CORBYN, McDONNELL AND LIVINGSTONE.

[alfredmizen]

You know of such people?

Loads , its only well meaning mugs like you who swallow the sob stories.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So you would rather a family living on benefits producing offspring just to get more handouts. The line has to be drawn somewhere. It's amazing how they always have enough for drink and fags and then complain they cannot afford to feed their children. I managed with 3 children and we struggled without any help and I had a low paid job. Priorities in afraid

I can think of quite a few items I'd spend 12bn on; bombers are not top of my list though.

 

[beorhthelm]

Meanwhile, Cameron and Osborne spend £12bn on 128 stealth bombers while letting UK children starve due to 12bn welfare cuts. Lovely people.

a delightful combination of hyperbole and misdirection so early in the morning. one number is for spending over 10 years, the other is per year because the public don't want to spend so much - can you guess which? no children are starving, unless from neglectful actions of their parents. the welfare state is more than adequate for basic provision.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

a delightful combination of hyperbole and misdirection so early in the morning. one number is for spending over 10 years, the other is per year because the public don't want to spend so much - can you guess which? no children are starving, unless from neglectful actions of their parents. the welfare state is more than adequate for basic provision.

Agree...can someone define poverty in this country,because people on the dole I've seen have iPads/phones,large flat screen tellies...(which are quite often left on all day,even if no one is watching)...they seem to wear designer sports wear,smoke and drink/drugs...

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Agree...can someone define poverty in this country,because people on the dole I've seen have iPads/phones,large flat screen tellies...(which are quite often left on all day,even if no one is watching)...they seem to wear designer sports wear,smoke and drink/drugs...

They may not be representative but I think it's called 'relative' poverty.

 

[glasfryn]

Agree...can someone define poverty in this country,because people on the dole I've seen have iPads/phones,large flat screen tellies...(which are quite often left on all day,even if no one is watching)...they seem to wear designer sports wear,smoke and drink/drugs...

not the growing army of those who sleep in shop doorways

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Agree...can someone define poverty in this country,because people on the dole I've seen have iPads/phones,large flat screen tellies...(which are quite often left on all day,even if no one is watching)...they seem to wear designer sports wear,smoke and drink/drugs...

Probably drive fancy cars as well.

 

[pastafarian]

I can think of quite a few items I'd spend 12bn on; bombers are not top of my list though.

That’s obviously a given

Its well known now matters of defence of this country are held with little regard by Corbyn and some of his lap dogs.

 

[London Irish]

The ComRes poll was bad for Corbyn but the glee in which it was seized upon by his opponents tells you all you need to know about the massive effect he has already had on politics. Thankfully he is here to stay, Labour membership is still growing rapidly

Meanwhile, there are some pieces in our billionaire-owned media that is telling the truth, like the following:



Here is something the media isn't telling you: Jeremy Corbyn's poll numbers are a lot better than Ed Miliband's

Jim Edwards


Inside the London Bubble, the media narrative about Jeremy Corbyn goes a bit like this:

Corbyn has been a disaster as the new leader of the Labour Party.
He's tearing the party apart as the socialist army inside the Momentum group threatens to deselect moderate MPs who show him disloyalty.
He can't control the people who sympathise with him, like veteran lefty Ken Livingstone, whom he appointed to his defence review team and who immediately caused offence by saying Labour's shadow defence minister Kevan Jones “might need psychiatric help.”
And he's going to lose the country as a whole by taking bonkers positions, such as the idea that you can fight ISIS with negotiations in the United Nations.
His rabid supporters have even managed to alienate Rob Webb, the comic genius behind Peep Show, who called the "Corbynators" a bunch of "posturing twats."
But hold that thought.

Here's a piece of news that has received almost zero attention from London's political media:

In the country as a whole, Corbyn is actually doing rather well, according to the most recent Ipsos-MORI poll. When asked who they would vote for if an election was held tomorrow, 35% said Labour and 37% said Conservative:

ipsos mori labour poll
Ipsos MORI

OK, so Labour are still trailing the Tories. But bear in mind that back at the May general election, former Labour leader Ed Miliband managed to poll only about 30% of the national vote, to PM David Cameron's 37%. Both parties have gained as they continue to take votes from UKIP and the Liberal Democrats, according to the YouGov polling blog. (The Green Party added a point, too.)

And, as Business Insider noted previously, Miliband was actually a successful Labour leader. He added 740,000 votes to Labour's total at the last election, compared to the previous one. (Labour lost because the Tory gains from the Liberals, coupled with Labour's losses to the SNP, screwed the Labour Party out of about 1 million votes it would otherwise have got.)

