Mods, wouldnt mind if this could be a standalone thread.
Today there has been the split and part of it is due to anti semitism issues. these issues seem to have always nagged away at the labour party.
I genuinely am ignorant of this whole issue.
Can someone explain to me in simple terms what the issue is? I am aware of the Israel / Palestine conflict but I cannot understand how that has became such an issue for a UK political party? And why only Labour?
|
Labour has become increasingly left wing and on the left the Israel/Palestine issue is an important one. They are very much pro Palestinian and anti Israeli, quite often this spills over into anti semitism.
The conflict isn't such much an issue in the other parties.
More to it, but that's the bare bones.
|
Much as I am anti labour, the Anti Semitism thing is a blind.
The Government of Israel, in the past few years, has been very good at managing to tie any criticism of their actions into the general bucket of anti semitism. Criticise the state, you are automatically a hater of Judaism,
The two are not linked. The state of Israel does behave appallingly, illegally, some of their actions are akin to that of the early nazi state, and in this respect Ken Livingstone has been unfairly pilloried.
I am not anti Semitic, have no axe to grind with judaism as a faith or the millions around the world for who it is a way of life. But the state of Israel, by its actions to its minorities, and linking of state criticism to religion is as much of a pariah as it's neighbours.
It should be possible for any political party to express displeasure at another, without the fake curtain of bigotry being thrown at them.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 19 Feb 19 at 08:04
|
"Criticise the state, you are automatically a hater of Judaism,"
Bit like 'if you criticise the EU, you are automatically a xenophobic, racist scumbag'.
|
>> "Criticise the state, you are automatically a hater of Judaism,"
>>
>> Bit like 'if you criticise the EU, you are automatically a xenophobic, racist scumbag'.
>>
No but as most people voted to get rid of foreigners, they are. See you dont get the distinction either.
|
"See you dont get the distinction either."
Precisely Zeddo, my very point is that most sniffers that I come across don't know the significance and meaning of the words that they are using.
The sun has come out, wake up!
|
I agree with pretty much every word of Zero's post. A Labour politician who put it in those terms though would be in breach of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of anti semitism which the party has adopted.
There are certainly posts in social media by members and supporters of the Labour party that display an altogether more ugly face exploiting anti-semitic memes and making disgusting statements. OTOH, somebody on the News Quiz last week put it Twitter has given an audience to people who were previously running out in the road barking at cars.
The Tory party has a similar issue with anti islamic sentiment but the only person taking an interest is Baroness Warsi.
|
>>the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of anti semitism
This one (which I got off Wkipedia)?
>>the definition of the International Holocaust Research Alliance (IHLA) working definition:
Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.
This is a working definition only and not legally binding. It confusingly refers also to non-Jews and doesn’t tackle a basic problem – there are several Semitic peoples, in addition to Jews. Other victims of the Nazis such as pacifists, homosexuals and Slavs need to be covered in a different and all-embracing definition of “hatred”.
I can understand why anyone would hesitate before committing something so vague. Anti-Semitism is a euphemism for anti-Jew.
|
I think anti-semitism is being used as an excuse in same way Irish backstop is used - divert attention from bigger picture to smaller picture.
Labour's break away group wants to remain in EU - they want 2nd referendum. They are projecting themselves as Remain party. They are not saying this explicitly as they want to get some Leave votes too.
|
>> I think anti-semitism is being used as an excuse in same way Irish backstop is
>> used - divert attention from bigger picture to smaller picture.
Err no, that's a very poor analogy indeed and pretty rubbish excuse to try and link it to Brexit.
|
>> I can understand why anyone would hesitate before committing something so vague. Anti-Semitism is a
>> euphemism for anti-Jew.
Its not vague, its pretty specific.
1/ Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
2/ Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
3/ Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
4/ Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
5/ Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
6/ Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
7/ Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
8/ Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
9/ Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis.
10/ Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
11/ Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
I'm afraid 6/ is a fact, especially in the US, where many pressure groups exist in high ranks of administration purely for the advancement of Israeli policy
8/ Is a travesty of fact, where the state of Israel does exhibit behaviour not expected or demanded of other states. And publicly proclaims the fact.
