|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Jeremy Corbyn out?
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.
If one comes to the conclusion that a parliamentary party is useless and craven but the best thing about it is a leader who is failing to demonstrate any managerial ability and cannot lead the party... well then aside from pausing to give the party a good kicking by inflicting him on them until the next general election it would seem the best thing to do would be to move on. Either in despair or in hope, depending on disposition.
The bulk of the PLP may yet see sense, or at least switch on to how the wind has changed; and Corbyn and those close to him may yet sharpen up their act, managerially speaking. I'm hopeful on both counts.
On that score though, how long a tenure as Labour leader would you expect Corbyn to have? Just on average and ignoring any special circumstances? Blair held office for a very long time, as did Wilson, but an average tenure might be, say, four or five years? Next week Jeremy Corbyn will already have been in post for a whole year, and if there has been any improvement in his ability to be an effective leader (as distinct from a spokesman for his own faction), I'm afraid it has been too slight for me to discern it.
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????
Why the need for supporters of Corbyn to smear Labour MPs (individually and as a group)?
Which instances of this did you have in mind?
The ongoing claims that the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs have been lying about Corbyn's inability or unwillingness to work with them, or else that it is the fault of the Labour MPs rather than Corbyn.
Here's an example:
quote:
'Draw me a tree'
[Other person starts to draw tree - First person then knocks his elbow so pencil slides all over page]
'Ha - see - I knew you wouldn't be able to draw a tree!'
By the way, I would like to know what precisely is either dishonest or not upfront about either resigning from the Cabinet or about holding a vote of no confidence in your leader? You can call it unwise, but it was out in the open.
Whether it was unwise or not is up for debate.
There are four possible courses of events:
a) Damaging leadership election; Corbyn wins.
b) Damaging leadership election; Smith wins.
c) No challenge to Corbyn.
d) Corbyn endorses successor who can unify the party.
Clearly for those people who think Corbyn is doing a poor job for whatever reason(*) it's more desirable that Corbyn nominate a successor who can unify the party than that they have a damaging leadership contest regardless of who wins.
(In game theory terms the correct course of action depends on how desirable each result is by how likely your course of action is to bring it about.)
(*) You might think Brexit is a good idea; many of us think it's an almighty cock-up, and that someone other than Tim Farron ought to be helping put a stop to it. Even if you do think it's a good idea, it's clear that calling in Article 50 now, when we have no negotiating strategy, and not even any negotiators, would make it a cock-up in short order.
Not that this is the only reason for thinking Corbyn is doing a bad job, but it's the reason that precipitated this.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
The bulk of the PLP may yet see sense, or at least switch on to how the wind has changed; and Corbyn and those close to him may yet sharpen up their act, managerially speaking. I'm hopeful on both counts.
The PLP had a go with Corbyn and have now been driven to sufficient desperation to engage in extreme measures which are likely to fail.
I see no sign that Corbyn is sharpening up.
Where does this hope come from?
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.
If one comes to the conclusion that a parliamentary party is useless and craven but the best thing about it is a leader who is failing to demonstrate any managerial ability and cannot lead the party... well then aside from pausing to give the party a good kicking by inflicting him on them until the next general election it would seem the best thing to do would be to move on. Either in despair or in hope, depending on disposition.
Plucky Johnny Major knew his Bismark: Politics is the art of the possible. If you are despairing, resign. Get a sodding grip man, as my old man would say.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amika
Shipmate
# 15785
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Then why not just admit that Corbyn as leader was a mistake, replace him, and unite the party in opposition against the oppressive and murderous Tory regime?
If only it were that simple! There are simply no suitable candidates who have been MPs for long enough. The left cannot settle for one of the rebels/plotters/resigners, and all the good alternatives (effectively those who have rallied around Corbyn such as Clive Lewis and Angela Rayner) are as yet too inexperienced. I like Corbyn and think he's been badly treated and often misrepresented but I don't think he's the messiah.
