Cameron must offer up to parliament to get a yes vote for the UK bombing of Isis in Syria and agreed by any coalition involved in any wider military response but then exactly what does he suggest to deal with Isis after the Syria issue is agreed?, I see nothing.

As for your 2nd sentence, he has not offered a political solution about how to deal with Isis because there is none, because a political solution would involve sitting around the table. I suspect everything possible is being done to cut off their funding because it is logical but already being done, so a moot point if ever there was one.

Agree with the last sentence, but apart from an interim solution to Syria, which is already in hand, I haven't seen one suggestion or idea from him only rhetoric and any political solution regarding Isis is going to have to result in people sat around a table, they are not just going to disappear, so at some stage people will have to sit around a table to reach a political solution to Isis and that would have to include Isis, so I repeat there is nothing he has said that will bring an end to the ultimate goal of defeating Isis, they will not stop even if the Syria problem is addressed.

 

You can apply political reasoning and solutions without talking to ISIS directly. You are incredibly biased against JC and you turn everything he says to score points against him.

This government isn't doing enough to cut off their funding. It is a completly legitamte point to raise. 

[BCFC Jimmer]

10 hours ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

it is not incorrect.

I understand his argument about Syria and that seems to be the central plank of what Cameron must offer up to parliament to get a yes vote for the UK bombing of Isis in Syria and agreed by any coalition involved in any wider military response but then exactly what does he suggest to deal with Isis after the Syria issue is agreed?, I see nothing.

As for your 2nd sentence, he has not offered a political solution about how to deal with Isis because there is none, because a political solution would involve sitting around the table. I suspect everything possible is being done to cut off their funding because it is logical but already being done, so a moot point if ever there was one.

Agree with the last sentence, but apart from an interim solution to Syria, which is already in hand, I haven't seen one suggestion or idea from him only rhetoric and any political solution regarding Isis is going to have to result in people sat around a table, they are not just going to disappear, so at some stage people will have to sit around a table to reach a political solution to Isis and that would have to include Isis, so I repeat there is nothing he has said that will bring an end to the ultimate goal of defeating Isis, they will not stop even if the Syria problem is addressed.

 

You can apply political reasoning and solutions without talking to ISIS directly. You are incredibly biased against JC and you turn everything he says to score points against him.

This government isn't doing enough to cut off their funding. It is a completly legitamte point to raise. 

9 hours ago, marshy said:

It will come as no surprise to you to see me comment that Farage has been right all along about this.

1).Right in saying the first migrant boats should have been towed back.

2). Right in saying at the outset that most of the so-called refugees were in fact economic migrants

3). Right in saying, again from the outset, that it was a wonderful opportunity for ISIS to plant who knows how many terrorists in amongst the migrants.

4). Right in saying that we should have no military involvement in Syria in what was essentially, before ISIS moved in, a Civil War. How Corbyn plans to bring about ''some kind of unity government'', the usual vague waffle, goodness only knows

After all everywhere we've moved in and tried to engineer regime change it has just resulted in a mess which becomes ever more difficult to sort out. We've been involved in Afghanistan since the 1830s, since the early days of the 'Great Game' for instance, supporting one puppet ruler after another and we don't appear to be much closer to stability in the region.

Of course with reference to 4). above the game has changed since the latest terrorist atrocities in France, Egypt , Tunisia and many, many others. It's a delicate balancing act, however, fighting ISIS on their own turf without getting involved in the Syrian Civil War.

Unfortuntely, I cannot take UKIP seriously. The way they are funded and their policies on the economy are sketchy at best. 

The way they blame immigration for social problems, wage compression etc is laughable if you know anything about how the economy works.

They are doing quite well because most people vote on soundbites. 

[Barry Sheene]

2 hours ago, Collis1 said:

 

 

The way they blame immigration for social problems, wage compression etc is laughable if you know anything about how the economy works.

 

Cannot claim to be an expert on how the economy works but after being in my profession for 34 years i can give you an insight into how immigration has certainly impacted on wages.

I valet cars for a living and certainly over the last ten years we have had an influx of immigrants doing the job working for lower wages which has kept wages low and given the management a reason to employ them instead of local labour.

Polish, Bulgarian, Iraqi ,Iranian, Brazilian, lithuanian are just a few nationality's that have come in and taken the profession over. There aren't many british car valeters anymore.

My living standards have certainly been affected so you certainly will not find me laughing.

[BCFC Jimmer]

2 minutes ago, Barry Sheene said:

Cannot claim to be an expert on how the economy works but after being in my profession for 34 years i can give you an insight into how immigration has certainly impacted on wages.

