Thankfully not too many think like you Nick.

The concept of mutual destruction has stopped a direct major war between superpowers since WW2.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

You are mistaking opinions with facts on that blog! No links to back up the assertions.

I don't think there is any doubt that Corbyn is treated worse by the press than the majority of the alternatives would have been. And that's at least partly because he sets himself up to be. He and his advisers are disorganised, do regularly appear to announce and then reverse policies, and don't seem able to play the game. And while Corbynistas aren't willing to acknowledge that it pushes the party further and further from power.

You're buying into the same narrative. Yes there were local factors (of which the opposition to nuclear power is the biggest) but it's not accepting that Corbyn was a major factor in the loss. And it was a relatively safe seat - held for over 80 years in various guises - in the middle of a parliament with a government who are making huge cuts and so should have been very unpopular. Copeland should have been held comfortably. Winning Copeland and Stoke would have provided the Labour party with a positive narrative and something to build on. Losing Copeland - especially the way they did - was disastrous. And it was materially Corbyn's leadership that was the reason for that loss.

And people from JC's inner sanctum coming out and blaming it on very poor turnout (when it was one of the highest turnouts for a by-election in generations) just make them look very stupid.

Richmond had been a seat moving between the Tories and Lib Dems for ages. It was also a seat where the overwhelming issue - despite was some Brexiters suggested at the time - was lost because Goldsmith (not even a Tory candidate officially) campaigned on a Brexit agenda and the Lib Dems didn't.

I didn't say he was. But he is from the left rather than centre left (or certainly the centre left as is recognised politically nowadays).

Edited by OknotOK (27 Feb 2017 3.22pm)

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

The paranoia of the Corbynistas is delicious:

[Link]

It's everyone's fault except Jezza's!

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Making a statement like that really demonstrates how out of touch you are with reality.

That is the only reasonable position a leader could take in a world where nuclear weapons exist.
To say you aren't prepared to use your own nuclear weapons disqualifies you from office.

Of course there are major issues which these by elections have shown with the Cornyn movement. He needs to be far more assertive about what he stands for, most people just see him as the same as the rest of the Westminster elite.

But none thing which people I think are underestimating is the power that Labour's ground campaign can bring to the table. People have been sailing for months that UKIP would push Labour close in Stoke, that it would be the final nail in his coffin. Yes, their victory is partlyndown to UKIP falling apart as a party atm (far more than Labour interestingly) but it was also down to the fact that Labour can draw from the biggest membershipnofnany political party in Europe to campaign. Now this may not completely offset the mouthfrothing bile of the national media, but it shows the potential which still remains for a proper grassroots poltical movement to be built.

If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4

Many people realise that if Corbyn came to power, then the apocalyptic forecasts of companies fleeing the country, mass unemployment etc that the Remainers wrongly predicted, would come to pass.

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

UKIP would probably have taken Stoke if the media hadn't gone big time on that Hillsborough nonsense. I feel that the negative association really damaged the campiagn.

Pointing to Labour's victory without that context is disgenerous.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

'That Hillsborough nonsense'. What, that he told a shameless lie about one of the biggest scandals ever to hit his community?

Fact is UKIP are haemorraghing votes to the Tories. People are so focused on Labour doing likewise, but I would say more Labour voters are just not voting now than are voting for someone else. Corbyn needs to rectify this by being far more radical, far more assertive about the values that the movement he represents can offer to people. If he does that, there are millions of dissilusioned people who are there to be won over by a radical alternative to the xenophobic, corporate-sponsored rhetoric of the Tories. If he doesn't they'll fulfill they're dreams of making this country a oligarchic tax haven in a decade.

If punk ever happened I'd be preaching the law, instead of listenin to Lydon lecture BBC4

True but that "context" argument can equally be applied to Labour's defeat in Copeland (nuclear power, etc). Although I don't believe Labour would have lost in Stoke anyway.

The article for me sums up where Corbyn supporters should be. Even if you believed in him, in his position, and his policies; he is clearly not the leader needed to bring those to fruition.
[Link]

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