Just one sec...
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Clive Lewis to succeed Corbyn, and be Britains first black PM?

Announcements Posted on
Take our short survey, £100 of Amazon vouchers to be won! 23-09-2016
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I really like Lewis, I think he has integrity, and he could have strengths as leader in years to come. He is still pretty young and might be perfect age wise to succeed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Denise Lewis has a better chance of being PM. She at least would be good at throwing her hat in the ring to run for Leader
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Wrong. By 2020, the EU will be dead, and Trump will be in the Whitehouse. Full paradigm shift, with the UK ready for a left wing government. Also the state of security in the world and the conflicts and tensions, will make people more supportive of non-intervention and even nuclear disarmament. It may even come about that we get it multilaterally.
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    I really like Lewis, I think he has integrity, and he could have strengths as leader in years to come. He is still pretty young and might be perfect age wise to succeed.
    Clive Lewis comes across as really untrustworthy, slippery, dishonest and arrogant in the media. If he tries to lean on his service in Afghanistan (i.e. three months in a territorial army unit, when most servicemen serve 8 or 9 months over multiple tours) to claim he's some kind of war hero, he will be ridiculed.

    He's no Dan Jarvis, that's for sure. If anything people will find him even more extreme and unlikeable than Corbyn.
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Wrong. By 2020, the EU will be dead, and Trump will be in the Whitehouse. Full paradigm shift, with the UK ready for a left wing government. Also the state of security in the world and the conflicts and tensions, will make people more supportive of non-intervention and even nuclear disarmament. It may even come about that we get it multilaterally.
    I don't mean to be provocative, I'm just trying to be honest; you sound like you have completely drunk the kool aid.

    You guys never have a strategy for how you will convince ordinary voters to support you, it's always hoping there will be some kind of economic crash or crisis that you can exploit. You really do seem to think winning elections is like tossing a coin and if you just cling onto the leadership of the party long enough, eventually you'll win.

    If you truly believe the above comment then I'm sorry but you are not thinking clearly and objectively. It's that kind of thinking that people in Labour clung to for 17 years of Tory government during the 1980s and 1990s. Hoping that there will be some kind of major paradigm shift, in fact betting the house on that happening and making no serious effort to reach out to ordinary voters in marginal seats... you are setting Labour up for failure.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Clive Lewis comes across as really untrustworthy, slippery, dishonest and arrogant in the media. If he tries to lean on his service in Afghanistan (i.e. three months in a territorial army unit, when most servicemen serve 8 or 9 months over multiple tours) to claim he's some kind of war hero, he will be ridiculed.

    He's no Dan Jarvis, that's for sure. If anything people will find him even more extreme and unlikeable than Corbyn.
    Oh, well this is just exact what I'd expect from someone who relentlessly propagandizes against anyone further on the economic left. It's seemingly standard practice for NuLab 'establishment'.

    Untrustworthiness, unpleasantness and evil associations belong exclusively to anyone on the economic left who thinks Labour should be there to have a problem with hundreds of thousands living on food banks. This from the people who got David Kelly bumped off effectively.

    The bias and sell-outy hypocrisy is untrue. No slipperynessor unpleasantness in any Blairites then? Not one.....

    This is why, as you say, the party must split now. The public can then be given a clear choice between two groups who honestly represent different things.

    And he is the most telling phrase

    'If he portrays himself as a war hero', (when he's said nothing)a hypothetical character smear, you start with little propagandist attacks pre-packaged and ready to heat up don't you? Nice.....it must be that high mindedness again.( Don't worry whether he does or not though, clearly you will make up some BS, as you do about anyone on the economic left.) And yet you still blindly refuse to acknowledge anything biased, machiavellian or self-seeking about you people, you refuse to acknowledge the role you play in obliterating any real democratic choice and further left options. I suppose at least you are now willing to support a split and let go of the meaningless tribal identity for policy.

    Oh and let's not resume personal *****ing all the time, don't take it personally but you can't blame people on the economic left for thinking this way , the evidence is pretty strong...maybe it is individual character dislike, but it all happens to fall on one particularly set of people - those on the economic left. Pretty hard for decent people also on the economic left who see inequality as needing radical change as not seeing this as a sustained attack on that concept.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    I don't mean to be provocative, I'm just trying to be honest; you sound like you have completely drunk the kool aid.

