You are reading a single comment by @Howard and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • He's right about some things - and I think I'd rather have shit Labour in power than any Tories.

    But he's also very selective with the information he chooses.

    I liked the part where he talks about what united Labour in the 1940s, despite the relative extremes of Bevin and Bevan.

    But he has to accept his part in making the divides in Labour irreconcilable since 2015.

    By all accounts, Corbyn and his team were very poor people managers, and very abrasive - but he was undermined consistently by people who seemed incredibly bitter that they weren't getting their way, and so it's a bit rich for Blair to talk about the lack of a shared vision now.

  • Corbyn and his team were very poor people managers, and very abrasive - but he was undermined consistently by people who seemed incredibly bitter that they weren't getting their way

    Who are these mysterious forces? Could they be the people that Corbyn and co didn't spend years of prep work aligning so that once they had power, exercising it was easy?

    Isn't this just one of many consequences of putting someone in a leadership role who historically has not made any plans to lead, so hasn't done the groundwork. The imposter syndrome on its own must have been crushing.

    But he has to accept his part in making the divides in Labour irreconcilable since 2015.

    I can't really see how Blair is responsible for that.

  • They're hardly "mysterious forces" - they were pretty outspoken in calling another leadership election on the pretext of the outcome of the EU referendum. It's not a conspiracy to say that people like Stephen Kinnock, Hilary Benn, Jess Philips etc. were outspoken in their criticism of Corbyn.

    Following what seems to be your logic, you should only be party leader once you've spent years "networking" and aligning, and a lack of unity compounding a poor media image is acceptable.

    And you're not sure about Blair's role in it? What about contributions like this:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/28/tony-blair-corbyn-government-dangerous-experiment

    Tony Blair has said it would be a “very dangerous experiment” if Jeremy Corbyn or a populist politician like him were to form a government.

    So yes, what a time to call for unity of purpose.

    I'd love for Labour to find a leader who the party can actually unite behind. But blaming Corbyn alone for the division is horseshit.

About

Avatar for Howard @Howard started