Beginning to distrust Jeremy Corbyn

I thought that obieone had a sensible comment. We need a strong opposition and Corbyn in charge is just handing power to the Tories on a plate. He is quite likely to split the party. I would live to vote Labour but there is no way that I would with Corbyn as leader- I know 4 people who are members of his fan club but the rest want to get rid of him.

trisher, it would appear that the main difference between you and others of the Labour persuasion on this thread is that you believe JC can deliver the things you list through a Labour Government next time round and we do not. That is because we do not believe he can win an election.
dj - thank you for your link, most of which I have read. It doesn't alter the fact that he, like the five over membership eligibility to vote, had a right to go to court for clarification. He had the money to fund it himself so no loss to Labour funds. The others did not and people like you kindly funded them. Both he and thee lost as the court did not find in the respective favour.
It's done and dusted now and we have to tighten the wording so that there is no chance of any misinterpretation in the future.

I retired a few years ago but from 1978 worked with disadvantaged children and families, with women fleeing domestic abuse, with former mining communities where the grandparents stepped in to care for their grandchildren because their own adult children had become addicted to heroin. Yes, that was what was predicted when Thatcher set out to destroy the miners. I was there, on the picket lines, my babies in prams, collecting money for striking miners. We weren't well off but we went to rallies, the birth of one of our children was announced at a miners fund raiser when my absence was explained because I'd given birth an hour earlier. My credentials aren't perfect but they're ok imo.
My grandparents worked in mills or mines - Iwon't go on but honestly, I know about poverty and deprivation, though my own life was protected by my parents and extended family, who worked very very hard to ensure that the generation I belong to, born after WW2 had a better/easier life than they had. My grandparents talked about when it cost half a crown to get the doctor out, a huge amount of money.
I supported Michael Foot, I have letters from him. I saw what happened in the wilderness years. I also saw what happened after Blair won the election. I know he wasn't perfect and like most people, I opposed and marched against the war in Iraq. But - new schools, sure start centres where we had health visitors, midwives, libraries, and the primary school all built on a new site in the middle of those depressed former mining communities. I could write a book about children and their families who were helped and felt cared for during that period.
So yes, I want a Labour government that may make some mistakes. None of us are perfect, even Mr Corbyn. But I want a Labour leader who can win an election and improve our society generally. I want a Labour leader who can appeal to a much broader group of people than Jeremy does. I hate the bullying, the anti semitism. I don't accept those accusations are simply dreamed up by the Daily Wail. I know that paper exaggerates. I know we have a press that leads to the right. That isn't news. What we need are Labour leaders and fixers who anticipate that and manage it better than the current lot do.
I apologise for this rant. I try and avoid long posts but this thread is depressingly polarised. I don't like the way Anniebach is being singled out and told she's aggressive etc. Annie's posts are always heart felt. She and I have sometimes disagreed but my impression is that she speaks from her heart.

You're wrong, Annie.
There are at least five policies which have had to be watered down because of opposition by labour, including child tax credits and academies.

You say that Corbyn wants to take us back thirty years, but Smith has said he agrees with Corbyn on most policies.
So why is he not wanting to take us back thirty years?

How many times have I said , I want a labour government in power

Trisher, I do not hate . I am not responsible for what other posters believe or don't believe. As you care so much for the most vunerable why the hell are you supporting a man who cannot win an election ? I accept you believe he can but I say he cannot win seats from the Tories , not with militant ideals . Labour has to move to the centre to win and only by winning can the vunerable be helped , ranting from the oposition benches will not change a thing

Yes I had, rather amusing really, more so as he seems to be treated as the second coming

On a flippant note. Has anyone commented on the that fact that JC has the initials of another advocate for the poor? We all know how that story ended. I just hope we don't have 2000 years of this new cult.

I am sorry but as someone who has qualifications, has children with qualifications and what many would regard as a pleasant middle class lifestyle I strongly resent being portrayed as not being a caring or compassionate person who recognises that there are those who need more help and care than I do. I know that the Conservatives don't care for the homeless, the poor, the mentally ill or indeed anyone who happens to have a period of bad luck or ill-health. I don't think that there are people out there who are living the life of Riley on my taxes, although there may be a few benefit scroungers far more has been stolen by people like Sir Philip Green.
I believe in a fully funded NHS which could be done if tax loopholes were closed.
I believe in a publicly run rail network which is efficient, reasonably priced and profitable (Which can be done as demonstrated by the East Coast franchise sold on after it had been brought into profit)
I believe Trident should be scrapped -it's outdated, expensive and fairly useless.
The Conservatives haven't changed, they are just better at hiding what they do. They have messed up education, the NHS and the rail network. They are punishing the disabled, the mentally ill and have things in the system to punish the elderly. Unfortunately they do it very quietly and some people are completely conned by them.
Anniebach I cannot believe that you have anything in common with some of the people on this thread than a hatred of Corbyn, but they are lapping up what you are saying and using it for their own ends.

I strongly disagree Corbyn is the most principled labour MP, if he was he would acknowledge the fact that going back thirty years is no way to win votes through out the country . Labour has to move to the centre not return to the far left

Wow, what an intelligent post,Day6. Well done. Much food for thought.

daphnedill - "the Conservatives will stay in power and drive through measures which will destroy the NHS, education and the foundations of the welfare state."

This is the stick always used about the Conservatives. I think this thread illustrates that there has been a HUGE societal shift in outlook, aspirations and fortunes and the way in which people view political parties. Labour may well be the party to look after the least well off in society, but the Conservatives have shifted ground = they have had to - and if they only represented those who owned horse and vast estates, or those people with lots of money, ordinary working people wouldn't be voting for them.