    You guys never have a strategy for how you will convince ordinary voters to support you, it's always hoping there will be some kind of economic crash or crisis that you can exploit. You really do seem to think winning elections is like tossing a coin and if you just cling onto the leadership of the party long enough, eventually you'll win.

    If you truly believe the above comment then I'm sorry but you are not thinking clearly and objectively. It's that kind of thinking that people in Labour clung to for 17 years of Tory government during the 1980s and 1990s. Hoping that there will be some kind of major paradigm shift, in fact betting the house on that happening and making no serious effort to reach out to ordinary voters in marginal seats... you are setting Labour up for failure.
    hmmmmm, jam. :drool:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    I don't mean to be provocative, I'm just trying to be honest; you sound like you have completely drunk the kool aid.

    You guys never have a strategy for how you will convince ordinary voters to support you, it's always hoping there will be some kind of economic crash or crisis that you can exploit. You really do seem to think winning elections is like tossing a coin and if you just cling onto the leadership of the party long enough, eventually you'll win.

    If you truly believe the above comment then I'm sorry but you are not thinking clearly and objectively. It's that kind of thinking that people in Labour clung to for 17 years of Tory government during the 1980s and 1990s. Hoping that there will be some kind of major paradigm shift, in fact betting the house on that happening and making no serious effort to reach out to ordinary voters in marginal seats... you are setting Labour up for failure.
    I'm thinking clearly that the global establishment is way behind the curve...alright I was pushing the envelope and speculating about world affairs the deterrent. But the EU will be dead by 2020 and Hillary is simply not going to win. I know that much.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Oh, well this is just exact what I'd expect from someone who relentlessly propagandizes against anyone further on the economic left. It's seemingly standard practice for NuLab 'establishment'.

    Untrustworthiness, unpleasantness and evil associations belong exclusively to anyone on the economic left who thinks Labour should be there to have a problem with hundreds of thousands living on food banks. This from the people who got David Kelly bumped off effectively.

    The bias and sell-outy hypocrisy is untrue. No slipperynessor unpleasantness in any Blairites then? Not one.....

    This is why, as you say, the party must split now. The public can then be given a clear choice between two groups who honestly represent different things.

    And he is the most telling phrase

    'If he portrays himself as a war hero', (when he's said nothing)a hypothetical character smear, you start with little propagandist attacks pre-packaged and ready to heat up don't you? Nice.....it must be that high mindedness again.( Don't worry whether he does or not though, clearly you will make up some BS, as you do about anyone on the economic left.) And yet you still blindly refuse to acknowledge anything biased, machiavellian or self-seeking about you people, you refuse to acknowledge the role you play in obliterating any real democratic choice and further left options. I suppose at least you are now willing to support a split and let go of the menaingless tribal identity for policy.
    If the party splits, Clive Lewis won't be PM. There probably won't ever be another Labour PM unless something dramatic happens to the hard left.
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Oh, well this is just exact what I'd expect from someone who relentlessly propagandizes against anyone further on the economic left. It's seemingly standard practice for NuLab 'establishment'.
    :yawn: These Corbynite accusations are so predictable. Anyone who doesn't support Momentum must be to the right of Attila the Hun and should go join the Tories. If a centre-left person in the Labour Party who doesn't support Corbyn is an evil right-winger, what does that make the ordinary voters whose support you need to win an election?

    Unlike most Corbynites, the sort of people who voted Lib Dem in 2010 and supported and defended John McDonald while he signed up to the Tory austerity pact, I've actually spent a good portion of my life fighting Tories and trying to get Labour governments elected, fighting for workers rights and spending hundreds and hundreds of unpaid hours representing people as a union rep. Most Corbynites are dilettantes for whom politics is about clicking a like button, paying your £3 and casting a ballot.

    There are plenty of left-wing people, like Lisa Nandy, whose left-wing credentials are impeccable but don't support the leader. Although Corbyn is a policy shambles, on his broad economic approach I'm mainly in agreement with him. But his terrorist baggage is a disaster for the party, he's incompetent and incapable of leading, and he will destroy the party.

