I don’t watch the news very often as all this grass isn’t going to smoke itself and wanking takes time, but I had the (mis)fortune to catch channel 4 news last night.
Mr Pfizer’s lips flap but his words are greasy.
News on tv is absolute bollocks. I won’t be tuning in again.
While Corbyn was speaking to 10,000 people who will vote for him no matter what, Owen was on national TV getting across what he stands for, to millions. And I think he does a decent job, certainly not taken to bits.
Originally posted by @Fatso
While Corbyn was speaking to 10,000 people who will vote for him no matter what, Owen was on national TV getting across what he stands for, to millions. And I think he does a decent job, certainly it taken to bits.
I disagree. He spent much of the interview explaining either his words or his policy shifts. If you’re having to conclude the interview by reassuring people that you’re actually Labour, and you’re running for Labour leader, that’s something of a handicap.
What was it that so impressed, btw?
He’s still dribbling over the free ice-cream 
Channel 4 News is probably the best of a bad bunch as well.
I think he brushes off silly accusations of threatening violence against May/women well.
he reassures the labour voters that he won’t be a part of any split.
he gets across his ideas of borrowing and supporting public services.
he is honest enough to say he can and has changed his mind on things
And I didn’t say I was impressed, I said he did a decent job.
He spent nearly the entire interview on the defensive, and when he wasn’t doing that, was attempting to conclude with meaningless platitudes like “we’re going to have an honest conversation”, like he did with immigration. Fair play to Guru-Murthy for not letting him off the hook with that one.
He came across as a slippery sort with no clear direction on policy.
Less charitable people might just call him a bullshitter.
Think it was a good politician’s performance on a national news channel - which is the context that the majority of us are used to seeing our politicians within.
Stayed calm under pressure, and it was clear that Murthy was trying to have his Faisal Islam moment, but I still didn’t trust a word he said.
He’s got that whole smarmy, Blair thing going on. It’s both impressive and unconvincing at the same time.
This whole business of smashing May has been seen out of context for me. I’m not defending his clumsy line because I don’t think it was clumsy. I think it was brilliant PR.
May is known for wearing kitten-heels, and as the PM she has to be largely sexless (not as in abstinence, as in beyond gender).
So now, the public (insomuch as the public gives a shit) believes that May owned Corbyn at her first PMQ’s, and the public (same caveat) now believes that the challenger to Corbyn is going to give me a bloody nose if he’s opposite her at PMQs.
The more this gets thrown in his face, the more he has the chance to show how much tougher on the new Tory leader he will be than Corbyn. It’s smart PR.
He made the point that Corbyn was supposed to be on the program with him - leaving the impression that Corbyn had ducked out.
Also the other smart thing he’s done well is repeatedly stating the John McDonnell is prepared to split the Labour party, and that it was McDonnel’s threat to do that that caused Smith to enter the leadership race.
Now I don’t know the facts of the situation, but Smith said this on Marr and now again on Ch4, and it makes me think about McDonnell’s (and by extension, Corbyn’s) motives every time I hear it. And that’s me, a Corbyn supporter.
None of this impacts his chances much in the leadership contest, but fair’s fair, he’s doing better than I thought he would.
One these two points.
Originally posted by @saintbletch
He made the point that Corbyn was supposed to be on the program with him - leaving the impression that Corbyn had ducked out.
It’s a lie. If I were Corbyn, I’d challenge Smith to produce evidence of this promise. They’ve been trying the chicken angle all week.
Also the other smart thing he’s done well is repeatedly stating the John McDonnell is prepared to split the Labour party, and that it was McDonnel’s threat to do that that caused Smith to enter the leadership race.
Now I don’t know the facts of the situation, but Smith said this on Marr and now again on Ch4, and it makes me think about McDonnell’s (and by extension, Corbyn’s) motives every time I hear it. And that’s me, a Corbyn supporter.
How is the “if that’s what it takes” comment much different from my opinion that the ringleaders should be deselected?
If those MPs truly cannot take the Labour whip, then perhaps it is best that they split. Personally, I know exactly where McDonnell is coming from. I’d characterise it as such:-
“We’ll do this to you if we don’t get our way!”