10/ I already proclaimed that in an earlier post, because its a valid comparison.
11/ effectively means "we will behave in exactly any manner we want with no retribution"
I'm afraid those steps make many of us technically officially Anti Semetic, tho in reality we are not. And I suspect it was designed to do so.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 19 Feb 19 at 13:28
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47300832
And another one gone.
Rumours about three con MPs joining them as well.
|
>> Rumours about three con MPs joining them as well.
Anna Soubrey, Sarah Wollaston and Heidi Allen.
|
Thanks for the replies on this which are much appreciated and enlightening.
I wonder if the MPs on either side of the Israel / Palestine divide are being "supported" to hold those views?
|
I wonder if the State of Israel is aggressive because it is (was) surrounded by countries that wanted to wipe it off the map?
Throughout history the Jewish people have been persecuted. Even in England, in the 1200s Jewish people were forced to wear a yellow patch! England even had its own dark days with regards Jewish history, the 1190 massacre in York and executing about 300 Jews in the Tower of London in the 1270's and imprisoning others around the country.
|
>> I wonder if the State of Israel is aggressive because it is (was) surrounded by
>> countries that wanted to wipe it off the map?
Indeed that is part of the problem, Historically there was never a "state of israel" it has appeared in a hostile area and displaced the existing (albeit rather fluid) population of alternate religious followings. With such differing views and doubts about its legitimacy, its no wonder it has had to "punch above its weight" to survive
Unfortunately one wing of Israeli politics has used such security fears to its own advantage, whipping up a siege mentality and bigging up "enemy" Its a classic move, very much in line with trump and his walls, but in the middle east is self propagating and self fulfilling.
Overt American support and interference really helps to propagate the "illegal invader" local feeling against Israel.
>> Throughout history the Jewish people have been persecuted. Even in England, in the 1200s Jewish
>> people were forced to wear a yellow patch! England even had its own dark days
>> with regards Jewish history, the 1190 massacre in York and executing about 300 Jews in
>> the Tower of London in the 1270's and imprisoning others around the country.
History is much closer than that. Battle of Cable street, alas the BUF came up against the locals (and imported left wing factions), the locals who very much thought of the jewish community there as their own.
|
> History is much closer than that. Battle of Cable street, alas the BUF came up
>> against the locals (and imported left wing factions), the locals who very much thought of
>> the jewish community there as their own.
>>
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cable_Street
Never heard of that before.
|
Which brings us back to the original labour party issue, Jewish communities were very much in line with, and involved with the early days of the Labour party, and were well represented within. Hence when the ultra right wing BUF arrived on the scene, the working class, left wing and the jewish community were united against them.
For what ever reason Israel now has a good lobby within the Tory party, but very little in the Labour party, hence they are able to criticise the state of Israel and its Palestinian/territorial policy. The charge of anti semitism is whipped up using the "international definition" One the labour party have only recently fully accepted. Unwillingly because of its unjustifiable scope.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 21 Feb 19 at 14:14
|
www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/21/rachel-riley-and-tracy-ann-oberman-to-take-legal-action-after-twitter-abuse-antisemitism
An interesting article and seeing how successful the action will be interesting.
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 22 Feb 19 at 00:06
|
Events over the last couple of days would suggest that this issue is not going away for Labour.
So an MP who openly states his opinion that Labour are their own worst enemies with their stance on this, has to then backtrack and pretend that this wasn't really what his thoughts were!
|
As per my last post - this still isn't going away!
I am so annoyed at Labour. So angry. Almost as angry at them as I am at the Tories. Tories are screwing our country, no, HAVE screwed our country, and we are now all waiting to see what they are going to leave for us.
They should not have got away with this as we should have had a strong opposition that would have fought them at every juncture. Instead the opposition is self imploding over a country many miles from UK.
By birth I am a catholic, in the west of Scotland over the last week, and the next week as well, I will be subjected to orange walks trotting around all the towns, causing chaos , spouting their anti catholic drivel. But no political party seems to want to take interest as they account for a lot of voters. But if it was anti Islam, anti Gay or anti Jew marches, there would be universal condemnation.
