Could Labour 'split'. Tom Watson calls off talks.

have just booked to listen to this guy;

blenheimpalaceliteraryfestival.com/literature-events/2016/october-14/age-of-discovery-navigating-the-risks-and-rewards-of-our-

It sounds interesting.

I wasn't a Liberal Annie I joined the SDP and am probably still a Social Democrat even though I am partyless.

N chance of winning an election by turning to the far left and many are not impressed by Corbyns past, supporter of the IRA demands for a United Ireland, friend of Castro, friend if Hamas , supported publicly by young people at his rallies . Lost the support of his own party and the Tory press hasn't started yet , wait for a lead up to an election thrn the dirt will be dished , some even question a man who has married three times and divorced wife no 2 over her choice of a school for their son, yet is very close to an old girl friend who chose against state education fir her son, these are the things those who are not dependant on food banks , earn a decent wage etc think about

You never say "it is my opinion" Annie but that is what it is. You have no way of knowing that there is no chance of winning and election and your comments about Corbyn are not everyone else's thoughts they are yours and a small number of others. Who know what would happen if the LP got behind him properly.

John Bercow, the Commons speaker, has told Labour MP Seema Malhotra that alleged unauthorised entry into her office does not amount to a possible breach of parliamentary rules.

@yggdrasil

The difference is that in 1945, the Labour government already had in place detailed plans for welfare, nationalisation, housing, education and healthcare, which it could 'sell' to the electorate.

Labour had a cracking manifesto
www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/man/lab45.htm
written by Herbert Morrison, who never did get the top job.

Morrison and Attlee didn't just shout soundbites. They had already worked how they could achieve their aims.

The two men disliked each other intensely, but Attlee managed to keep the factions within the Labour Party under control.

Tories have a 16 point lead over @UKLabour. Time to wake up. Corbyn is the worst leader Labour has ever had.

True Daphne

In your opinion the thoughts are the thoughts of a small number Gracesgran, now I await you reminding very poster what you think is their opinion and what is fact, have fun

,

In your opinion beam, and in my opinion he is the worse leader the party has had

The case has been heard and the judge will give his/her decision Thursdsy, I doubt the party donor will win and if the judge is a strong Tory supporter Corbyn will remain leader

I haven't really seen many others presenting opinion stridently as fact Annie. Compared to the numbers of voters it is quite a small number - perhaps that doesn't matter to those who are determined to destroy Corbyn though.

Gracesgran, what on earth are you on about - determined to destroy Corbyn , good grief do you expect an assassination

"and if the judge is a strong Tory supporter Corbyn will remain leader" - really? Who will vote for the type of LP that comes out with this sort of thing.

Off to do some knitting. It seems right as the LP MPs steer the tumbrils towards the guillotine. The death of the Labour Party may have been exaggerated in the past but I have a feeling it isn't this time.

I think most of us have given up posting on this thread Gracesgran. I had hoped for a reasoned discussion when it started, but things are so entrenched that it's just reflecting all that I and many other people hate about politics at the moment.

I and many other people have always believed in a united Ireland, Anniebach. We adapted our views when the Good Friday agreement was signed.
Castro may operate an unpalatable system but there is no doubt that the changes he has brought to Cuba have been remarkable. Literacy is almost 100%, education is free.After the Haitian earthquake it was medical teams from Cuba who provided the best and longest medical aid. Cuban teams identify key local people who can be trained in medicine, they are then sent to Cuba where they are educated free of charge. It's a system that terrifies the Americans, which is why they are resuming contact and Obama is now talking to Castro.

I sgree Trisher, but as you say, it was an unpalatable system . I have never wanted a united Ireland or a divided Ireland because for me this would mean one side was right and the other wrong, I have always been very sympathetic towards the Catholics and although disagreeing with the murders of people such those in the Birmingham pub and other places in England I could understand the anger and injustice felt by the IRA. I could never feel scything but contempt for the happens such as Bloody Sunday. But there can be no denying there is still much bitterness towards the IRA - in my opinion

The only time Ireland was united was under English rule and then never easily. Before that time it was made up of independent kingdoms or tuatha as they were called under their own leader or monarch. Why it is assumed that just because you are connected to another part of a land mass you should be forever joined to it I do not know. If that was the case Europe would be only one land mass connected to Russia, China etc. There would be no separate Scotland, England or Wales. It is never that neat. The latest DNA study in Ireland showed that historically the peoples of the North and South originated from different parts of the world. No real reason why they should be joined at the hip. Of course historical events muddy the waters. Historically the Protestant community were to the forefront in demanding Home Rule - Wolfe Tone, Charles Stewart Parnell, Erskine Childers to name but a few. Personally I think the British Government should have pushed through Home Rule for all 32 counties in the 1921-22 settlement and it would all be done and dusted by now. It should have been done under the Commonwealth with the proviso that there would be a vote after a generation or two for total republican status. It didn't happen and we have what we have today. I can't see the Protestants or indeed some Catholics in the North settling for a Republic Health service or indeed their Pension provision. Perhaps though Brexit will solve it finally. Every cloud has a silver lining.