I've been loyal to Labour through Blair and Brown even when I was not happy with the party's direction, but now their successors will not allow the left its chance and seem determined to crush it. If it was just about Corbyn's 'incompetence' why the hostility from day one? This incompetence issue has proved very convenient for the Corbyn-haters such as Mcternan. A handy stick to beat him with when all the others failed.
It's going to be very difficult to unite the party now, whoever is leader.
Posts: 147 | From: Ingerland | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amika
Shipmate
# 15785
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
The bulk of the PLP may yet see sense, or at least switch on to how the wind has changed; and Corbyn and those close to him may yet sharpen up their act, managerially speaking. I'm hopeful on both counts.
Those are my hopes, too.
Posts: 147 | From: Ingerland | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amika:
This incompetence issue has proved very convenient for the Corbyn-haters such as Mcternan.
It has proved extremely inconvenient for some who tried to work with him, apparently in good faith, and resigned in despair. The reports are linked to in this thread. I really wanted Corbyn to succeed but it seems impossible to ignore the combined reports of the chaos around his office.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Attitude is ALL.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Not if you are below the poverty line and want out. Those people need some actual implementation as well. Implementation is SOMETHING AS WELL.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
It all depends on what's being implemented.
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amika:
This incompetence issue has proved very convenient for the Corbyn-haters such as Mcternan.
That's rather like saying 'John Major's incompetence has proved very convenient for Tony Blair.'
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
How was John Major incompetent? Surrounded by bastards epitomized by Portillo (who was humbled nicely) whose attitude (is that better MDIJON?) was incompetent.
And look! The first nail in the Tories' coffin! Grammar Schools.
[ 08. September 2016, 09:56: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
How was John Major incompetent? Surrounded by bastards epitomized by Portillo (who was humbled nicely) whose attitude (is that better MDIJON?) was incompetent.
And look! The first nail in the Tories' coffin! Grammar Schools.
An entirely avoidable recession, standing idly-by whilst Serbian nationalists slaughtered innocents in the former Yugoslavia and the beef war are the immediate examples which spring to mind.
He did, however, win a General Election and maintain the support of a majority of his MPs until the bitter end so not, perhaps, an exact analogy.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
It all depends on what's being implemented.
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
Really, I thought it was because members of the Parliamentary Party were stupid enough to nominate Corbyn and enough entrusts joined subsequently, to keep him in position.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
It all depends on what's being implemented.
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
Well, Scotland again stands as a big flashing warning light for Labour. I don't think the collapse there was down to Corbyn!
I wonder if there is any analysis going on about what went wrong north of the border. For example, it struck me that Smith's idea of a second referendum could be catastrophic, and could lead to a Labour collapse in some English areas.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quetzalcoatl wrote: quote:
I wonder if there is any analysis going on about what went wrong north of the border. For example, it struck me that Smith's idea of a second referendum could be catastrophic, and could lead to a Labour collapse in some English areas.
A second referendum may play into the hands of the burgeoning sense of English nationalism. I suspect that would then play out more according to how the other parties are disposed to handle that phenomenon - or in other words it will be something that relies on attitudes within as well as external to the party's voting base. Tricky to foresee.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
It all depends on what's being implemented.
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
Really, I thought it was because members of the Parliamentary Party were stupid enough to nominate Corbyn and enough entrusts joined subsequently, to keep him in position.
Yes. Brown and Milliband losing two elections on the trot must be Corbyn's fault. What else could the answer be? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
quetzalcoatl wrote: quote:
I wonder if there is any analysis going on about what went wrong north of the border. For example, it struck me that Smith's idea of a second referendum could be catastrophic, and could lead to a Labour collapse in some English areas.
A second referendum may play into the hands of the burgeoning sense of English nationalism. I suspect that would then play out more according to how the other parties are disposed to handle that phenomenon - or in other words it will be something that relies on attitudes within as well as external to the party's voting base. Tricky to foresee.
Yes, impossible to predict. But I could imagine, that if a second referendum were called, some Labour voters, who voted Leave, might feel so incensed at the apparent slight on their democratic vote (to Leave), that they would abandon Labour.