But either way, I do not think that the political party's viewpoint on catholicism is as important as its policies on poverty, homelessness, the economy etc. So why do the Jewish seem to think that is their number one priority in the UK Govt?
|
"Tories are screwing our country, no, HAVE screwed our country, and we are now all waiting to see what they are going to leave for us."
In what way? Trying to implement the wishes of the populace? People keep yelling that's their job. Maybe they could have done it differently but no-one of any significance has actually yet said how, despite everyone knowing they've done it wrong.
Last edited by: smokie on Thu 11 Jul 19 at 21:03
|
Well, for a start, they only agreed to the vote to try and save their own party.
They have not had the balls to stand up and say, the vote was rigged with lies, money, bribes and complete fabrications.
They have not had the balls to say, ok yes the country voted for it but every expert with any savvy is saying it is going to be a complete disaster for the country.
Their own leader elects have said they must push on with brexit or their party is finished (no concerns for how this leaves the country)
They have let every other aspect of governing the country over the last 3 years slip to concentrate on Brexit.
They have paid millions in ferry contracts to company that didn't have ferries.
Will I continue?
|
>> Well, for a start, they only agreed to the vote to try and save their
>> own party.
Oh I don't know about that. I think their was an air of inevitability of it. Labour's tight rope/fudge on brexit tells us its wider than a handful of con MPs or a small number of its members.
|
As a Jew and a Tory voter the current situation is totally bizarre.
The party have acted like Labour in terms of taxation, created an incompetent bureaucracy, especially in the DWP and managed to annoy all sides of the Brexit debate.
Meanwhile Labour have dropped any capability of running the country due to a feeble minded leader who cannot see beyond his own political dogma, however bad it is.
I have some insider knowledge of a meeting between Jeremy Corbyn, Seumas Milne and representatives of the Jewish community last year. JC and SM were incapable of understanding the hurt they have caused and failed to accept that the actions of a democratically elected government in Israel may not necessarily be the views of people who voted for other parties or indeed Jews who are citizens (and proud citizens) of other countries.
This is like accusing all British people of war crimes because Tony Blair sent our troops into Iraq. Plainly this is anti-Semitic as it damns all Jews simply for being Jews rather than having individual opinions. I have lots of friends and family in israel who are 'right wing' but did not vote for Bibi because they think he is a crook. Others are left and voted for parties more sympathetic to the Palestinian situation but all are tarred by the same Corbyn brush as Bibi himself.
I think my views are well known and whilst Israel is by no means perfect it's treatment of all people including Arabs, refugees, the LGBT community etc is a damn sight better than the vast majority of other countries. Try holding a Gay Pride parade in any Moslem country and see how that goes. Israel had an ambassador in a same sex marriage a few years ago; the spouse is a close friend from when I was a teenager.
So Corbyn is an idiot for not even trying to understand the situation, he could not care less as his default stand is to support the freedom fighter, terrorist or fringe lunatic even if it means he can never be considered as sensible prime minister material.
We are in a mess, Labour could have benefited from the mess but have allowed every one else to set the agenda, and that agenda is to show that Labour are run by people who are even more selfish than the Tories.
|
>> I think my views are well known and whilst Israel is by no means perfect
>> it's treatment of all people including Arabs, refugees, the LGBT community etc is a damn
>> sight better than the vast majority of other countries. Try holding a Gay Pride parade
>> in any Moslem country and see how that goes. Israel had an ambassador in a
>> same sex marriage a few years ago; the spouse is a close friend from when
>> I was a teenager.
One of my parents was an ex-pat in a North African country as a child.
The locals were in the process of overthrowing their colonial rulers and several ex-pats were murdered. My uncle can never forget the image of a neighbor being dragged down and beaten to death by the armed mob.
The street my parent's family lived in was torched and the family was evacuated under the noses of the mob.
A Jewish family took all the family's children (my parent, uncle and audit) in, at great risk to themselves and hid them until the authorities could mount a rescue.