Polls are not elections of course. And the 2020 vote is a long way away.

But if Corbyn's numbers stay firm over time it will prove our pet theory that the hostile media environment isn't detrimental to Corbyn — it actually helps him by proving his supporters' suspicions about the bias of the right-wing media.

 

[Hampster Gull]

There are clearly people who genuinely need support who should get it, the challenge is not to incentivise it

 

[Hastings gull]

The ComRes poll was bad for Corbyn but the glee in which it was seized upon by his opponents tells you all you need to know about the massive effect he has already had on politics. Thankfully he is here to stay, Labour membership is still growing rapidly

Meanwhile, there are some pieces in our billionaire-owned media that is telling the truth, like the following:



Here is something the media isn't telling you: Jeremy Corbyn's poll numbers are a lot better than Ed Miliband's

Jim Edwards


Inside the London Bubble, the media narrative about Jeremy Corbyn goes a bit like this:

Corbyn has been a disaster as the new leader of the Labour Party.
He's tearing the party apart as the socialist army inside the Momentum group threatens to deselect moderate MPs who show him disloyalty.
He can't control the people who sympathise with him, like veteran lefty Ken Livingstone, whom he appointed to his defence review team and who immediately caused offence by saying Labour's shadow defence minister Kevan Jones “might need psychiatric help.”
And he's going to lose the country as a whole by taking bonkers positions, such as the idea that you can fight ISIS with negotiations in the United Nations.
His rabid supporters have even managed to alienate Rob Webb, the comic genius behind Peep Show, who called the "Corbynators" a bunch of "posturing twats."
But hold that thought.

Here's a piece of news that has received almost zero attention from London's political media:

In the country as a whole, Corbyn is actually doing rather well, according to the most recent Ipsos-MORI poll. When asked who they would vote for if an election was held tomorrow, 35% said Labour and 37% said Conservative:

ipsos mori labour poll
Ipsos MORI

OK, so Labour are still trailing the Tories. But bear in mind that back at the May general election, former Labour leader Ed Miliband managed to poll only about 30% of the national vote, to PM David Cameron's 37%. Both parties have gained as they continue to take votes from UKIP and the Liberal Democrats, according to the YouGov polling blog. (The Green Party added a point, too.)

And, as Business Insider noted previously, Miliband was actually a successful Labour leader. He added 740,000 votes to Labour's total at the last election, compared to the previous one. (Labour lost because the Tory gains from the Liberals, coupled with Labour's losses to the SNP, screwed the Labour Party out of about 1 million votes it would otherwise have got.)

Polls are not elections of course. And the 2020 vote is a long way away.

But if Corbyn's numbers stay firm over time it will prove our pet theory that the hostile media environment isn't detrimental to Corbyn — it actually helps him by proving his supporters' suspicions about the bias of the right-wing media.

A fascinating conclusion, as I read so often on here that so and so Labour politician has to battle against the right--wing media and how the media can influence people. So, now we know that it is simply not true,

 

[Hastings gull]

There are clearly people who genuinely need support who should get it, the challenge is not to incentivise it

Exactly.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

The ComRes poll was bad for Corbyn but the glee in which it was seized upon by his opponents tells you all you need to know about the massive effect he has already had on politics. Thankfully he is here to stay, Labour membership is still growing rapidly

Meanwhile, there are some pieces in our billionaire-owned media that is telling the truth, like the following:



Here is something the media isn't telling you: Jeremy Corbyn's poll numbers are a lot better than Ed Miliband's

Jim Edwards


Inside the London Bubble, the media narrative about Jeremy Corbyn goes a bit like this:

Corbyn has been a disaster as the new leader of the Labour Party.
He's tearing the party apart as the socialist army inside the Momentum group threatens to deselect moderate MPs who show him disloyalty.
He can't control the people who sympathise with him, like veteran lefty Ken Livingstone, whom he appointed to his defence review team and who immediately caused offence by saying Labour's shadow defence minister Kevan Jones “might need psychiatric help.”
And he's going to lose the country as a whole by taking bonkers positions, such as the idea that you can fight ISIS with negotiations in the United Nations.
His rabid supporters have even managed to alienate Rob Webb, the comic genius behind Peep Show, who called the "Corbynators" a bunch of "posturing twats."
But hold that thought.

