Blairites staging a coup...

[Eugene Wrayburn]

The Today programme had Diane Abbott on this morning. I hadn't realised that she and Corbyn had opposed the exile of Militant.

It all seems rather odd and very much a throwback to the 1980s. Yes Labour has a right to fight entryism and to oppose the membership of those who don't agree with the principles as set out in the Labour constituion, but at the same time just because someone was once part of Militant doesn't mean that they should be barred from ever supporting Labour. Similarly a party can change its principles = else Tony Blair would have had to be thrown out rather than abolishing Clause 4.

The Labour Party really has got itself in a terrible muddle.

[Digby]

The Labour Party really has got itself in a terrible muddle.

It has, and it's hard to see how they get out of this, if they go ahead with some de-selections then even were they to elect a competent leader down the line, unlikely with the Trots calling the shots, they'd have a group of MPs that wouldn't want to plot any electable course

[Zhivago]

Watson's lies exposed!
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/12/tom- ... ts-images/

[Donny osmond]

It seems like Labour's ruling body has managed to overturn the high courts decision allowing new members to vote.

[Zhivago]

It seems like Labour's ruling body has managed to overturn the high courts decision allowing new members to vote.

That's insane

[Digby]

It seems like Labour's ruling body has managed to overturn the high courts decision allowing new members to vote.

I do think Labour could and should have some rules around who's allowed to vote, and seeking to ensure that those voting are long term Labour supporters seems entirely reasonable to me. That said the comments from the judge who instructed that new members should be allowed to vote on the basis of what members joining the party were told at the time of registering seemed entirely reasonable to me, and had Labour not wanted them to be able to vote that should have been made clear to those registering, or at least not telling people they'd be a key part of decision making within the party.

Given where we are now I think it'd only be fair if people who can't vote wish to withdraw their membership applications that Labour refund any monies paid, and then going forward Labour need to make clear what new members joining the party are entitled to partake in.

[Digby]

Watson's lies exposed!
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/12/tom- ... ts-images/

It does broadly read like what's happening, so one might perhaps object to some specific points of reference but the essential truth is as Watson suggests. Whether people think Watson is correct to have those concerns is a different thing.

[Zhivago]

Watson's lies exposed!
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/12/tom- ... ts-images/

It does broadly read like what's happening, so one might perhaps object to some specific points of reference but the essential truth is as Watson suggests. Whether people think Watson is correct to have those concerns is a different thing.

What are you on about?! He just blatantly made up this lie about the Momentum doc he had seen, and just lifted this passage from an article from Progress magazine. It could not be more blatant!

[Digby]

Watson's lies exposed!
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/12/tom- ... ts-images/

It does broadly read like what's happening, so one might perhaps object to some specific points of reference but the essential truth is as Watson suggests. Whether people think Watson is correct to have those concerns is a different thing.

What are you on about?! He just blatantly made up this lie about the Momentum doc he had seen, and just lifted this passage from an article from Progress magazine. It could not be more blatant!

He's not wrong that there are now more joiners to the Labour party who would have stayed away until they saw a chance to influence the direction of the party more under Glorious Leader™, now one might consider that a good or an ill but it'd seem hard to deny it's happening. And too many of those over on the left are somewhat strident, and even if not partaking in death and rape threats and putting bricks through windows are making it a more combative environment at meetings across the country.

[Zhivago]

It does broadly read like what's happening, so one might perhaps object to some specific points of reference but the essential truth is as Watson suggests. Whether people think Watson is correct to have those concerns is a different thing.

What are you on about?! He just blatantly made up this lie about the Momentum doc he had seen, and just lifted this passage from an article from Progress magazine. It could not be more blatant!

He's not wrong that there are now more joiners to the Labour party who would have stayed away until they saw a chance to influence the direction of the party more under Glorious Leader™, now one might consider that a good or an ill but it'd seem hard to deny it's happening. And too many of those over on the left are somewhat strident, and even if not partaking in death and rape threats and putting bricks through windows are making it a more combative environment at meetings across the country.

Grow up. Use this one more time and I'll put you on ignore.

[Zhivago]

[cashead]

The Labour Party really has got itself in a terrible muddle.

