Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Corbyn's former staffers never fail to dissapoint

Not to mention he was very open in his praise of Cameron and the austerity measures.

As I posted on twitter I won’t be taking lessons on the left from the likes of him.

I was looking at the cost of nationalising water the other day. Hard to get figures that aren't from water lobbyists, but I found Team Jez's estimate £14.7bn.

This seems a bit implausible given that the debts/liabilities (not sure which) of the water companies are £56bn. How do you get around repaying that? The state owning it would doubtless reduce a lot of the costs and make a fair biit of sense, but it's not £14.7bn. On balance, I'll go for tougher regulation and spending the money on the climate emergency.

Anyway, remember chaps. It was all fully costed.

Obviously in the campaign, Bozo just had to lie about Brexit, but with stuff like this in the manifesto, I reckon he could have won a landslide on the economy too.

Another unhappy 'accident' for St Jezzcock...

Funny how he managed to avoid this stuff when he was running for leader. Or indeed when he was trying to become Prime Minister.

I see his former pal Chris Williamson is on to knocking about with Lyndon Larouche's widow.

Sounds like the usual high level of analysis.

Jeremy Corbyn gave his usual speech at today's Stop the War march

FTFY Chris.

Corbyn displaying the type of political acumen which saw his movement relinquish total control of almost every level of the Labour Party to being reduced to embarrassing irrelevancies within the space of a few short months back in 2020.

I hate to say this, but I think we're rapidly reaching the point where Starmer is going to have to address this directly by issuing some sort of public apology for the entire Corbyn era. Otherwise there is a real danger that "Tried to make Corbyn PM" will start to gain actual traction with voters as we approach the next GE.

That would be too strong, I think. Lots of people who recognise the problems with it also liked some stuff about it. He’s probably not even standing as an independent now, judging by this stuff. He’s been seen off, that’s enough.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 9:19 pm

Someone I follow twitter pointed out that saying your anti-war is like saying your anti-murder.

It's not a difficult moral position.



Until the tanks come across your border...

Arrowhead wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 9:44 pm I hate to say this, but I think we're rapidly reaching the point where Starmer is going to have to address this directly by issuing some sort of public apology for the entire Corbyn era. Otherwise there is a real danger that "Tried to make Corbyn PM" will start to gain actual traction with voters as we approach the next GE.

I don't think that'll be necessary (or desirable, BTW). The Corbyn shroud-waving by Sunak, etc is sheer desperation(they have virtually nothing else). Starmer simply needs to point out that he was no different from any other Labour Party member in working hard to to try to get a Labour government elected - no matter who the leader happened to be. Yes, even me. Starmer was also bound by collective reponsibility as a shadow cabinet member. In short, aside from a few easily duped diehard Tories, it doesn't really wash.

Abernathy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 11:38 pm

Arrowhead wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 9:44 pm I hate to say this, but I think we're rapidly reaching the point where Starmer is going to have to address this directly by issuing some sort of public apology for the entire Corbyn era. Otherwise there is a real danger that "Tried to make Corbyn PM" will start to gain actual traction with voters as we approach the next GE.

I don't think that'll be necessary. The Corbyn shroud-waving by Sunak, etc is sheer desperation(they have virtually nothing else). Starmer simply needs to point out that he was no different from any other Labour Party member in working hard to to try to get a Labour government elected - no matter who the leader happened to be. Yes, even me. Starmer was also bound by collective reponsibility as a shadow cabinet member. In short, aside from a few easily duped diehard Tories, it doesn't really wash.

The sort of people who use this line would still be parroting "Vote Starmer - get Corbyn" if Starmer proposed making it illegal to be Corbyn.

Loyalty and cabinet responsibility (and Chatham House rules) means nothing to them.

David Sainsbury is hardly a sinister oligarch.

Looks like former members of the Jez club have made their decision. And they won’t be joining his peace & love 1 man band party…

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... to-ukraine

The Putin stooge SpEkEs his bRaNeS

Magic Grandpa wrote: “Pouring arms in isn’t going to bring about a solution; it’s only going to prolong and exaggerate this war,” Corbyn said in an interview with a Beirut-based TV channel last August. “We might be in for years and years of war in Ukraine.”

He added: “What I find disappointing is that hardly any of the world’s leaders use the word peace; they always use the language of more war, and more bellicose war.

“This war is disastrous for the people of Ukraine...

It may turn out disastrous for Ukraine. Who knows what the future holds? What will be disastrous for Ukraine is letting Russia roll in and take over without a fight. Ukraine is a sovereign nation called Ukraine, not a province of Russia.

Why won't Corbyn just come out with it and admit he's on Putin's side?

And the word he's looking for is "exacerbate", not "exaggerate". And him with a private school education too.