[user104658]

To be fair jet, if it's any consolation, your posts (and looking into them) has been part of leading me to the conclusion that Corbyn is definitely not the answer. While I can't completely jump on board with the idea that he's a full-blooded terrorist sympathiser (I feel more likely he'll disingenuously support a lot of things to further various agendae), I do appreciate that he certainly isn't any BETTER than other mainstream UK politicians. He's developed a level of smugness that doesn't fit with the persona he's trying to project, at all, and therefore I can only imagine that most of what he says on any subject needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair jet, if it's any consolation, your posts (and looking into them) has been part of leading me to the conclusion that Corbyn is definitely not the answer. While I can't completely jump on board with the idea that he's a full-blooded terrorist sympathiser (I feel more likely he'll disingenuously support a lot of things to further various agendae), I do appreciate that he certainly isn't any BETTER than other mainstream UK politicians. He's developed a level of smugness that doesn't fit with the persona he's trying to project, at all, and therefore I can only imagine that most of what he says on any subject needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

See,I've gone the other way.
A staunch Labour supporter because I want more and better social justice.
So my right wing days are gone,especially with this truly awful uncompromising lot in govt now.

However, I was not an advocate of Corbyn,I felt it a mistake electing hin leader and I feared for the party.
However over time I have come round to him more.
He has brought policies back to Labour which firstly no one thought any leader would dare.
However again,as I found canvassing in June,people like the policies,they want them too.

While still holding reservations on Corbyn myself and indeed as do the people I talked to in June.
One thing came across more,people who even have reservations on Corbyn,do believe he believes in the policies he advocates.

They,and indeed I do too,really believe he would deliver those policies.
It amazed me the large and it seems ever growing number if the younger new voters, who want his policies too.
So I think the wishful thinking Corbyn is going to go away is going to now lead to disappointment to said people.
With over half a million membership and Labour so strong on the ground now and the Cons estimated to be at least under 100,000 membership,possibly more like only 80,000.

Corbyn has in his way,helped polarise politics again between the 2 parties again.
The choice is vastly different,his is the vision it seems the newer generation of voters want and they are ever growing now too.
So it's sad for me to see you pull back TS,as your past arguments especially on the cruelty and wrongs of this govt,all unchanged and still there,we're in my view strong and valid ones.

However this is democracy,I turned my back on the Cons, due to the endless heartless policies.
Equally you have altered your position now.

For me however,it's about fair and just policies,social justice and reaching out.
None of which I see in this PM governnents policies.
Which seem created to bring down further, those already down anyway and to keep them there.
Under the daft electoral system we have,there can only be a CON led govt or a LAB led govt.
I know,regardless of leader,which one I prefer and think the Country needs too now.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

See,I've gone the other way.
A staunch Labour supporter because I want more and better social justice.
So my right wing days are gone,especially with this truly awful uncompromising lot in govt now.

However, I was not an advocate of Corbyn,I felt it a mistake electing hin leader and I feared for the party.
However over time I have come round to him more.
He has brought policies back to Labour which firstly no one thought any leader would dare.
However again,as I found canvassing in June,people like the policies,they want them too.

While still holding reservations on Corbyn myself and indeed as do the people I talked to in June.
One thing came across more,people who even have reservations on Corbyn,do believe he believes in the policies he advocates.

They,and indeed I do too,really believe he would deliver those policies.
It amazed me the large and it seems ever growing number if the younger new voters, who want his policies too.
So I think the wishful thinking Corbyn is going to go away is going to now lead to disappointment to said people.
With over half a million membership and Labour so strong on the ground now and the Cons estimated to be at least under 100,000 membership,possibly more like only 80,000.

Corbyn has in his way,helped polarise politics again between the 2 parties again.
The choice is vastly different,his is the vision it seems the newer generation of voters want and they are ever growing now too.
So it's sad for me to see you pull back TS,as your past arguments especially on the cruelty and wrongs of this govt,all unchanged and still there,we're in my view strong and valid ones.