Gracesgran. I don't want to destroy Corbyn. I just want him to realise he is not the leader we need. Actually, I think he knows that and would be happy to return to the back benches and his allotment and drain covers. He never sought any office the whole time he was an ordinary MP. I think he should have made the choice to stand aside and let someone else take over when it looked like he might win. I thought he looked distinctly stressed at that meeting with the press when his aide hurried him away. He is also beginning to lose his temper a bit more than he did. Signs of deep stress to me. He is not a young man and no matter how fit you keep yourself, nature, and medical conditions, are no respecter of it. I would hate to think that he made himself ill by the stress of being leader. I remember what Blair looked like when deciding to go to war or not. Of all the world leaders he changed in appearance the most which is why I give him the benefit of the doubt. I believe he really agonised over it. It is easy to be pressurised by others into following a path you yourself do not seek.

I feel such a mixture and pity for Corbyn , when I canvassed and voted for him I thought he was the man I had heard at miners galas and during the miners strike but now realise this is not the real Corbyn, he was never heckled only applauded ,he was always in the background such as when he support Benn to challenge for the leadership. He isn't good st off the cuff replies, I was amazed that when asked about the days leading up to the choice of a candidate to oppose him he said he was enjoying it . Did he avoid tv debates because Cameron was included then agree to a solo one but only before a young audience or does he fear them? Can he only do rehearsed speeches? or pre recorded speeches ? Did he not defend the MP because he wasn't the chairman or because he wanted to avoid getting involved with s heckler ? Is he being the front man with McDonald the real wanna be leader who had tried three times but failed ?

Every Labour leader, bar Blair, has been rubbished by the press and mainstream media. Labour MPs are well aware that Corbyn is a big risk to the party because he challenges, and will continue to challenge, privatisation of public services, militarisation and the targeting of the poor in order to maintain tax cuts for the rich.

The vilification of Labour leaders by the right wing press and mainstream media, is nothing new, and neither is intra-party plotting. In 2013 Roy Hattersley described how George Brown (who the media called a "moderate" but he was in fact pretty right wing) was, despite his drink problem, championed by the press against Wilson (who was considered to be to the left of the party). Also, many right wingers, such as Roy Jenkins, did their best to blacken his character and undermine him.

Michael Foot was subjected to a campaign of ridicule by the press who named him "Worzel Gummidge". Again, members of his own party plotted against him and shortly after his election the right wing "Gang of Four" resigned from the Labour Party and set up the SDP.

Neil Kinnock was similarly treated by the press and mainstream media, who named him "The Welsh Windbag". This was despite his high profile challenge to Militant's presence in the party and his distancing himself from the miners strike or anything else that would have him labelled as to the left of the party. His reward was the Sun's headline on the eve of the election - next to a photo of Kinnock - "Will the last one to leave Britain please turn out the lights". Despite a previous slight lead in the opinion polls, Labour lost.

Tony Blair, however, is reported to have said (re Murdoch) "I think we may have to do a deal with this man". Shortly after his expenses-paid trip to see Rupert Murdoch in his holiday home, Blair made a speech declaring he would reduce media regulation and provide greater support for commercial enterprises like Murdoch's. The Sun told its readers to vote Labour, and Labour won.

Ed Miliband was also portrayed as a left wing firebrand, even though he spent a lot of his campaign apologising for the "mistakes" that Labour had made when in office and confirming his commitment to austerity policies. His policies were hardly earth-shattering and yet he soon acquired the title "Red Ed" and was subjected to the sort of innuendo and ridicule (almost) all Labour leaders have come to expect.

So, in my opinion, it makes little difference whether Labour leaders propose policies that barely change the status quo or more radical policies. Unless they go wholeheartedly for the privatisation/austerity/regulation-lite approach, the British press and mainstream media have always portrayed, and will continue to portray, them as wholly undesirable and dangerous characters.

Many Labour members watched with dismay as Blair's government - initially so hopeful - gradually transformed into one that reduced regulation of the media and financial institutions, entered into private finance initiatives to fund public services and (unlike the Wilson government which refused the US's request for Britain to join the Vietnam War) joined in the illegal invasion of Iraq - which has had the most terrible repercussions round the world.

We have a Conservative Party on the right and the Liberal Democrats in the centre. Some of us think it is time to present a real left wing alternative to the timid and apologetic policies put forward by Ed Miliband in the last election. It is, of course, risky and many MPs don't want to take that risk. Far easier and safer to go along with the sort of Tory-lite policies that will not leave them exposed to media character assassination and the loss of even safe seats. Surely, though, it is up to all politicians (not just the leader) to convince the voters that there is a real alternative to the policies that are being pursued at the moment.

The press in this country has overwhelmingly supported the Conservative Party and told readers to vote Conservative. Why then are they so concerned that a supposed ineffectual no-hoper like Corbyn is the Labour leader and are making such efforts to discredit him? Perhaps it isn't Corbyn they are frightened of but a fear that the idea might take hold that there is a more equitable and effective way of building a better Britain.

Good post Eloethan. You describe the relationship with the press well and the choices made by the factions in the Labour Party.

eloethan great post thanks xx

So the press fear Corbyn !

Hmm. It's easy to blame the press. I don't believe it's that simple or that people are so influenced by what the press says. I think people have a bit more gumption than to be so patronised.

In the meantime....

voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/07/27/speculation-over-snap-election-as-tories-take-16-point-lead-in-polls/