    No slipperynessor unpleasantness in any Blairites then?
    So is that, "If the Blairites do it then it makes it okay for Corbynites to do it?". I guess that was the excuse for why Corbyn is apparently allowed to take £20,000 from a regime that lynches gay men from cranes.

    This is why, as you say, the party must split now
    I agree. We'll take the majority of the PLP, 172 at least and probably more, and become the official opposition. You can keep a rump of 30 or 40 hardcore Corbynites and continue to decree excommunications on anyone who fails to live up to your confused and hypocritical standards (which means pretty much the entire country)

    Once you no longer have the PLP to blame for the leader's incompetence and terrible unpopularity, you will start squabbling among yourselves and start claiming that various people in Momentum are insufficiently radical and should now "go join the Tories">

    JamesN88
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Wrong. By 2020, the EU will be dead, and Trump will be in the Whitehouse. Full paradigm shift, with the UK ready for a left wing government. Also the state of security in the world and the conflicts and tensions, will make people more supportive of non-intervention and even nuclear disarmament. It may even come about that we get it multilaterally.
    If Trump gets in the White House the EU won't be the only thing that ends up dead.
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    But the EU will be dead by 2020
    I don't think it will be dead by 2020, but we will certainly be out and it will be ripping itself to shreds.

    Hillary is simply not going to win. I know that much.
    Even with a 2 to 3 point lead in national points he still loses to Clinton due to the electoral mathematics and distribution of Democratic voters. She is still clearly favourite to win. Many Corbynite types hate Hillary and so they buy all of the Trumpite propaganda that says he's winning, that says she's unelectable etc etc.

    And if Trump becomes President, unpopular as he is with the world, I don't see how Britons will then favour a party leader who pretty much supports Trump in his pro-Russian inclinations, isolationism and desire to get rid of NATO. If anything, Corbyn's views lining up with Trump's will be political poison.

    alright I was pushing the envelope and speculating about world affairs
    Would you accept, though, that kind of thinking is very common among Corbynites? That there will be some kind of deus ex machina, some kind of economic collapse or global crisis that suddenly makes Corbyn popular thus obviating the need to do anything to appeal to voters in the marginal seats? I see them saying it all the time on Twitter, and that is how you lose elections. Corbyn is already coming from behind with massive handicaps in leading the Labour Party, the smart thing to do would be to moderate a bit, to accept criticism, to make an attempt to reach out to moderate party members and voters. If he can't even reach out to Labour moderates, how would he appeal to swing voters in the marginals (who are to the right of the labour moderate wing)?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Corbyn's views lining up with Trump's will be political poison.

    Which views? I don't know about this
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Oh and let's not resume personal *****ing all the time, don't take it personally but you can't blame people on the economic left for thinking this way
    I'm not attacking you personally, I'm attacking Clive Lewis. He's a grasping little opportunist and an egotist to boot. I have quite a few friends who work in the Palace of Westminster for Lab, even other Corbyn-supporting MPs dislike him.

    Go and watch the Marr interview from the other day, he comes across as really snide and unpleasant. I don't think that will go down well with the voters.

    Look, I would be happy for there to be a ceasefire in Labour that would install a Corbyn protege or ally (not McDonald, Clive Lewis, Thornberry or Abbott... maybe someone like Kate Osamor) as leader, probably leave McDonald in place as shadow Chancellor and essentially give the Corbynites control over the Treasury, Health, Education and International Development while the moderates get the Home Office, Defence, Foreign Office and Business. Some kind of divying up of the posts that allows Labour to be a credible opposition while also being economically progressive.

    Corbyn needs to accept that he doesn't speak for the whole membership, he speaks for maybe 60% of them which means 4 in 10 don't support him. That's not a tiny minority, it's not like 99% of the members support him, so he does need to make concessions if he wants the Labour Party to stay together.

    But from everything I've seen his offers of an olive branch doesn't involve any serious agreement or concessions, it's basically "I'm the leader and you have to do what I say", and menacing statements like "I'm willing to forget their disloyalty" (as if he's some kind of benevolent king or dictator of the party, rather than a massive hypocrite who called for John Smith to be challenged only two months after Smith won the leadership with 91% of the vote, and who until last year proposed there should be annual leadership elections)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    :yawn: These Corbynite accusations are so predictable. Anyone who doesn't support Momentum must be to the right of Attila the Hun and should go join the Tories. If a centre-left person in the Labour Party who doesn't support Corbyn is an evil right-winger, what does that make the ordinary voters whose support you need to win an election?