However this is democracy,I turned my back on the Cons, due to the endless heartless policies.
Equally you have altered your position now.

For me however,it's about fair and just policies,social justice and reaching out.
None of which I see in this PM governnents policies.
Which seem created to bring down further, those already down anyway and to keep them there.
Under the daft electoral system we have,there can only be a CON led govt or a LAB led govt.
I know,regardless of leader,which one I prefer and think the Country needs too now.

The country does not and never will need a Corbyn. He will cause far more problems than he solves. It is easy to promise this, that and the other but words come cheap. A party should never be more about the leader than the party and that is exactly what has happened with Corbyn.

Underneath though he is just a figurehead for Momentum. His popularity with the young who are naive and inexperienced enough to buy into his rhetoric gives the extreme left the foot in the door that they have so desperately been looking for and will have long term negative effects for our economy and democracy.

The country does not need to be so naive, the country needs to be strong and stand-up to this manipulative and publicity-seeking, cheap reality show brand of politics that misleads the inexperienced and conceals the controlling monster beneath.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

See,I've gone the other way.
A staunch Labour supporter because I want more and better social justice.
So my right wing days are gone,especially with this truly awful uncompromising lot in govt now.

However, I was not an advocate of Corbyn,I felt it a mistake electing hin leader and I feared for the party.
However over time I have come round to him more.
He has brought policies back to Labour which firstly no one thought any leader would dare.
However again,as I found canvassing in June,people like the policies,they want them too.

While still holding reservations on Corbyn myself and indeed as do the people I talked to in June.
One thing came across more,people who even have reservations on Corbyn,do believe he believes in the policies he advocates.

They,and indeed I do too,really believe he would deliver those policies.
It amazed me the large and it seems ever growing number if the younger new voters, who want his policies too.
So I think the wishful thinking Corbyn is going to go away is going to now lead to disappointment to said people.
With over half a million membership and Labour so strong on the ground now and the Cons estimated to be at least under 100,000 membership,possibly more like only 80,000.

Corbyn has in his way,helped polarise politics again between the 2 parties again.
The choice is vastly different,his is the vision it seems the newer generation of voters want and they are ever growing now too.
So it's sad for me to see you pull back TS,as your past arguments especially on the cruelty and wrongs of this govt,all unchanged and still there,we're in my view strong and valid ones.

However this is democracy,I turned my back on the Cons, due to the endless heartless policies.
Equally you have altered your position now.

For me however,it's about fair and just policies,social justice and reaching out.
None of which I see in this PM governnents policies.
Which seem created to bring down further, those already down anyway and to keep them there.
Under the daft electoral system we have,there can only be a CON led govt or a LAB led govt.
I know,regardless of leader,which one I prefer and think the Country needs too now.

To be fair Joey I didn't say that I've gone towards supporting the conservatives; at the core I'll always be an advocate of independence (or full devolution) for Scotland under a socially responsible centre government.

For the UK, as I said in another thread just recently, the pendulum swinging is essential because a one-party state (either party) is literally THE worst possible situation for any country to be in. And I do feel that it's (now past) time for Labour to be in the driving seat... So I do support Labour for UK government and I do despise the Tories uncaring social policies.

However I now have some serious question marks surrounding Corbyn himself and his actual motivations. In his new found popularity and confidence, he has tipped his hand a few times and being honest, what I see is, as Ammi says above, an opportunist... and a popularist who will smugly back "whatever he thinks his supporters want to see him backing" in order to maintain and increase his popularity. And I generally hate the term - but he's hugely guilty of "virtue signalling", and it's to achieve an agenda that's not entirely clear to me. I don't feel like his end game is clear at all even though I get the strong impression that there is one... And that's troubling.

