David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs

David Cameron faces the latest Prime Minister's Questions - 20th April.

[jakeu]

Corbyn literally didn't land a single effective blow throughout the whole debate on academies

[bopechanga]

nice to see a leader of a country face direct questions. never happens here in america

[natasharenston]

As I sit and look at a picture of David Milliband and David Cameron striding purposefully, almost hand in hand, away from camera in sharp suits today; I realise that there really is little difference between a Blairite and a Conservative. When I use the word 'Blairite' I don't mean it as a derogatory term, although anything 'ite' sounds as such. But both in their mutually accepted worldview there is little room for change. I remember before the general election, the media complaining that politicians are viewed as 'all the same', sharp-suited, spun, insincere. Then somebody like Corbyn comes along - and 'comes along' seems to be about right in the eyes of the media, as if he somehow just came into the role accidentally. Memories of the immense leadership win; coming despite an en-masse desperate media frenzy to prevent it from happening. Politicians old and new threatening, fearmongering, lying. Most of the criticism has been so absurd. I have been left speechless by some of the bias in Guardian articles.

The mainstream media and Blairite narrative is clear and predictable: If Labour loses in Oldham, Corbyn is to blame. If they win, it's despite Corbyn. If Labour do badly in the local elections, Corbyn is responsible. If Labour do well, it's despite Corbyn. And be sure to emphasise how bad the results are either way. If Khan doesn't become Mayor, things are 'bleak' for Corbyn. If he wins, again it's despite Corbyn. Labour cannot win by only appealing to it's 'core voters' they need a bigger tent. There is no point living in a utopian protest bubble. It's naive, as are Labour's young new members.

I'd like to know how a party leader can succeed when a large number of people in the party don't want him to. I'd like to know how a party itself can succeed when a large number of people in it don't want their leader to succeed. I'd like to know of any person that can succeed in such circumstances. Few could remain sincere, and resolute in attempting to deliver their electoral mandate to the degree that Corbyn has; if faced with the kind of criticism and attacks he endures endlessly from people in his party; without considering the mainstream media. If Labour MPs had given their party leader the level of respect demanded by the huge support, enthusiasm and votes of Labour Party members, or even something near it; then Corbyn could be judged more fairly. We can all speculate about how well Labour would be doing if those within it respected the aspirations and wishes of those who voted. Democracy can be a beautiful thing; and I am in doubt that many in politics are terrified of it.

In 2016 I don't want to read an article entitled "Scruffy and old-fashioned Corbyn not a hit with swing voters" in the Guardian. I'm tired of being drip-fed vague negativity surrounding the leader of the opposition; and never being informed about what he says, believes, or has been spending his time doing! Yes, people think he's scruffy, because they've been constantly told that he is scruffy. They've been told many things about him. The suit he wore in PMQs on that depressing day of Cameronism was fine; it was smart, it was nice. The rudeness, arrogance, superficiality, and smoke and mirror distraction of the political elite is shocking. We may not be at Republican level lows yet, but Cameron steps a little in that direction each passing day. It's not that I'm debating whether he's scruffy, it's not important. As long as it's negative it will get in. Anything but his message.. anything will do. Don't talk about the issues; talk about him, criticise him. I don't want a sharp-suited paid-for Conservative politician. And I don't want a Labour politician who believes that mimicking the Tories will win an election, or even that it's worth the price. New Labour paved the way for the Government we have today. Thatcher said New Labour was her greatest achievement.

Times are changing fast. The public are now anti-austerity, they do want an NHS, they do want affordable housing, they don't want CEO's earning what they're earning, they don't want tax havens, they don't want a leader who is corrupt and elitist, they do want nationalised rail, they don't want vast wealth inequality, they do want workers rights, they do want a lower pension age etc. etc. The austerity narrative is running dry. So when the Guardian, or Sadiq Khan, or a backbench Blairite says that Labour need to move towards and meet the narrative of the last election, the narrative that hangs by the skin of its teeth to our nations consciousness; the free market capitalist TTP narrative; then no... I don't believe you. Thatcher changed the political narrative. As she said, you navigate by the stars, you take the lead. If Labour MP's supported Corbyn, I have no doubt that the British public would be ready for a more progressive narrative. But to say that they aren't in advance, and to fight any attempts to offer this, and then to blame the representative of a huge anti-austerity mandate is, in my mind, absolutely cynical, afraid and feeble.

[nexus]

Who's this imran Hussain barely string a sentence together