It does make you laugh when you look at it in the very basic terms. Middle class politicians want a leader who represents who the party does/should, to resign from his leadership. Working class people on modest pay and the poorer parts of society and is called Labour of all things.

But they cannot win an election on that alone and have previously branched into wider areas of the political spectrum and ignored their traditional voters with the most avaricious leader we will probably ever see.

COYP

I am paying it to vote against him.

I think Corbyn would lose any GE against the majority of Tory PMs but I cannot see how the implementation of the new rules last night can be seen as anything other than underhand and will probably boost him.

We all get that the PLP don't like him. He understands that. But he isn't resigning. And trying to cheat him out of a victory when people are signing up to vote for him isn't going to make him. Or stop him winning (given it will still have the same electorate that gave him the largest membership mandate of any political leader in British history).

He won't win a GE but he's going to have to be given the electoral rope to 'hang himself' and his supporters. That's the only way to convince them that he can't win. 5 more years of Theresa May will have them all desperate for a Dave Miliband clone.

Edited by OknotOK (13 Jul 2016 11.48am)

"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show

Do you know what avaricious means Rudi? It means someone who is seeking to make money at every opportunity. Now Corbyn has been criticised for many things but chasing after money is not one of them. judging by the house he is filmed coming out of every day he doesn't seem to have a millionaire life style so what are you on about?

I overheard this view expressed the other day.

The current Labour shambles is excellent for my party but not good for the country as a whole.Government's of whatever political persuasion need effective oppositions and alas as we all know there is NO opposition of any note at the present time.

In terms of Labour, perhaps they are grateful that their current ills have been masked by the Conservative leadership election and the new PM.

Not only does it need opposition day to day and to reign in a party in power, but we could also see situations such as 4 terms of Tory rule and then 3 terms of Labour rule. Both can be damaging for some.

COYP

I thought you were referring to Brown. However, is avaricious really the correct adjective for Blair? I can think of a few better ones... but let's leave that for another thread.

Just watching Cameron's departing speech, whatever you think of him that is what a proper leader looks like.

Gracious, calm, authoritative, humorous and sincere. He is a prime example of what characteristics a Prime Minister should have and I think he'll be an extraordinarily hard act to follow.

In short, he is everything that Corbyn is not.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Don't get me wrong I think he's gone way off track since winning the majority. I think he had a lot more to give and didn't fulfil his potential as PM, his achievements have in my eyes been hamstrung by the poor economy he inherited. He'd done the hard work... A massive shame, but the point I'm making is that he was an example of what a Prime Minister should act like and that Corbyn is so far off that it's untrue. Same goes for Eagle and Smith. Labour are nowhere near power and won't be for a generation.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.