Here's a piece of news that has received almost zero attention from London's political media:

In the country as a whole, Corbyn is actually doing rather well, according to the most recent Ipsos-MORI poll. When asked who they would vote for if an election was held tomorrow, 35% said Labour and 37% said Conservative:

ipsos mori labour poll
Ipsos MORI

OK, so Labour are still trailing the Tories. But bear in mind that back at the May general election, former Labour leader Ed Miliband managed to poll only about 30% of the national vote, to PM David Cameron's 37%. Both parties have gained as they continue to take votes from UKIP and the Liberal Democrats, according to the YouGov polling blog. (The Green Party added a point, too.)

And, as Business Insider noted previously, Miliband was actually a successful Labour leader. He added 740,000 votes to Labour's total at the last election, compared to the previous one. (Labour lost because the Tory gains from the Liberals, coupled with Labour's losses to the SNP, screwed the Labour Party out of about 1 million votes it would otherwise have got.)

Polls are not elections of course. And the 2020 vote is a long way away.

But if Corbyn's numbers stay firm over time it will prove our pet theory that the hostile media environment isn't detrimental to Corbyn — it actually helps him by proving his supporters' suspicions about the bias of the right-wing media.

 

[portslade seagull]

There are clearly people who genuinely need support who should get it, the challenge is not to incentivise it

Trouble is a certain Labour leader would do this and make many dependent on it safeguarding votes

 

[Tarpon]

A fascinating conclusion, as I read so often on here that so and so Labour politician has to battle against the right--wing media and how the media can influence people. So, now we know that it is simply not true,

That's right: the media has no bias and even if it does it matters not because it does not influence people.

How do we know this is true? Well, it's someone's pet theory.

Sure but what is the evidence? Er...well there isn't any to speak of yet really.

Oh OK anything else should I should take into account? Hmmm where to start? Maybe ask yourself why so much time effort and money is spent by such a wide variety of organisations on media and PR if it has no influence? Maybe note the heavy caveats in the article? Maybe... Oh you get the general idea

I hope to God for your sake that you are fishing (in which case well caught). Not least because it appears to escaped your attention that the the conclusion you have drawn is informed by a highly speculative opinion piece with no evidential base...that would be the influence of the media then...

 

[Hampster Gull]

There is a left wing bias in much of the media, its not all one way

 

[alfredmizen]

Fantastic piece on Corbyn here written by Nick Cohen , absolutely nails it for me .



Jeremy Corbyn isn’t anti-war. He’s just anti-West

And his inability to state his true beliefs defines his leadership of the Labour party