In Scotland, there was a ready-made alternative, not so clear in England, except of course, for UKIP. I bet Farage would be drooling over the prospect of a second referendum. He would unretire again.
[ 08. September 2016, 11:22: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Amika:
This incompetence issue has proved very convenient for the Corbyn-haters such as Mcternan.
That's rather like saying 'John Major's incompetence has proved very convenient for Tony Blair.'
I don't believe that John Major was incompetent at all - however for many in his party he was very much NOT a logical successor to Thatcher , and they did their best to trip him up. He wasn't expected to win the 'put up or shut up' election but did (he might have emerged with a better reputation if he HAD lost - he was forever associated with the ERM disaster and 'sleaze' both of which occurred in his second term).
Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand seems to be becoming quite proficient in finding open goals to miss. Didn't mention Brexit in PMQs yesterday, for example, when David Davis seemed to have opened a nice fault line in the Tories on the subject the day before.
I always back Jeremy Corbyn , for bringing back true Labour , which has been pretty much MIA for 20 years, but realistically, and taking account of his age , he is a stopgap and may well retire before the 2020 election. Clive Lewis or Angela Rayner may be ready to give a go by then.
None of this explains the PLP launching a damaging Coup just when the Tories were at the most vulnerable position they had been at since 2010 (I still think the Liberals would have been better served holding the balance of power to a Tory Minority government but that's another discussion entirely).
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amika
Shipmate
# 15785
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Amika:
This incompetence issue has proved very convenient for the Corbyn-haters such as Mcternan.
It has proved extremely inconvenient for some who tried to work with him, apparently in good faith, and resigned in despair. The reports are linked to in this thread. I really wanted Corbyn to succeed but it seems impossible to ignore the combined reports of the chaos around his office.
I, too, find this troubling. I don't think they are liars and it's clear that Corbyn is not the perfect leader. However, it can also be said that while they may have gone into their posts in good faith, it was always with a rumbling resentment. In other words, they were waiting for him to stumble - in some cases, hoping for it. I doubt that any leader is 'perfect' to their colleagues, but here all the dirty laundry has been put on display; the (sometimes ridiculous) resentments thrown out as bones to the media. It smells a bit rotten.
He has said and done things I don't like or agree with (the 'article 50' moment, and his refusal to consider a progressive alliance, for two) but I feel he is the best hope for the left and Labour at present. I do believe he cares and is sincere, but yes he stumbles and bumbles a bit. He isn't the polished politician, but for many of us that's in his favour.
I'm not among those who feel we can wait 20 years for a Labour government. I'm desperate to see the Tories out as I fear for what this country will become, and worry about those who are suffering under Tory rule. Prior to the resignations I had hope that Labour was starting to gain traction under Corbyn, that the Tories were in such disarray after the Leave vote that if there were a snap election under a new leader Labour would win. The resigners destroyed all that.
If Corbyn is 'ousted' I see no hope for Labour at all as the 'brand' is utterly sullied. If he stays I see a slim hope. If the resignations hadn't happened we would all be in a far better place right now.
Posts: 147 | From: Ingerland | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amika:
Prior to the resignations I had hope that Labour was starting to gain traction under Corbyn, that the Tories were in such disarray after the Leave vote that if there were a snap election under a new leader Labour would win. The resigners destroyed all that.
If Corbyn is 'ousted' I see no hope for Labour at all as the 'brand' is utterly sullied. If he stays I see a slim hope. If the resignations hadn't happened we would all be in a far better place right now.
This is just wishful thinking. The Tories have enjoyed significant poll leads ever since Corbyn became labour leader, including around the time of the referendum and afterwards. They are now getting on with the business of retaining power come what may (sorry) as is their ruthless wont.
The actions of the PLP speak to me more of desperation and despair than any Machiavellian plotting; they know that the referendum was bad news for the Tories but terrible for Labour.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
It all depends on what's being implemented.
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
Really, I thought it was because members of the Parliamentary Party were stupid enough to nominate Corbyn and enough entrusts joined subsequently, to keep him in position.
Yes. Brown and Milliband losing two elections on the trot must be Corbyn's fault. What else could the answer be?