    Unlike most Corbynites, the sort of people who voted Lib Dem in 2010 and supported and defended John McDonald while he signed up to the Tory austerity pact, I've actually spent a good portion of my life fighting Tories and trying to get Labour governments elected, fighting for workers rights and spending hundreds and hundreds of unpaid hours representing people as a union rep. Most Corbynites are dilettantes for whom politics is about clicking a like button, paying your £3 and casting a ballot.

    There are plenty of left-wing people, like Lisa Nandy, whose left-wing credentials are impeccable but don't support the leader. Although Corbyn is a policy shambles, on his broad economic approach I'm mainly in agreement with him. But his terrorist baggage is a disaster for the party, he's incompetent and incapable of leading, and he will destroy the party.



    So is that, "If the Blairites do it then it makes it okay for Corbynites to do it?". I guess that was the excuse for why Corbyn is apparently allowed to take £20,000 from a regime that lynches gay men from cranes.



    I agree. We'll take the majority of the PLP, 172 at least and probably more, and become the official opposition. You can keep a rump of 30 or 40 hardcore Corbynites and continue to decree excommunications on anyone who fails to live up to your confused and hypocritical standards (which means pretty much the entire country)

    Once you no longer have the PLP to blame for the leader's incompetence and terrible unpopularity, you will start squabbling among yourselves and start claiming that various people in Momentum are insufficiently radical and should now "go join the Tories">
    What? I am sod all to do with momentum. I have never been in a political movement or party in my life. I voted Lib Dem only, two times, somewhat tactically.
    I am someone dismayed, as so many are, by the media/corporate/political interrelationship, and living in such a propagandised country that has offered so little electoral choice for so long, specifically on economics. I have no tribe. It's your caricaturing and smearing I cannot accept or believe in the integrity of, I'm willing to respect anyone's position if it is genuinely felt, objective and doesn't come with bias and smear campaigns. Unlike seemingly many youth in British politics I am not some sort of totalitarian. This stuff has authoritarianism, and being told what to think all over it...it is the exact same methodology that made me hate and question 'remain'.
    I am not a 'Corbynite', I am someone who believes is he more sincere about economic inequality than others. I am someone who believes in his personal decency and that their is a massive smear campagin that goes on against non-orthodoxy figures, such as Farage also. It's part of a kind of insistence on though conformity that so many have gotten sick of.

    Well good for you.

    No, again this is a self-deceiving reframing. It's the hypocrisy in British politics in general- who gets attacked and who doesn't, and the reason is their perfectly principled stance which falls outside accepted views that are there for vested interests. Many Blairites will not condemn or attack anyone on that side for stuff so much worse. And as far as I know, Corbyn has not been part of any smear campaign and attack that led to a decent mans death, merely for exposing their lies.

    That's why the like of Campbell nauseate me so much, and Jack Straw with his extraditions. Why should I believe their moralising about Tories, when many behave with so much more integrity? It is farcical and makes me hate them more.

    I told you, this is just fantasy. I am not interested in joining such things, I don't know anything about them, a lot of them look like knobs and a lot look unpleasant, I really don't want to join or socialize in such things. But I don't think any of that has any bearing on Corbyn, who I think is principled, and doesn't deserve endless lies thrown at him by people who claimed to support the same kind of aims, whether he is too old, has competence issues or not.

    They were on his back from the start, and then the whole media thing kicked in, and fueled the perception of an elitist stitch up that tries to stifle debate, hence further dividing people than would have occurred otherwise, part of the general feeling of rejecting established order and being told what to think..
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MathMoFarah)
    Which views? I don't know about this
    They have very similar views on NATO, on Ukraine, on Russia, on North Korea, etc etc.

    Trump is extremely anti-NATO and contemptuous of America's allies. Corbyn is also anti-NATO and contemptuous of our allies. Trump blames the Ukrainians for Russia's invasion and annexation of Crimea, and the subversion and terrorism in Ukraine's east. Corbyn also blames the Ukrainians and justified the Russian invasion.

    Trump is very complimentary about President Putin, Corbyn is also extremely sympathetic to Russian interests.