Before the bodies in Paris’s restaurants were cold, Jeremy Corbyn’s Stop the War Coalition knew who the real villains were — and they were not the Islamists who massacred civilians. ‘Paris reaps whirlwind of western support for extremist violence in Middle East’ ran a headline on its site. The article went on to say that the consequence of the West’s ‘decades-long, bipartisan cultivation of religious extremism will certainly be more bloodshed, more repression and more violent intervention’.
This flawless example of what I once called the ‘kill us, we deserve it’ school of political analysis takes us to the heart of Corbyn’s beliefs. Even his opponents have yet to appreciate the malign double standards of the new Labour party, though they ought to be clear for all to see by now.
Whatever its protestations, Corbyn’s far left is not anti-war. Pacifism may not be a moral position in all circumstances but, in my view at least, it remains an honourable belief, rooted in Christian teaching. Corbyn does not share it. He does not oppose violence wherever it comes from, as the BBC’s political editor claimed this week. When anti-western regimes and movements go to war, his language turns slippery. Corbyn never quite has the guts to support the violence of others, but he excuses it like a gangster’s lawyer trying to get a crime boss off on a technicality.
He defended the Russian invasion of Ukraine by saying the West had provoked the Kremlin. His spin-doctor, Seumas Milne of the Guardian, the nearest thing you can find to a Stalinist in the 21st century, joined the leaders of Europe’s far-right parties at Putin’s propaganda summits. Meanwhile Corbyn and John McDonnell have defended the IRA, Hezbollah and Hamas. Like many on the far left (and right), they are pro-Assad. So committed to Syrian Ba’athism are Stop the War that they tried to stop Syrian refugees from Assad’s terror speaking at their meetings.
You cannot describe a far left that can overlook Assad’s atrocities as pacifist. Nor can you call its members little Englanders. True isolationists think we have no business wasting our blood and treasure in other people’s conflicts — a view I suspect the majority of the British share. They do not want to call radical Islamists, Assad, or Putin their ‘friends’ and take up their grievances. They hope, vainly I fear, that we can ignore them.
Corbyn, along with too much of ‘progressive opinion’, has a mistrust bordering on hatred for western powers. They do not just condemn the West for its crimes, which are frequent enough. They are ‘Occidentalists’, to use the jargon: people who see the West as the ‘root cause’ of all evil.
Their ideology is in turn genuinely rootless. They have no feeling for the best traditions of their country, and their commitments to the victims of foreign oppression are shallow and insincere. They rightly condemn western support for Saudi Arabia. But if the Saudis were to become the West’s enemy tomorrow, their opposition would vanish like dew in the morning sun.
These double standards were once a problem for those of us who thought the British left deserved better. Now that we have learned from Corbyn’s landslide victory that the British left neither deserve nor want better, they are everyone else’s problem too.
Stop the War revealed the devious inability of the new left to stick by what they mean. As soon as they realised that outsiders were reading the site, they removed the offending article. Corbyn was as shifty. On Monday, Labour MPs implored him to reject the idea that an attack on Parisians by a fascistic Islamist movement was the West’s fault. He ducked into woozy bureaucratic language and said Stop the War’s argument was ‘inappropriate’. He refused to condemn it, however. How could he when he would be rejecting everything he believed for 40 years?
Those who want to see the far left for what it is should be able to detect a pattern in his statements by now. Corbyn’s response to the Paris killings was to join with other apparently moral voices and denounce the media for not giving equal space to atrocities ‘outside Europe’. You do not understand Corbyn if you reply, as Helen Lewis of the New Statesman did, that ‘the media is full of foreign news that barely gets read’ — telling though her putdown was. Nor is it enough to go further and say that Corbyn does not want foreign news that contradicts his Manichean worldview.
Conspiracy theories certainly riddle his far left, who dismiss reports of inconvenient war crimes as lies by corporate media designed to brainwash the masses into supporting western imperialism. The reality, however, is worse than a mere blocking out of unpleasant truths. Corbyn and his supporters do not want us to think about Paris because they cannot accept that privileged westerners can be victims. If Isis kills them, it is their own or their governments’ fault. All you should do is mutter ‘blowback’ and turn off the news.
Understand that the far left believe that only favoured groups can be victims, and you understand the growth of left-wing anti-Semitism, the indifference to demands for women’s equality in rich countries, as well as the ease with which they dismiss bodies on Parisian streets. Privileged whites are the problem. We should shed no tears for them.
Corbyn’s inability to state his true beliefs defines his leadership of the Labour party. To take the most brazen instance, he condemned the assassination of Mohammed ‘Jihadi John’ Emwazi by saying it would have been better if he had been brought before a court. So it would. But Corbyn would not have supported sending special forces to Syria to kidnap Emwazi and bring him to trial. He does not believe in deploying the armed forces. Indeed he is ‘not happy’ with police shooting to kill terrorists murdering British citizens on British streets. His apparently moral stance was built on an outright lie.
A chorus of approval from ignorant cliché-mongers accompanied Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour’s leader. He was authentic. He was not afraid to say what he thought. He was not the creation of focus groups and media manipulators, but an honest man making a new politics.
Every claim they made was false. Jeremy Corbyn and the left he comes from cannot campaign for office by saying what they really think or they would horrify the bulk of the population. They say enough to keep their ‘base’ happy, and then dodge and twist when they speak to the rest of us. Far from being authentic, Jeremy Corbyn is one of the most dishonest politicians you will see in your lifetime.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Labour party members back Jeremy Corbyn by a two-thirds margin, The Times can reveal, making it all but impossible for the leader’s detractors to mount a successful putsch.
The hard-left party leader was elected in September with 59 per cent of the vote. Now 66 per cent of Labour members believe that he is doing “well”, according to an exclusive poll.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4622011.ece

Shows there is no easy way to dump him and how detached Labour members are from reality. Another round of high fives at Conservative central office ..

 

[WonderingSoton]

There are clearly people who genuinely need support who should get it, the challenge is not to incentivise it

I don't think anyone regardless of their political persuasion would disagree.
The multi billion pound question that has been going round in circles for decades, is how?

 

[glasfryn]

Labour party members back Jeremy Corbyn by a two-thirds margin, The Times can reveal, making it all but impossible for the leader’s detractors to mount a successful putsch.
The hard-left party leader was elected in September with 59 per cent of the vote. Now 66 per cent of Labour members believe that he is doing “well”, according to an exclusive poll.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4622011.ece

Shows there is no easy way to dump him and how detached Labour members are from reality. Another round of high fives at Conservative central office ..

but they don't vote for themselves do they...........................its the electorate that matters not that bunch of schoolboys