My parent is always thankful to those people and always fearful of the others.
|
>> In what way? Trying to implement the wishes of the populace? People keep yelling that's
>> their job. Maybe they could have done it differently but no-one of any significance has
>> actually yet said how, despite everyone knowing they've done it wrong.
The whole schmozzle from offering the referendum right up to the Bojo/Hunt contest is about the interests of the Tory Party not the country.
And don't even get me started on benefit reform in general or Universal Credit in particular.
|
Personally, I don't think they are any worse than any other party has been over the years.
I do think the quality and reliability of our MPs on all sides has declined enormously over the past few years.
|
Smokie, I am genuinely interested on what basis you are saying that. I kind of agree on your second point but do you not see that our country is screwed?
What is more noticeable to me is the fact that they are now so open about it. They know they are lying, they don’t care. You have the next prime minister making up complete stories about model busses and the like and he is laughing at us.
Remember we were all shaking our heads at how ridiculous Trump was and couldn’t understand how dumb the Americans were ? What sort of democracy do we have that the people with the most money can blatantly take control? That’s not democracy.
|
>>What sort of democracy do we have that the people with the most money can blatantly take >>control? That’s not democracy.
Hasn't it always been that way?
And when it's not that way, the results are just as bad or even worse (Russian Revolution, French Revolution, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea etc.).
|
I *do* think there is a fairly large element of the country being screwed. I also hope that BREXIT works out well but I fear it won't.
I've always said the Tories were wrong to go for the referendum in the first place but there were reasons. Maybe to do with "saving the party" (as someone said) but also there was a groundswell which gave the idea legs. Had Labour been in power the same may well have happened - or maybe not, but who knows?
The Tories have been somewhat cornered because the vote is seen as binding, but many indicators seem to be that a fresh vote may have a different outcome - but they can't be seen to be flying in the face of democracy. Labour, in opposition, can obviously take whichever stance they think gives them the best shot of winning the next election (like any Opposition party might). But they've taken an awful long time to decide what that position is though, and not really been particularly cooperative in the process to date for very shaky reasons.
And do Labour not also feel the need to respect democracy? Seems not.
So the Tories were left holding the poison chalice of trying to deliver an undefined thing, a thing which is really not related to party politics at all, without any cooperation from anyone else.
I am not denying that the Tories have made a right pigs ear of it but I don't lay the blame entirely on them, or on Theresa. With a little more constructiveness from others (including some of their own) we could have been out by now.
And just speculate how it might have gone under Labour... how would they have done any better? Answer = they wouldn't.
Thus I don't think the Tories have screwed the country, any more than A N Other would have done.
|
The Tories decided to hold a referendum without defining the alternatives being chosen between, the timescales to achieving either decision, the costs of either decision, the approach, the referendum threshold or anything else.
They have then spent the time since with ridiculous and pathetic little in-games all designed to further the career of one individual or another with not a care got the impact on the country or it's reputation, never mind it's future health.
The only think they have achieved in the last 3 years is to hold a referendum which has split and screwed up the country and then danced in it's ashes whilst causing every issue from Scottish separation to the Irish border to rise up again..
>>Thus I don't think the Tories have screwed the country, any more than A N Other would have done.
I dunno so much, you'd have to go some to beat that record.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50077384
And another Labour MP leaves. Looks like JC still has plenty to do inside Labour to stop this.
OT, has there ever been a parliament where this many MPs have left or been kicked out of their own parties?
Must be nearly 30 since the last GE.
|
Sadly Labour is already outside my tolerance zone and still going in the wrong direction. It needs more people like Louise Ellman and fewer incompetents such as Corbyn and the fascist idealogues (there is such a thing as a left wing fascist, the defining feature to me being that they brook no opinions but their own) who are pulling his strings.
Ellman has of course cited Labour's antisemitism but she has also referred to the party "having no room for dissent". That is what will stop me voting for it - it just isn't what it says on the tin.
|
>> she has also referred to the party "having no room for dissent".
It's always been pretty intolerant of internal disagreement, hasn't it? Has it really got worse/stronger in recent years?
