One of the rare occasions that I generally agree with the comment from Dally

Toppling Johnson has near enough handed the job to May, a remainer. Surely Gove knew his actions would turn people against him. Whether it's all part of a clever strategy worked out between him and Boris I do not know. Boris would have been a shoe-in for PM had Gove not turned on him.

Gove's betrayal of Johnson came a day after Sky revealed the leaked email from Daily Mail columnist Sarah Vine to hubby Michael Gove, warning that he must be careful in his support of Boris, as neither her boss, Mail editor Paul Dacre, nor Rupert Murdoch trusted the former London mayor.

People know how powerful the media is in terms of politics, but this is a rare piece of actual evidence. Plus, Dacre hates being dragged into issues and the subsequent declaration of the Mail for Theresa May has more than a hint of his being very, very unhappy with both Mr and Mrs Gove.

Imagining the conversations in the Give household, and between Mrs Gove and her boss is most amusing.

As to whether Gove thought his actions would turn people against him – who knows? We're apparently now in a world where, according to him, we don;t need experts and, if you lie often enough, people will believe you.

Someone needs to show that bar steward where the ocean is!

I'm genuinely at a loss as to why there is such strong support for him from Corbyn supporters. Why so much focus on him and not the policies?

The reason I ask is because he is simply unelectable, whilst a number of policies he espouses are not. The guy is an electoral asset only to a tiny base of rusted on supporters. All the evidence suggests he's simply not up to running a political party never mind a government.

Surely there's another potential leader who can close the gap and make Labour firstly a credible opposition and then a party of Government, not just a party for the far left twitterati and rent-a-mob marchers?

One thing that seems to have come out of the woodwork from Corbyn defenders is the kind of language last heard publicly by Rik in the Young Ones. Neo-liberal and Blairite are two of the most annoying, completely meaningless words ever to be heard outside of a students union.

If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

Which policies? The one that are for fairness and against greed?

In general yes. The working poor and unemployed want and need a voice. A lot of people who aren't necessarily Labour supporters support the idea of basic fairness in society - primarily that the 'have nots' should not be destitute. The design and implementation of actual detailed policies that try to create that fairness are not easy, and not something that can be brought into existence by marches or waving placards.

But if the main party that espouses such causes in a two-party system has a leader who cannot convince those directly around him to back him up, why should or would the general electorate? And why does Corbyn's awful leadership arouse incredibly strong feelings for him amongst his supporters? It seems that his core supporters blame the Tory press and the Blairite Labour MPs, rather than the man himself. Any Labour leader will be subjected to attack from parts of the media. Any political leader except in North Korea will (and should) face internal opposition - from those with ambition of leadership themselves and particularly when its clear that the party is headed for continued electoral oblivion. Corbyn has dealt with these both incredibly badly.

Corbyn supporters just remind me of the Labour left of the 80s and 90s (Militant Tendency and their ilk), who seemed perpetually enraged by the fact a large part of the population didn't 'get' their message and found their marches and shrill moral superiority an absolute turn off.

If any Labour MP wants to mount a Leadership challenge, they can gain the support from MP's and do so. The way they've gone about it with the attempted 'coup' & trying to force Corbyn to resign, is the type of crafty, underhand tactic that the majority of the electorate loathe about politicians. Ambitious, career-driven, self-serving people IMO.

At this moment in time, the party should be uniting and tearing the Tories to shreds, but since Corbyn was elected this has been in the pipeline.

I agree about your comment on the media. Every leader should face criticism and have their policies/actions questioned, but it's pretty obvious that Corbyn gets a great deal more scrutiny than the others, and faced almost no coverage of his own campaign & the positives surrounding that. I agree that while what he says, he needs to refine his policies and get the message out there to the voters. His PR/marketing etc is pretty poor.

The thing is, is there a credible candidate out there that would have more chance of winning an election for Labour? I'm not sure there is.

Andy Burnham has that polished look that drives the superficial to vote, I know he was looked over in the last leadership race, but I think he could take it to them.
Personally being a Green voter I wouldn't mind if Caroline Lucas defected over, she is strong, principled with the ability to tap into the leftwing, being in a more mainstream party. Granted it would weaken the Greens but it already became significantly weaker when she stepped down from the leadership and left Natalie Bennett in charge.