That's putting it lightly. They had a chance to score big when the Tories had found itself up to its eyeballs in a shitstorm of its own making thanks to the Brexit clusterfuck, but instead they were like "I'll show you a shitstorm of one's own making. We'll make the biggest goddamned shitstorm you ever saw!" and well, here we are.

Both sides can go fuck, basically. It's like "Sort your shit out, you fucking assholes."

[Digby]

What are you on about?! He just blatantly made up this lie about the Momentum doc he had seen, and just lifted this passage from an article from Progress magazine. It could not be more blatant!

He's not wrong that there are now more joiners to the Labour party who would have stayed away until they saw a chance to influence the direction of the party more under Glorious Leader™, now one might consider that a good or an ill but it'd seem hard to deny it's happening. And too many of those over on the left are somewhat strident, and even if not partaking in death and rape threats and putting bricks through windows are making it a more combative environment at meetings across the country.

Grow up. Use this one more time and I'll put you on ignore.

Glorious Leader™

Much too easy

[cashead]

He's not wrong that there are now more joiners to the Labour party who would have stayed away until they saw a chance to influence the direction of the party more under Glorious Leader™, now one might consider that a good or an ill but it'd seem hard to deny it's happening. And too many of those over on the left are somewhat strident, and even if not partaking in death and rape threats and putting bricks through windows are making it a more combative environment at meetings across the country.

Grow up. Use this one more time and I'll put you on ignore.

Glorious Leader™

Much too easy

Now you've done it. He's put the whole forums on ignore.

[fivepointer]

Given the influx of people applying for membership it would be extraordinary if there hasnt been some entryism. Its hard to believe that no one from the SWP or Socialist Party havent applied for membership, and arent active in Momentum in view of the leftward shift in the party.

The question is to what degree, and what influence they may have had, or are likely to have.

The Court stuff is excruciating. Its perfectly reasonable to have a cut off point for new members voting, but that has to be made clear when people join. To change the rules once people had joined is grossly unfair.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Given the influx of people applying for membership it would be extraordinary if there hasnt been some entryism. Its hard to believe that no one from the SWP or Socialist Party havent applied for membership, and arent active in Momentum in view of the leftward shift in the party.

The question is to what degree, and what influence they may have had, or are likely to have.

The Court stuff is excruciating. Its perfectly reasonable to have a cut off point for new members voting, but that has to be made clear when people join. To change the rules once people had joined is grossly unfair.

I don't think that is. If the power for deciding the leadership rules are delegated then that's fair enough. t's also perfectly reasonable to say that the election of a leader should be reserved to those members of some standing. Where i thought they'd come unstuck is that if that's the ratonale, why let any old fecker with £25 vote? that seems entirely irrational. If i cared more I'd read the judgement but I can't for the life of me see how that's justifiable.

[Digby]

Traingate may thankfully be drawing to close. It does seem quite apposite for the Glorious Leader™ in that he actually has a subject up for discussion that people will care about, and that many with think there's merit in addressing, but when he sets out what he thinks the problems are and how he thinks about them he runs into a little problem with reality, and then when reality wants a word he simply gets angry and probably storms off to sit in a vestibule (again)

That said I don't see much advantage in switching to Smith, they both look set to lose, so perhaps better to do so under the Glorious Leader™ and hold out faint hope the party then grows up.

[Sandydragon]

Pathetic isn't it. One of the few issues where many non labour supporters would agree with him, and he cocks it all up due to a publicity stunt.

[Digby]

Turns out he wasn't just looking for a seat for himself, but seats for the group he was with, heaven forfend they should sit with some ordinary people. Also suggests he's not the familiar with train travel, as who'd try to seat multiple people without booking seats?

And of course there's the Python routine in that he was lucky to find seating space in the vestibule, i've been on a good few trains where there was no such possibility

[Sandydragon]

I know what you mean. There have been a few where the only standing space was the bog; anyone who needed to go just had to wait.

[Digby]

More or Less have done a bit of a number today on Labour/Glorious Leader™

[Eugene Wrayburn]

More or Less have done a bit of a number today on Labour/Glorious Leader™

Not been able to listen yet. What is the gist?