Edit: Not that I'm saying it is any worse than other parties.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 18 Oct 19 at 10:44
|
>> >> she has also referred to the party "having no room for dissent".
>>
>> It's always been pretty intolerant of internal disagreement, hasn't it? Has it really got worse/stronger
>> in recent years?
Yes and yes I think. Ellman for example would have been booted out by her constituency party members (despite her popularity with voters) so has got her retaliation in first.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 18 Oct 19 at 11:01
|
Ellman for example would have been booted out by her
>> constituency party members (despite her popularity with voters) so has got her retaliation in first.
>>
>>
What issues are there with her and her constituency party?
|
>> What issues are there with her and her constituency party?
I've not seen anything specific but the party membership is committed to the current leader (for whom they voted) and the current party policy. If Ellman or others, and she's not the only one, disavow the leadership and current policy they're unlikely to be re-nominated in a democratic selection process.
That's not unique to Labour as we've seen with various Tories out of sympathy with Boris and Brexit etc facing no-confidence votes.
|
That's not unique to Labour as we've seen with various Tories out of sympathy with
>> Boris and Brexit etc facing no-confidence votes.
>>
Indeed, as bad (or good depending on your politics) as each other.
|
>> That's not unique to Labour as we've seen with various Tories out of sympathy with
>> Boris and Brexit etc facing no-confidence votes.
>>
b***** shambles, the lot of them.
|
Yes and she did take it a bit too far by going well beyond not being a fan of Corbyn to saying she could not ask her constituents to vote for the party with him as leader.
Her CLP is at the opposite pole and is well beyond just toeing the line behind a 'democratically' elected leader, being very pro-Corbyn.
Herein is part of the the problem, the (legacy) PLP is at odds with Corbyn and many of the CLPs following the 'takeover' of the party by people of a particular mindset. Just look at the quality (or lack of it) of the Labour front bench. All their best players are on the bench.
|
|
Parliamentary labour party and constituency labour party.
|
Doh, obvious now you say it.
Thank you.
|
CLP - Constituency LP i.e grass roots supporters
PLP - Parliamentary LP i.e Labour MPs
|
>> PLP & CLP?
PLP = Parliamentary Labour Party
CLP = Constituency Labour Party.
CLP membership tends to be left wing compared to PLP, although in many cases the members renew selection where MP is good worker and well known.
Again, similar issues in Conservatives and probably others too.
|
>>CLP membership tends to be left wing compared to PLP
Why is that?
|
>> Why is that?
Just those who choose to join the party (ie CLP) and perhaps more so stand for office within it. Historically that's usually been case (qv Benn/Healey 1981 and the Gaitskell era 20+ years before that).
Labour membership probably drifted to centre ground in Blair's pomp. I actually left during that period 'cos of rightward drift particularly in Education and Public Ownership (ie sale of ATC). Since 2010 various schemes to increase membership have resulted in an overwhelmingly young and left leaning membership - see also Momentum.
Sitting MPs who are up to snuff generally get benefit of doubt - I'd be surprised if Jess Phillips is on same page as her CLP. There have though been noises about Stella Creasy and David Lammy - both people the party can ill afford to lose.
Rejection of sitting MPs who over step mark is not new either - I've mentioned Reg Prentice (who responded to PLP trouble by crossing the floor) before.
Not just a Labour issue. I wonder if local party heat was on Mark Field who's announced he won't stand again in City and Westminster. Promise of an energetic and well known Lib Dem opponent in a seat that's likely to be heavily remain may have been a factor too.
I thin LD's have been pretty ruthless in past with MP's who are out of sympathy as have Nationalists of whichever stripe.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 18 Oct 19 at 13:24
|
Bromp!!!!
What are those apostrophes doing???? Two of them!
>>LD's have been pretty ruthless in past with MP's
Go stand in the corner and think about what you did.
|
There has always been a disconnect between 1/ the constituency labour party, 2/The parliamentary Labour party, 3/ Labour voters.