And would you say that the situation has improved markedly, since then?
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
And would you say that the situation has improved markedly, since then?
In the alternative timeline where the PLP hadn't thrown its toys out of the pram, yes.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
None of this explains the PLP launching a damaging Coup just when the Tories were at the most vulnerable position they had been at since 2010.
Let's see. The Remain camp had just lost the referendum, and were somewhere between denial and anger. And a good many of us are do not intend acceptance any earlier than we have to.
In which atmosphere some wally calls for Article 50 to be implemented right then. Really, how did he think pro-Remain Labour MPs were going to react?
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
As many have said (over and over again), there's little difference to the working masses if it's a Tory government implementing Tory policies, or a Labour government implementing Tory policies.
That's how Labour have ended up in the mess they're in - not being an alternative to the Conservative party.
I think that is why it is Owen Smith who is challenging Corbyn, rather than Benn or Umunna.
In the mean time, while many people would indeed like an alternative to the Conservative Party's (absence of) policy on Brexit, get out of the EU without stopping to think isn't the alternative we're looking for.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
And would you say that the situation has improved markedly, since then?
In the alternative timeline where the PLP hadn't thrown its toys out of the pram, yes.
So you are saying that Corbyn's unpopularity is the result of the actions of the PLP, rather than the cause of the PLP's actions? I'm not sure why, if Corbyn actually was improving the situation, why the PLP would wantonly destroy a viable Leader.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
So you are saying that Corbyn's unpopularity is the result of the actions of the PLP, rather than the cause of the PLP's actions? I'm not sure why, if Corbyn actually was improving the situation, why the PLP would wantonly destroy a viable Leader.
In response to the question, who would I vote for at a General Election, I'd say 'Green'. In response to the question, who would make the best prime minister, I'd say 'Caroline Lucas'.
This is despite supporting Corbyn: I strongly suspect that the PLP would go on trying to undermine the direction Corbyn wants to take the party at every turn. If, however, when Corbyn is re-elected as leader with an increased mandate, and the PLP sorts itself out (or is sorted out), I - and I'm guessing a lot of other people - will re-evaluate their position.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I'm not sure why, if Corbyn actually was improving the situation, why the PLP would wantonly destroy a viable Leader.
Sorry, I missed this bit out of my previous answer.
I'm not sure why either. But several Labour politicians are, if not on the record, certainly have strongly suggested that, they'd rather lose the General Election than win it with a more socialist manifesto. Make of that what you will.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
But several Labour politicians are, if not on the record, certainly have strongly suggested that, they'd rather lose the General Election than win it with a more socialist manifesto.
But I suspect these politicians would the final part of that sentence laughably implausible.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Sounds like the Blairites should be Lib-Dems. Arguably, the Liberals are the inheritors of the Whig tradition that stood in opposition to the Tories. So, Labour is really a third party that's enjoyed several decades of relative success. Few of the Labour prime ministers enjoyed the whole hearted support of the Left that Labour originally represented. I question rather Labour should have ever been in power after Atlee. Give everybody what they want. Let social democrats and democratic socialists vote Labour. Let neoliberal nationalists given to order and hierarchy vote conservative. Let cosmopolitan neoliberals enamored with change and progress vote Lib-Dem.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luigi
Shipmate
# 4031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I'm not sure why, if Corbyn actually was improving the situation, why the PLP would wantonly destroy a viable Leader.
Sorry, I missed this bit out of my previous answer.
I'm not sure why either. But several Labour politicians are, if not on the record, certainly have strongly suggested that, they'd rather lose the General Election than win it with a more socialist manifesto. Make of that what you will.
His personal ratings have been consistently awful - worse than any other opposition leader. This was before the referendum.
The local council election results which were according to his supporters on social media a great success (one meme showed that the results illustrated how he was doing better than Blair before the 97 landslide.) This was just absurd cherrypicking. The results were in fact very poor. Yes he did very slightly better than predicted (about 2% better) by a couple of social scientists, but if their predictions had been spot on the results really would have been appalling.