[Zhivago]

Turns out he wasn't just looking for a seat for himself, but seats for the group he was with, heaven forfend they should sit with some ordinary people. Also suggests he's not the familiar with train travel, as who'd try to seat multiple people without booking seats?

And of course there's the Python routine in that he was lucky to find seating space in the vestibule, i've been on a good few trains where there was no such possibility

1) They missed their originally booked train because Corbyn stayed to talk to a disabled women who had waited to speak to him.

2) Busy people have busy schedules and cannot know which exact train they will be on - therefore reserving is nigh on impossible.

3) I would also not choose a location in the train which only seated some of us. It would be rude and selfish to sit in such a place.

4) Hardly a stunt, it was a video made with a political point, and wasn't staged. He was sat in the vestibule for over 40 mins before finding a seat.

5) Branson had a motive for his disingenuous posts. He is obviously opposed to renationalisation of the railways. The video proved nothing, it is not from the period of the journey in question.

[Mellsblue]

Turns out he wasn't just looking for a seat for himself, but seats for the group he was with, heaven forfend they should sit with some ordinary people. Also suggests he's not the familiar with train travel, as who'd try to seat multiple people without booking seats?

And of course there's the Python routine in that he was lucky to find seating space in the vestibule, i've been on a good few trains where there was no such possibility

1) They missed their originally booked train because Corbyn stayed to talk to a disabled women who had waited to speak to him.

2) Busy people have busy schedules and cannot know which exact train they will be on - therefore reserving is nigh on impossible.

3) I would also not choose a location in the train which only seated some of us. It would be rude and selfish to sit in such a place.

4) Hardly a stunt, it was a video made with a political point, and wasn't staged. He was sat in the vestibule for over 40 mins before finding a seat.

5) Branson had a motive for his disingenuous posts. He is obviously opposed to renationalisation of the railways. The video proved nothing, it is not from the period of the journey in question.

1) Good man. Were his entire entourage, including cameraman, required for this conversation.

2) Very true. Though, it makes good economic sense - with the famous tax payers money - to pre-book and make the train. Two sets of train tickets for such a large group of people is a waste of money.

3) He seemed pretty lonely when sat on the floor. Where was his wife and the rest of his group?

4) That some services are badly overcrowded is true, though whether renationalisation will solve the problem is highly debatable, but it was staged. I'm looking forward to him on a station floor on the Southern franchise waiting for a train and listening to people who can't get to work because of strikes and rogue industrial action.

5) Branson has a motive, as does Corbyn.

[Digby]

Turns out he wasn't just looking for a seat for himself, but seats for the group he was with, heaven forfend they should sit with some ordinary people. Also suggests he's not the familiar with train travel, as who'd try to seat multiple people without booking seats?

And of course there's the Python routine in that he was lucky to find seating space in the vestibule, i've been on a good few trains where there was no such possibility

1) They missed their originally booked train because Corbyn stayed to talk to a disabled women who had waited to speak to him.

2) Busy people have busy schedules and cannot know which exact train they will be on - therefore reserving is nigh on impossible.

3) I would also not choose a location in the train which only seated some of us. It would be rude and selfish to sit in such a place.

I have no objection to the idea that it's more convenient not to book because you don't know when you'll travel, but if you've not booked it's also not reasonable to be able to seat a group together. Put another way, what sort of capacity would you or Glorious Leader™ expect the trains to run at? Is he seriously saying with his sit down vestibule protest that trains should be running at 25% capacity or less which might be what you need for a group to be able to sit together? I'm not wholly averse to a plan to bring major public transport back into public ownership, of course whilst it might always be argued one doesn't have the money for it we might currently really not have he money for it, and even if he could do it is he planning to pay for trains to run at 25% capacity and below as surely you'd want 80% and above?

And on point 3, well fine, if you can't sit together and prefer to remain in a vestibule it's quite reasonable providing you're not blocking others looking to go through the space, but if you're choosing not to sit don't bloody well whine about it. I've no idea why you think on a train though that it's rude for people to take available seats, if happens all the time and one rarely hears it described as rude