    They both basically have complete contempt for the current international order based around NATO, the US' system of alliances in the Pacific with Japan and South Korea, our mutual defence assurances, and so on. Both are essentially isolationist and willing to allow Russia to become much more aggressive in the international arena.
    Online

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    I am not a 'Corbynite',
    What an utterly dishonest comment. If you support Corbyn and his political programme you are a Corbynite.

    You clearly support Corbyn, defend him, attack his enemies and are extremely complimentary about his allies. If you're going to be dishonest, take a very clear position and then put on this pathetic affectation of, "No, I'm actually totally neutral and unbiased. Oh I'm so superior, I'm almost on another plane of existence" then we have nothing to talk about. I'm not interested in game-playing

    Also not interested in the paranoid, fraudulent crap that anyone who has a contrary opinion is somehow "propagandising" or part of some authoritarian conspiracy. Grow up, ffs

    KimKallstrom
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    "I'm willing to forget their disloyalty" (as if he's some kind of benevolent king or dictator of the party, rather than a massive hypocrite who called for John Smith to be challenged only two months after Smith won the leadership with 91% of the vote, and who until last year proposed there should be annual leadership elections)
    Well that is a fair point. It's the kind of objectively fair point that gets lost in polarization. This is what I mean about the whole media political machine, and the feeling of a stitch up- once people feel they are being told what to do, and being had, they just batten down and become more dogmatic as they see truth getting marginalized, and see it in morally black and white terms.

    I do think the media is massively pernicious in British politics, something I can agree with Alistair Campbell on I guess.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    What an utterly dishonest comment. If you support Corbyn and his political programme you are a Corbynite. You clearly support Corbyn, defend him, attack his enemies and are extremely complimentary about his allies. If you're going to be dishonest, take a very clear position and then put on this pathetic affectation of, "No, I'm actually totally neutral and unbiased. Oh I'm so superior, I'm almost on another plane of existence" then we have nothing to talk about. I'm not interested in game-playingAlso not interested in the paranoid, fraudulent crap that anyone who has a contrary opinion is somehow "propagandising" or part of some authoritarian conspiracy. Grow up, [email protected]
    No game playing or affectation whatsoever. I am the one who refuses to play games. I am not indoctrinated. I am not in a political tribe or organisation, there are UKIP and Tory policies I support. I support Corbyns economic stance. I attack the behaviour of the Blair government and the Blairite media in this. How can they not be propagandizing, when they are going on and on about Corbyn every single day, and talking about him condoning attacks and intimidation on women, his support for terrorists?And again, it's just completely disingenuous, as I said I respect contrary opinions all the time if they are not personal smears and genuinely held.There is an unhealthy relationship between media, corporations and the political classes, that is hardly a 'conspiracy'(smear term' ), and there is a sense the 'game is rigged' this is a perfectly legitimate global phenomenon, like the last paradigm shift was. Establishment fails to recognise the extent of genuine ****ed-upness and pain caused by them.

    You know, the question I asked you about explaining policy difference from the Tories, then I'd vote for them? You went quiet- this is where all the hate stems from within Labour, it all comes down to it. NuLabs presiding over an increase of inequality and decline over social mobility from under the Thatcher years. Why I'm supposed to believe in the objective case for 'electable Labour' over the Tories? This is what the contortion and rage within Labour is about-You believe deep down you can't be in any significant sense to the left of the Tories on key issues and get elected. You don't want to hear the objective undeniable truth about this(social mobility and inequality), it angers you and you try and portray it as the viewpoint of a crank, when it is what all this is about. You want to shout down the people who make a correct and ethical point by portraying them as sanctimonious or corrupt. Why is your world view seemingly so binary? You simply cannot accept that someone isn't a tribalist without 'playing games'. I am not a rabid Corbyn enthusiast simply because I want more radical economic ideas not smeared and given free reign. These smears are aimed at the like of Paul Mason, and Max Keiser too, respected economic figures who reject consensus. This is obviously not just about Corbyn. It's about economics.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    If you're going to be dishonest, take a very clear position

    KimKallstrom
    That's contradiction. I have taken a clear position, you just don't tolerate anyone with a different view.

    I bet you think I'm in momentum... God.
 
 
 
Write a reply…

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: September 23, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Who is going to win Bake Off?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.