In the last few days he has managed to say that "Jihadi John" should have been arrested and that "shoot to kill" as use by the French police (and as would be used in such circumstances by the UK police) is both something that is wrong and that he would not authorise in the UK
There would seem to be a double standard operating here. On the one hand the public are being encouraged to over react to a few deaths caused by terrorists, but on the other we are being encouraged to place no value on life it happens to be the life of a suspected terrorist. One unquestionable result of a shoot to kill policy will be that innocent people get shot by officers of th law. The police even managed to shoot an innocent man dead in my home town, in bed asleep with his girl friend, because of a case of mistaken identity, Didnt they also manage to kill an innocent man on the london undergroud not so long ago?
Recently they have created rules which hand most of the power to the Unions and the Members.
I am gobsmacked that anyone can believe an organisation should not honestly reprsent its members! However in labour's case, all recent changes to election rules have taken away or reduced the voting rights of unions, and transferred these to individual members.
1) Run a candidate against Corbyn. He needs 50 Labour MPs to back him to get on the ballot paper. He won't get these.
I think you meant Corbyn would not get 50 MPs to nominate him? That might be the case, but if it is, it suggests it is current labour MPs who are unrepresentative of their members, not Corbyn. If Corbyn is unelectable, the only reason for it is because the labour party is seen as divided and refusing to back him. The entire party becomes unelectable because it does not have confidence in its own policies, not because those policies are wrong. This is exactly what happened at the last election.
The new leader then pushes through the rule changes to kick out the communists, Marxists etcetera, restoring Blairite New Labour.
Blairites are conservatives, and would be perfectly happy in that party. I do not believe even Corbyn is a communist. He is simply a social democrat, which is the flavour of politics widely supported across europe, which has been accompanied by enormous economic success and a generally good lifestyle for everyone. The consevatives are anomalous in this, and indeed have been responsible during my lifetime for some serious and damaging structural changes within Britain.
2) Labour MPs resign from Labour in a body and form a New Labour party (say 230 Labour MPs).
They will not, because they need a local party supporting them. In reality they are carrying out a confidence trick against their own members. The slogan is, 'support us because even though you do not agree with our policies, you hate the other lot more'.
However many would switch funding to New Labour.
From the conservatives, perhaps? The conservatives are also carrying out a similar confidence trick aginst their own more right wing members. The reason for all this lying is very much the unfit electoral system we have which refuses to recognise more than one division of views.
On closing Britain's borders with the EU: Support: 53% Oppose: 34%
Yeah, right. And when there are then no teachers or doctors because we have forbidden them to come here? Nor any cleaners or dustmen? So would we see a sharp rise in wages paid by government ( and everyone else) to persuade english people to do these jobs?
The economic mess around the euro looks to create years of naval-gazing.
The British are famous for their navy in a tradition going back centuries, way before the EU was invented. (sorry, i know its a typo, but it made me laugh!)