At these elections he won the projected national share of the vote by 1% - much was made of this. However, oppositions consistently get around 14% leads on this, at least if they go on to win the next election. (Council elections are regarded as a pain free way of having a go at the government.)
Historically the only other local election results that were (very slightly) worse for an opposition were in 1998 and 2011. It doesn't take a genius to work out that what these two dates have in common. Both are within a year of a change of government and the new governments were still benefiting from a prolonged honeymoon after a very long period in opposition. This factor was not available as an excuse in 2016.
Any MP who actually understands opinion polls will have known how appallingly they were doing before 'the coup'. This alongside Dafyd's comments re Article 50 - which I also see as the final straw - easily explains the desperation. Most Labour MPs would like to win an election - it means their seats are less vulnerable and they get to do things rather than complain.
[ 08. September 2016, 16:32: Message edited by: Luigi ]
Posts: 752 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
So you are saying that Corbyn's unpopularity is the result of the actions of the PLP, rather than the cause of the PLP's actions? I'm not sure why, if Corbyn actually was improving the situation, why the PLP would wantonly destroy a viable Leader.
In response to the question, who would I vote for at a General Election, I'd say 'Green'. In response to the question, who would make the best prime minister, I'd say 'Caroline Lucas'.
This is despite supporting Corbyn: I strongly suspect that the PLP would go on trying to undermine the direction Corbyn wants to take the party at every turn. If, however, when Corbyn is re-elected as leader with an increased mandate, and the PLP sorts itself out (or is sorted out), I - and I'm guessing a lot of other people - will re-evaluate their position.
So, having claimed for the last few weeks that Jeremy Corbyn is eminently electable you will not, yourself, vote for him. I think that there is a performative inconsistency here.
More generally, the Labour Party are currently on 28% of the vote in the polls, which is what they got in 1983. The Tories are currently on 42%. The Liberals are on 8%, the Kippers on 12% with the rest, presumably being divvied up between the Greens, Plaid, the SNP and the various minor parties. The idea that there is some left wing surge waiting to rally if only Jeremy wins again and sorts out the PLP (how?) is, frankly, for the birds. The people who currently vote Lib Dem would probably vote for them come hell or high water, the sort of people who vote UKIP are not, let us say, Corbyn's natural constituency and the sort of people who have swung to the Tories between 2005 and now are not, obviously, looking for a government of the far left. There might be one or two marginals which go Tory to Labour if the Green vote collapses, but that's about it. The only major swing of any kind I can see at the moment is one where pro-Europe Labour voters notice that Corbyn isn't terribly concerned about staying in the single market and switch to the Lib Dems. I can't see that being an earth shattering development overall, but it might well take Labour below their 1983 nadir of 28%.
As to the PLP, they might be concerned to forestall a left wing government but politicians generally gravitate from the setting to the rising sun. There were a number of New Labour types who went from the left in the 1980s to the right in the 1990s and there has been a perceptible shift in the opposite direction, though not the same extent, subsequently. The body of opinion in the PLP is somewhat to the left of what it was in 2005. If they thought that Corbyn was a viable PM in waiting they would make their peace with him. It is the improbability of that scenario that has provoked the current difficulties. The exception to this is Mr Blair who said that he would not want to win an election on a Corbynite platform - I think that he meant that it would be undeliverable in practice, but, at any rate not being a member of the PLP has nothing to hope or fear from a hypothetical Corbynite victory.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
Saying that Labour would be doing better if only the PLP rallied around Mr Corbyn ignores the question: What actions on the part of the PLP could have avoided the examples of incompetence dissected on this thread?
In any case, Mr Corbyn's incompetence isn't just a question of electability. There are three reasons why a Labour leader may fail to inaugurate a social-democratic utopia:
1. They wuss out of social-democratic policies;
2. They don't get elected;
3. They get elected and cock it up.
Even if one accepts that Mr Corbyn's negative ratings are entirely down to lies and smears and the reports of his incompetence that are true would be forgiven by the electorate - that still leaves the issue that he is actually incompetent.