“Fucking do it, then.”
The collegiate approach was tried and it not failed, but was utterly spat back in the leaderships’ face. It should not be a surprise that when McDonnell’s opponents are trading in extremes, such as splitting the party or the promised war of attrition each and every year, which would surely guarantee a Tory government, that they get some ultimatums back too.
If these MPs cannot be reconciled back into the Party and say they’re going to cause trouble every year, what else is there to do?
Originally posted by @pap
One these two points.
Originally posted by @saintbletch
He made the point that Corbyn was supposed to be on the program with him - leaving the impression that Corbyn had ducked out.
It’s a lie. If I were Corbyn, I’d challenge Smith to produce evidence of this promise. They’ve been trying the chicken angle all week.
But here’s the news, literally - because he said it on a news program It sort of becomes fact unless it’s challenged immediately, or soon after on the same medium.
So now if Corbyn or his supporters try to argue the point and create a defence, they will simply look weak.
Again, it’s excellent, if dirty PR tactics.
Also the other smart thing he’s done well is repeatedly stating the John McDonnell is prepared to split the Labour party, and that it was McDonnel’s threat to do that that caused Smith to enter the leadership race.
Now I don’t know the facts of the situation, but Smith said this on Marr and now again on Ch4, and it makes me think about McDonnell’s (and by extension, Corbyn’s) motives every time I hear it. And that’s me, a Corbyn supporter.
How is the “if that’s what it takes” comment much different from my opinion that the ringleaders should be deselected?
If those MPs truly cannot take the Labour whip, then perhaps it is best that they split. Personally, I know exactly where McDonnell is coming from. I’d characterise it as such:-
“We’ll do this to you if we don’t get our way!”
“Fucking do it, then.”The collegiate approach was tried and it not failed, but was utterly spat back in the leaderships’ face. It should not be a surprise that when McDonnell’s opponents are trading in extremes, such as splitting the party or the promised war of attrition each and every year, which would surely guarantee a Tory government, that they get some ultimatums back too.
If these MPs cannot be reconciled back into the Party and say they’re going to cause trouble every year, what else is there to do?
Yeah, I don’t see it too much differently than you do.
The difference was starker on Marr (I think it was Marr), where Smith first positioned McDonnell as a Trot’, accused him of looking to split the party, and then put the “if that’s what it takes” words in his mouth.
This is designed to make those to the right of Corbyn, but who still believe they are left of centre, to pause for thought.
Once the party is split, because that surely has to happen, I would expect the narrative from the rebels/Continuity Labour/LibDemLabour Club to be “You can either vote for the Trotskyists that have wrecked our party, or vote centre-left for us”.
I would dispute the excellence of those tactics. The party as a whole tried this last year when Cameron apparently said he wouldn’t debate. Hell, I even made a couple of images to celebrate. They were current until the point that Cameron did debate, and then they were faintly embarrassing.
Corbyn will be debating Smith on Thursday night, so by the time that rolls around, Smith’s points from last night become something of a liability, particularly since the whole campaign has been shown to make mountains from molehills.
Fair dos, brickgate is something of a complex case that only political nerds will have been exposed to, but we also had officegate last week, which didn’t really require the Speaker’s ruling for most people to see it for what it was. By the time John Bercow finally ruled on it, it was a liability to the campaign.
The leadership debate on Thursday promises to be a fascinating encounter. Taking place in Cardiff, Smith will be among his fellow Welsh. It’ll be interesting to see who comes out on top. If Corbyn is perceived to win that, there, what blooming hope does Smith got?
The whole point is that many people think Corbyn is a good man - but even good men need to play the media game if they want to get into no.10.
It doesn’t matter whether Smith was being economical with the truth - if he’s given an impression of something, that’s enough.
Pap believes the general public is savvy - I disagree and think we have many too many fuckwits per square mile who will vote for a pedal bin if Murdoch tells them to.
Corbyn has to up his game on PR.
I think we’re living in uncertain times when it comes to judging the efficacy of the traditional media. Funnily enough, the treatment of Corbyn could be dissolving that trust further.
If it’s still all powerful, how is it that Labour are winning by-elections?
The inevitable Owen Smith parody account is quite amusing.