Basically I feel like what the Labour Party needs is realistic, sensible left-of-centre leadership with a strong focus on fair social policies; social mobility for those who want and need it (via actual funding, not the Tories "lol we'll take away ur money then u'll HAVE to work more!" policy). An end to unreasonable austerity measures and punitive tactics, and much greater support for the disabled and vulnerable. I think that's what people are LOOKING for in Corbyn but my gut instinct is that if / when he comes into power, his supporters are going to be disappointed.

So to reiterate... I haven't pulled back from my opinion that this government is wrong-headed, cruel, greedy and elitist. I'd also now happily add "disjointed and confused" and "utterly incompetent" to that list because they really are a shambles at the moment.

I do still fully support fairer social policies, I do still think that Labour is the better party to deliver them... I'm just skeptical of Corbyn himself at this point. He still sometimes says all the right things... I'm just not convinced of his sincerity.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair jet, if it's any consolation, your posts (and looking into them) has been part of leading me to the conclusion that Corbyn is definitely not the answer. While I can't completely jump on board with the idea that he's a full-blooded terrorist sympathiser (I feel more likely he'll disingenuously support a lot of things to further various agendae), I do appreciate that he certainly smugness that doesn't fit with the persona he's trying to project, at all, and isn't any BETTER than other mainstream UK politicians. He's developed a level of therefore I can only imagine that most of what he says on any subject needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Thanks TS, for looking deeper into what I have said. That is all I could hope for; for people not to take Corbyn at face value but to look at him with less than rose - coloured glasses, listen to other views and experiences, do some research for themselves into his past and decide whether he is someone they can support - and hoping of course that they will see through his 'causes' (like his latest as an egotistical saviour from social injustices) as nothing more than a desperation for recognition and validation, no matter how many lies he tells or who it hurts along the way.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair jet, if it's any consolation, your posts (and looking into them) has been part of leading me to the conclusion that Corbyn is definitely not the answer. While I can't completely jump on board with the idea that he's a full-blooded terrorist sympathiser (I feel more likely he'll disingenuously support a lot of things to further various agendae), I do appreciate that he certainly isn't any BETTER than other mainstream UK politicians. He's developed a level of smugness that doesn't fit with the persona he's trying to project, at all, and therefore I can only imagine that most of what he says on any subject needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

...I have to say that I’ve never been hugely on board with Corbyn as a potential country leader but in recent times he’s felt quite ‘opportunist’ in ways that have been quite unpleasant...anyway not wanting to get too much into the political debates.....I’m certainly no fan of the present government or leader, but I think as Livia has always said..it’s about the quality of labour as a party as well and being a strong opposition and the right opposition..rather than just taking one extreme end of a spectrum and zipping it along to the opposite extreme....?...I’m never that comfortable anyway when the leader of the party becomes ‘bigger than the party itself and what it stands for’...I think we had that to a large extent with Blair, that kind of ‘celebrity’ status...and well, look at the consequences with that...and obviously similar with the USA now...(...sorry Maru...)...and where the anti vote against Hilary has led them now...and also having an ego as a leader, which I’m not convinced Jeremy isn’t a very self ego person as well...

[Yuki Maru Hoshi]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I have to say that I’ve never been hugely on board with Corbyn as a potential country leader but in recent times he’s felt quite ‘opportunist’ in ways that have been quite unpleasant...anyway not wanting to get too much into the political debates.....I’m certainly no fan of the present government or leader, but I think as Livia has always said..it’s about the quality of labour as a party as well and being a strong opposition and the right opposition..rather than just taking one extreme end of a spectrum and zipping it along to the opposite extreme....?...I’m never that comfortable anyway when the leader of the party becomes ‘bigger than the party itself and what it stands for’...I think we had that to a large extent with Blair, that kind of ‘celebrity’ status...and well, look at the consequences with that...and obviously similar with the USA now...(...sorry Maru...)...and where the anti vote against Hilary has led them now...and also having an ego as a leader, which I’m not convinced Jeremy isn’t a very self ego person as well...