His comments on article 50 and Trident submarines without missiles do not give the impression of someone who thinks through all the implications of what he is advocating. How likely is it that he would be able to handle the complexity of rail renationalisation?
When the euro collapses, or Russia invades Latvia, or there's a coup d'état in Saudi Arabia, I can see Mr Smith bustling around with great energy and achieving very little. But I can see Mr Corbyn saying something totally off-the-wall and silly, like 'Well perhaps Britain can get by without oil', or 'Supposing we give Russia a land corridor to Kaliningrad.'
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Sounds like the Blairites should be Lib-Dems. Arguably, the Liberals are the inheritors of the Whig tradition that stood in opposition to the Tories. So, Labour is really a third party that's enjoyed several decades of relative success. Few of the Labour prime ministers enjoyed the whole hearted support of the Left that Labour originally represented. I question rather Labour should have ever been in power after Atlee. Give everybody what they want. Let social democrats and democratic socialists vote Labour. Let neoliberal nationalists given to order and hierarchy vote conservative. Let cosmopolitan neoliberals enamored with change and progress vote Lib-Dem.
You can question all you want but in 1964, 1966, 1974, 1974 (again), 1997, 2001 and 2005 the British electorate disagreed with you. British politics isn't made up of three teams based on pure ideological strata. They are made up of social coalitions which rise and fall depending on events and personalities.
Frankly, this is like saying that Democrats should support Trump because back in the day some Democrats were Southerners who supported segregation and that Republicans should support Hilary because, let's face it, Lincoln and Eisenhower would never have voted for Trump. I think an American would say that this was a somewhat glib reading of his, or her, country's politics so allow me to repay the compliment.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I'm not saying that Wilson, Callaghan, and Blair shouldn't have been Prime Minister necessarily. I'm saying that Wilson, Callaghan, and Blair should have been Liberals but ended up in the Labour party because the Liberals had been in decline for 40 years. Has nothing to do with who I think should have won the those elections. I'm really a completely impartial observer. I know the opinion on Blair. The opposition from the Left to first Wilson and then Callaghan largely handed the country to Thatcher. So, it now seems hard to suggest that they were solidly left wing. After Thatcher and Blair, it could be a case of don't know what you got till it's gone but the fact remains that with the exception of Atlee the left has complained about the purity of every single Labour PM. Whether or not they were isn't even relevant to the issue at hand.
There is no equivalent example in US politics because there is no Third Party. The Republicans and Democrats have been the two major parties since 1860. The Republicans clearly adopted most of the positions of the Whig Party which had been the opposition party for the 40 years prior. Plus, the names Democratic and Republican mean nothing.
And Lincoln would have voted for Trump.
[ 08. September 2016, 18:52: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
And Lincoln would have voted for Trump.
I'd love to hear the explanation for this statement.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
So, having claimed for the last few weeks that Jeremy Corbyn is eminently electable you will not, yourself, vote for him. I think that there is a performative inconsistency here.
If you can't get your mind around someone supporting a politician, and simultaneously thinking that the party around them will scupper their endeavour, then I can't help you.
But I'm guessing you knew that answer anyway. A performative something or other from you, I suppose.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Trump is a throwback to the Republican Party of the 19th Century. Lincoln believed in protectionism. Lincoln favored anti-immigrant policies like allowing the immigrant Irish to be drafted but allowing the wealthy to buy there way out of it. Lincoln opposed slavery but after emancipation wanted to deport the freed slaves to Central or South America. If Trump is a white supremacist, Lincoln most certainly qualifies as a white supremacist.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
So, having claimed for the last few weeks that Jeremy Corbyn is eminently electable you will not, yourself, vote for him. I think that there is a performative inconsistency here.
If you can't get your mind around someone supporting a politician, and simultaneously thinking that the party around them will scupper their endeavour, then I can't help you.
But I'm guessing you knew that answer anyway. A performative something or other from you, I suppose.
If you support a politician you vote for them. If you don't vote for them, you don't support them. It's a a fairly binary thing.