I valet cars for a living and certainly over the last ten years we have had an influx of immigrants doing the job working for lower wages which has kept wages low and given the management a reason to employ them instead of local labour.

Polish, Bulgarian, Iraqi ,Iranian, Brazilian, lithuanian are just a few nationality's that have come in and taken the profession over. There aren't many british car valeters anymore.

My living standards have certainly been affected so you certainly will not find me laughing.

Interesting, and I can understand that in a niche like car valeting it could have an affect.  I would argue that there are possibly deeper economical factors as well though.

On a more general basis the bigger companies freeze pay for staff mainly because they get so obsessed with making profit the money never works its way down to pay packets. Blaming immigration for wage compression when a company is making billions of profit does seem to be unfair.

 

 

 

[Red-Robbo]

I don't think Corbyn is saying anything different on Syria than Cameron is to be honest: get the least extreme sides around the table and try to work out a former of government that would address Sunni grievance whilst safeguarding the position of minority faiths. It was done to end the Lebanese civil war.

The difference from Cameron's ideas is, he doesn't think participating in a bombing campaign will help that process and it may in fact drive more people into the arms of the IslamoFascists. 

.Peace in the non-IS parts of Syria would rob IS of much of its Sunni support. It's ground forces aren't all crazed global jihadists, some were.Sunni rebels who wanted to be on the side most likely to topple Assad. 

A unified Syrian government,  with international backing, would also be able to take on such crazed irridentists that remained on the fringes of the country.

[...]

Corbyn: will go down in history as leader of Labour for 12 months, before leaving for West Bank.

Why is thread still running?

 

Uncle TFR

[Esmond Million's Bung]

59 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

I don't think Corbyn is saying anything different on Syria than Cameron is to be honest: get the least extreme sides around the table and try to work out a former of government that would address Sunni grievance whilst safeguarding the position of minority faiths. It was done to end the Lebanese civil war.

The difference from Cameron's ideas is, he doesn't think participating in a bombing campaign will help that process and it may in fact drive more people into the arms of the IslamoFascists. 

.Peace in the non-IS parts of Syria would rob IS of much of its Sunni support. It's ground forces aren't all crazed global jihadists, some were.Sunni rebels who wanted to be on the side most likely to topple Assad. 

A unified Syrian government,  with international backing, would also be able to take on such crazed irridentists that remained on the fringes of the country.

Agree and have said as much re the highlighted portion.

My question is 'then what'?, the rest of what you say is all well and good and will help, but will it bring an end to Isis in the Syria and Iraq?, not a chance. So after the Syrian question is agreed and hopefully implemented, what is the next part of Corbyn's plan? because I don't hear or see one, Collis seems to think, we are not doing enough about their funding which is a red herring, because I am sure that we are doing all that is humanly possible in that area.

For Corbyn's dream of a non military intervention to come true, at some stage there will have to be, a meeting, with a table and all interested parties including Isis sat around the said table and that ain't going to happen. if Isis were asking for an autonomous enclave where as a barbarous death cult they can spend their time wiping each other out, which is what would happen, there would be a starting point because then we would know exactly what their demands are, there is nothing that we can offer Isis to stop them doing what they are doing and seek to do in the future apart from complete surrender.

 

[...]

Corbyn is a dick, why are we discussing him?

 

TFR

[Red-Robbo]

11 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Agree and have said as much re the highlighted portion.

My question is 'then what'?, the rest of what you say is all well and good and will help, but will it bring an end to Isis in the Syria and Iraq?, not a chance. So after the Syrian question is agreed and hopefully implemented, what is the next part of Corbyn's plan? because I don't hear or see one, Collis seems to think, we are not doing enough about their funding which is a red herring, because I am sure that we are doing all that is humanly possible in that area.

For Corbyn's dream of a non military intervention to come true, at some stage there will have to be, a meeting, with a table and all interested parties including Isis sat around the said table and that ain't going to happen. if Isis were asking for an autonomous enclave where as a barbarous death cult they can spend their time wiping each other out, which is what would happen, there would be a starting point because then we would know exactly what their demands are, there is nothing that we can offer Isis to stop them doing what they are doing and seek to do in the future apart from complete surrender.

 

Western military intervention hasn't exactly worked out well in the past in that area. Which is why I think it's good to see some voices calling for a pause in the headlong rush to.bomb.

As I said in my earlier post, IS facing a unified Syrian government - rather than an Alawite dictatorship - would have less appeal to.locals. And while we focus on the foreigner element among their fighters, the vast majority are still Syrian and Iraqis. 

A unified Syrian and Iraqi/Kurdish force, with foreign backing,  would be able to take on the rump of extremists.

The solution has to be a local one.