The Conservatives know that the NHS is a BIG vote winner. To damage it, destroy it, or hand it over would send people running to other parties to demand justice. Blair and the Labour party started giving contracts to outside agents and Blair in 2006 was looking to get as many people off Incapacity Benefit as possible. It was a huge scandal at the time. I know as I was one of the many who lost out then. I couldn't believe this was happening under a Labour government. It was a money-saving move and trust me, I knew the meaning of austerity when it happened.

Until Corbyn, there hadn't been a lot to choose between the parties and in many ways I respect him for trying to widen the distance and return some Labour values. However, I think he is a bit of an anachronism because what he is proposing is turning the clock back to a time when people DEPENDED on old Labour to give them a voice. There are many who still depend on those they elect appreciating that life is a struggle for many and I think the Conservative party forget that at their peril. This is where they have gained ground...and this is where Labour has fallen back.

I am musing and I appreciate all that the Labour party gave us in terms of social reform (because I am of that generation, maybe) but perhaps now Labour has to look to the middle ground a bit more, and support those with aspirations to get on, those who have hauled themselves up, despite the odds, through graft and I know over the years a great swathe of hard-working people who supported themselves (those without silver spoons in their mouths) felt very let down by Labour, because they were the workers not getting any breaks. They were being taxed so those who didn't work could have just as good a life as they could, on their meagre wages. There has to be a difference, and I don't say that in a selfish way. We have a duty to care for the frail, sick, old, incapacitated, disabled and I'll have no truck with any political party that doesn't recognise that. Labour forgot to recognise that, seeing me as OK, because I'd worked hard, got qualifications, brought my family up without state aid and paid a mortgage. I was kicked into touch by Blair and his cronies when I was most vulnerable.

I think the Conservative party has lowered its sights, quite rightly and is no longer the party of the landed gentry, whereas Labour has become stuck in the image of it's forefathers and perhaps needs to raise its sights to recognise that the daughter of the factory worker and coal miner now has a degree. She knows poverty and hardship, hasn't become hard-hearted, but she also appreciates that people have more social mobility today, and those who graft need breaks too. Bringing back the militant faction is scaring people off. Those workers who got tax breaks and saw their paltry hourly rate rise recently want more of that, and ironically, they got their breaks under a Conservative government.

Just saying. As politicians go, I think Corbyn is probably one of the most principled of his party. I like him a lot, but turning back the clock is not the way forward for Labour, and in Smith they have a weak alternative.

i2.wp.com/voxpoliticalonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/160815-Akehurst-email.png?w=470

This letter was sent to CLPs by Progress, a right wing labour grouping.
What is the difference between a right wing organisation trying to influence the vote and Momentum trying to influence the vote?

Results of local parties support

285 for Corbyn

83 for Smith

skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2016/08/15/michael-fosters-poisonous-nazi-slur-article-dissected/

About Michael Foster, Devorgilla, the man who took the labour party to court.

Can't imagine how that would work out Devo, yes interesting times but troubling

AB, the Tory press are waiting with all the best stories as they always do for the run up to the next election. They sit on them until the best possible time for them to break them to the world at large.
I am beginning to think we will end up with two factions of the LP for the duration of this Parliament, with both having leaders and speakers. They could have three questions each at PMQs. We do indeed live in very interesting political times.

littlefierce, I assume you mean the vote for whom your CLP would support as you can still vote individually if you have that right either by being a member before 12th January or having paid your £25 or affiliated in time. Some CLPs are using their delegates to carry the wishes of their branch members to the 'pro or con' support meetings. Branch meetings were held and the delegate for that branch informed of the majority opinion, with the instruction to vote accordingly. It really is down to the efficiency of the officers at the meeting whether eligibility was enforced. I have heard of meetings where anyone got in even if not eligible and ones where strict adherence to the rules was observed. I know which I prefer. Our CLP is not having a meeting of members or delegates and just leaving it up to the individual vote. You can hold these meetings as it comes within the remit of the leadership campaign. The ones you can't hold are those to change the officers.
I sympathise with your point re the belief that you would have the right to vote just by being a member and I think that does need clarified on the LP site for the future. The court clearly found it was not unreasonable. The same NEC that allowed JC on the ticket without the % requirement is the same NEC that set the cut off date. On reflection I think I agree more with AB on a longer cut off date as I do think long-term commitment shows dedication to the cause. Again, though, that should be reflected clearly in the membership blurb.

Besm, if the Tories felt threatened by Corbyn the Tory press would really attack him as it is they are amused and some really believe he is being attacked , no, big difference in attacking and mocking

Cheer up Jen , you and the fan club are taking us back to 1883 , and all the strikes in 1978, the winter of discontent

What other side?
The pro-Smiths or the Tories (who surely want Corbyn to stay).

Beam,mi am baffled, youngsters I can understand but those who lived through the eighties and the thatchers years ?

Election results

1983 Tory 397. Labour 209. Massive swing to conservatives

1987 Tory 376. Labour 229. Slight swung to labour

1992 Tory 336. Labour 271. A swing to labour no seats gained by Tories

1997. Tory 165. Labour 418. Massive swing to labour

And corbynites want to go back to 1983

You've been brainwashed by the other side, beammeup.
Idon't suppose you've read the link about Smith, have you?

I can't understand sensible grandmothers falling for all the man says, can you? Incidentally, Owen Smith is saying much the same things, but is dismissed, probably because he is reasonable. Which make you wonder if all Corbyn's support come from desiring anarchy in politics.

Beam, he is dangerous , all this gentle, sweetness in interviews and in the house, I have heard him at miners rallies, no gentle, sweetness then, the hypocrite . He wants to destroy the Labour Party and change it to a Militant party , no power in the country but lots of marches, street riots etc. He tried to get the Militants back all those years ago and failed, this time he could succeed .