I miss the ye old days when we would just vote for someone who sounded fit for the job (based on qualifications), rather than simply celebrity status. That was a large defect of Hillary I think, was this sort of overexposure.

I wonder if like the's public apathy being one extreme of bad for political discourse, if there is maybe another extreme where the public have become too overly enmeshed (identity or whatever) with politics. So instead of scandals, issues or deals being hashed out in a more manageable way, we magnify the chaos and so those issues become too difficult to handle. It's easy to see why the smallest of issues can be hijacked by either side and make it very difficult to get things done. It used to be, you voted, but then you stood back and let the system do it's job (to the extent that is reasonable)... now everything is checked under a microscope. And people who have no idea the delicacy of such matters, or just simply opportunists who have an agenda, are injecting their projection of things in an effort to sabotage or manage the outcome. It makes it very difficult for a more moderate/less polarizing candidate to survive the way politics is being done today, much less to be electable...

There's this emphasis to make everything public, every public act of "treachery" punishable by way of polarizing media coverage and I wonder if our focus on being so incredibly honest and virtuous may having unintended side effects on our ability handle political discourse as a society. It seems like we sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot... because it does rob the moderates of a voice and it allows those who are truly problematic to get in-between those systems and civil discourse to push their most polarizing messages through.

I'll quote a good article that covers a lot of these complications fairly well...

We reformed closed-door negotiations. As recently as the early 1970s, congressional committees could easily retreat behind closed doors and members could vote on many bills anonymously, with only the final tallies reported. Federal advisory committees, too, could meet off the record. Understandably, in the wake of Watergate, those practices came to be viewed as suspect. Today, federal law, congressional rules, and public expectations have placed almost all formal deliberations and many informal ones in full public view. One result is greater transparency, which is good. But another result is that finding space for delicate negotiations and candid deliberations can be difficult. Smoke-filled rooms, whatever their disadvantages, were good for brokering complex compromises in which nothing was settled until everything was settled; once gone, they turned out to be difficult to replace. In public, interest groups and grandstanding politicians can tear apart a compromise before it is halfway settled.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Maru

I miss the ye old days when we would just vote for someone who sounded fit for the job (based on qualifications), rather than simply celebrity status. That was a large defect of Hillary I think, was this sort of overexposure.

I wonder if like the's public apathy being one extreme of bad for political discourse, if there is maybe another extreme where the public have become too overly enmeshed (identity or whatever) with politics. So instead of scandals, issues or deals being hashed out in a more manageable way, we magnify the chaos and so those issues become too difficult to handle. It's easy to see why the smallest of issues can be hijacked by either side and make it very difficult to get things done. It used to be, you voted, but then you stood back and let the system do it's job (to the extent that is reasonable)... now everything is checked under a microscope. And people who have no idea the delicacy of such matters, or just simply opportunists who have an agenda, are injecting their projection of things in an effort to sabotage or manage the outcome. It makes it very difficult for a more moderate/less polarizing candidate to survive the way politics is being done today, much less to be electable...

There's this emphasis to make everything public, every public act of "treachery" punishable by way of bad media coverage and I wonder if our focus on having everything be transparent, chaos and all, if we don't sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot... because it does rob the moderates of a voice and it allows those who are truly problematic to get in-between those systemsand civil discourse.

I'll quote a good article that covers a lot of these complications fairly well...

..yeah it does feel a bit in western politics like...’who has the best celebrity type publicity campaign’ when obviously it’s always been a combination of both...party values/policies as well as the leader as a person...the last election campaign was a shambles with one saying..I’ll give you everything and the other saying, I’ll give you nothing....i mean it just all leave s us all in limbo and desperate for a more centre party...our present government is awful and has been for some time...but I would t cast my vote for another awful, the only difference being it may be at the opposite spectrum of awful.../..all very gloomy I’m afraid...