3/ Dont know about 1, 1 dont care about 3, 1 think they elect 2, but really its 3 that elect 2, 2 understands that but 1 doesn't. JC thinks 1 is 3.
|
>> 3/ Dont know about 1, 1 dont care about 3, 1 think they elect 2,
>> but really its 3 that elect 2, 2 understands that but 1 doesn't. JC thinks
>> 1 is 3.
Under FPTP the reality in very many seats is that 1 effectively appoints 2. The election is a formality.
Exactly same in Tory party. Daventry would elect a scabby rat if it wore a blue rosette.
|
>> Exactly same in Tory party. Daventry would elect a scabby rat if it wore a
>> blue rosette.
Exactly the same in the Labour party. Islington North did elect a scabby rat.
|
>> Exactly the same in the Labour party. Islington North did elect a scabby rat.
I avoided spelling anything out but since you mentioned it so did Daventry!!
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 18 Oct 19 at 18:14
|
>> Under FPTP the reality in very many seats is that 1 effectively appoints 2. The
>> election is a formality.
Yes but that doesn't get you in power, its the swing constituencies that count. 1 and JC cant contemplate that, 3 dont' know that, 2 does.
|
Prior to Corbyn's election as leader, Labour in an attempt to broaden support introduced the £3 "supporter" voting right. Tens of thousands paid their £3 to vote for Corbyn and effectively change the party rather than support the established one.
From 2015:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33795163
They succeeded, presumably with at least some support from proper members but many long term members were very cheesed off about it.
P.S. sorry for the trouble caused with the CLP/PLP thing. I do try not to do that but laziness won that time.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 18 Oct 19 at 15:42
|
>> Just look at the quality (or lack of it) of the Labour front
>> bench. All their best players are on the bench.
There certainly was a phase when that was true - about the time of the attempted coup against Corbyn.
Of present lot Keir Starmer, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Rebecca Long-Baailey and Richard Burgon all give good accounts of themselves in the media. Personally I've no issue with John McDonnell either - his experience as 'Chancellor' of the GLC in the Livingstone era is easily overlooked and belittled.
Diane Abbott doesn't perform well on media - could do to follow Maggie T's example and take some voice training. Everybody remembers her 'car crash' interviews in last election where failure to control her T2 Diabetes messed with her concentration. But she's a damned sight cleverer than Priti Patel, who of course she shadows. Personally I've no time for some of her politics - bit too left - but lets not fall into the usual trap about her.
She's never had an easy ride 'cos of her weight, race and looks but you don't get to be first black woman in Civil Service fast stream without tons of ability. There are no easy passes now for race and gender never mind in the seventies. And of course she has a significant reputation as a parliamentarian - has awards for it.
|
>>
>>
>> Beaten by edit timeout:
Government bench that includes Dominic Raab, Liz Truss, Patel, Alok Sharma and Andrea Leadsom has no lustre. Gavin Williamson and Grant Shaps are beyond parody. Will Therese Coffey actually say something relevant to her role @ DWP eventually? (Amber Rudd is a hard act to follow, granted).
Robert Buckland has acquitted himself well as Lord Chancellor and I've time for Nicky Morgan - who should never have spent May years on back benches.
Don't get me started on Rees Mogg.
Defenestration of 'the 21' may well prove, for his party, to be biggest of Boris's many misjudgements.
|
>>
>> Everybody remembers her 'car crash' interviews in last election where
>> failure to control her T2 Diabetes messed with her concentration. '
>>
Come off it, she was a disaster because she didn't know her facts and made a fool of herself. Search YouTube and you'll find similar examples of her being put to the sword for the same reason.
|
Of present lot Keir Starmer, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Rebecca Long-Baailey and Richard Burgon all
>> give good accounts of themselves in the media.
No better or worse than their opposite numbers. Although starmer comes across as more than a bit wooden.
Personally I've no issue with John McDonnell
>> either - his experience as 'Chancellor' of the GLC in the Livingstone era is easily
>> overlooked and belittled.
He's the best one in interviews or speaking to the public. Don't necessarily agree with his politics but he looks the most comfortable in his skin.
|
Excuse my ignorance - Labour party issues - sooty123