Here is my rival @jeremycorbyn in Liverpool addressing a small cabal of Trotsky-loving entryists pic.twitter.com/mNtK8pVNza
That interview is terrible. Smith looks foolish trying to turn each question into a dig at Corbyn then gets embarrassed by his own quotes. Didn’t anyone tell him the interviewer will have printouts of what he said ready to quote.
Seems a very muddled man.
I wouldn’t normally bother watching something like that, but I was piqued by this Papsweb Controversy, and it was the bog-standard, awful excercise in politician desperately trying to say nothing vs journalist trying to get facile soundbite.
Forget about the personality for a bit and just consider Smith’s role and function in all of this.
In my view, the coup effectively ended as a contest once it became clear that Corbyn wasn’t going to be bullied out of position. Plan A was to make him a hostage to events, releasing him into the political wilderness once their demands had been met, unharmed but never a threat again.
Some may argue that Plan B, the combined attempts to keep Jeremy Corbyn off the ballot _could _have been the last chance, myself included at times, but realistically, the fallout from keeping him off the ballot could have been fatal to the party.
Either of those plans would have been mercilessly seized on by the Tories, who would have been in the rare position to justifiably call the Labour Party “the nasty Party” if bullying had worked, or having scant regard for democracy if the ballot box strategy worked. They’ll probably use it anyway, but a Labour leadership forged from either of those circumstances would have been untenable and infinitely attackable. The integrity of the party would be gone.
I don’t think Smith is anywhere near first choice, and he wouldn’t be vying for the leadership now if Plans A or B had succeeded. I suppose the question is whether he is genuinely the best candidate they have to beat Corbyn in an election, or whether he’s a reflection of the fact that deep down, they know that right now, after what they’ve done, they can’t win a leadership election with any candidate.
The rebels are now hostage to events.
Perhaps Smith’s role is to be thrown under the bus and be reversed over a couple of times while they regroup.
This is going around on Facebook. Private Eye, 1995.
Manuel Cortez has written a detailed serious response to Owen Jones in the Huffington Post where he pretty much nails him. Owen Jones may be a talented writer with a gift for prose, but he is a phony. Runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds. I’m with Manuel on this one.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/manuel-cortes/owen-jones-jeremy-corbyn_b_11303870.html
Up to 10,000 people joined a rally in support of Jeremy Corbyn in Liverpool on Monday night. It was another sign of the growing support behind his campaign to be re-elected leader of the Labour Party.
Thousands of people had also marched and rallied for Corbyn across the North of England last weekend.
Over 2,000 supporters joined the rally in Leeds on Saturday—an even bigger audience than during last year’s leadership race.
Colette, a student in Leeds, said, “When Jeremy Corbyn says we have to make the world a better place I believe him. He’s had those beliefs forever. It’s not a career for him—he represents something exciting to you as a young person.”
As 1,600 crammed into the venue, Corbyn had to address an overflow rally of some 600 outside.
Corbyn had just arrived from Hull where some 3,000 people stood in the baking sun to hear him speak.
The Labour right are going all out to unseat Corbyn with their candidate Owen Smith, because they fear losing their grip on the party.
A march in Newcastle on the same day, with people chanting “Tories out—Corbyn in”, showed that many new members see themselves as part of a bigger movement fighting for change. Organisers said that over 1,000 people joined the demonstration.
We need more events like this—and get the message out to show more people what Jeremy Corbyn represents.”
Labour’s shadow chancellor John McDonnell is building support for Corbyn with a tour on the “new economics”.
Some 350 people joined a meeting in Liskeard, Cornwall, last Friday, and hundreds packed a room in Oxford the previous night.
Labour left group Momentum is mobilising members within the Labour Party.
Ben Sellers from Red Labour ran Corbyn’s social media campaign last year. He told Socialist Worker, “For Red Labour it’s about winning the battle in the Labour Party.
“But we have to mobilise people in the community to break it out from just being about the leadership election.
“If we’re going to build a movement it has to involve other people.”
To avoid that means not compromising with the Labour right and looking to where Corbyn’s real strength lies—in the streets and workplaces. That can both bolster Corbyn and help build a movement capable of winning real change.