I have a lot of time, for example, for Ken Clarke. I wouldn't vote for him, not being a Tory, and all that. So the most I can say is that I like Ken Clarke. Given that the wrong lot win elections from time to time, I would rather they supported a politician I like and, as it happens, I think the Tories would have done better in 2001, 2005 and, possibly, even 2010 if they had voted for him.
But I would probably refrain from saying to people who had given a great deal of time and energy to the Conservative Party that they were betraying the Conservative Party, and it's principles by not supporting a politician I liked but was not, myself, prepared to support. Indeed, I would probably refrain from lecturing people about the principles of their party if I did not, myself, support it. YMMV.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
But several Labour politicians are, if not on the record, certainly have strongly suggested that, they'd rather lose the General Election than win it with a more socialist manifesto.
Can you give examples?
Do you have evidence that this is true of more than a small minority of the Labour MPs?
Would it be unfair to say that some Corbyn supporters think that Labour to the right of Corbyn is just Tory-lite, and that therefore Labour might as well lose under Corbyn as win under a less left-wing manifesto?
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Trump is a throwback to the Republican Party of the 19th Century. Lincoln believed in protectionism. Lincoln favored anti-immigrant policies like allowing the immigrant Irish to be drafted but allowing the wealthy to buy there way out of it.
The Enrollment Act did not specify immigration status, merely a fee for opting out.
Strike one.
quote:
Lincoln opposed slavery but after emancipation wanted to deport the freed slaves to Central or South America.
Not exactly correct. Lincoln's attitude was an evolving one, changing from practicality and his meetings with people like Fredrick Douglas.
And he makes glancing contact sending a foul ball into the right field stands. Strike two.
quote:
If Trump is a white supremacist, Lincoln most certainly qualifies as a white supremacist.
This is a little more nuanced. Lincoln was in the 19th C. and the Trumpaloompa is here, in the 21C. Whilst I think Lincoln's position far from ideal, he was a relatively progressive man of his times. Which means, were he in the present day, he would not likely be in anywhere near the same arena as the orange one.
Strike three, yooour OUT!
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by lilbuddha:
The Enrollment Act did not specify immigration status, merely a fee for opting out.
Strike one.
No, but that policy had a disparate impact on Irish immigrants. Hence, Irish rioted and Lincoln suppressed them. Such a violent man that Lincoln.
quote:
originally posted by lilbuddha:
Not exactly correct. Lincoln's attitude was an evolving one, changing from practicality and his meetings with people like Fredrick Douglas.
And he makes glancing contact sending a foul ball into the right field stands. Strike two.
Even your post says that Lincoln believed separation was best solution. He never completely gave up on the idea even if he didn't mention it publicly. See below for evidence.
Abraham Lincoln wanted to deport slaves to other colonies
Why would he stop talking about it publicly? One, he wanted a slave revolt. Two, forcibly relocating all of the freed slaves wouldn't have been easy.
quote:
originally posted by lilbuddha:
This is a little more nuanced. Lincoln was in the 19th C. and the Trumpaloompa is here, in the 21C. Whilst I think Lincoln's position far from ideal, he was a relatively progressive man of his times. Which means, were he in the present day, he would not likely be in anywhere near the same arena as the orange one.
Assuming Trump is truly a racist. This is simply a non sequitur. Trump's actual views on race aren't extreme. Now, what he is claimed to believe is a different story. I'll allow that by the definition of racist used by SJW's that Trump is a racist. However, by that definition, every Republican president except possibly Eisenhower was a racist.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
If you support a politician you vote for them. If you don't vote for them, you don't support them. It's a a fairly binary thing.
It's clearly a binary thing for you. I'm glad the world is so clear and straightforward in your eyes.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Fine. Then don't vote Republican.
Simple.
What am I missing?
Besides I thought this thread was about Corbyn not The Donald, still less an 1860s US politician with an even weirder line in beards.
WTF has Lincoln got to do with the UK's Labour Party, other than pieces of rhetoric like the Gettysburg Address that most people admire from time to time?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I didn't bring him up. I am trying my best to serve as an impartial outside voice here and people keep thinking I have ulterior motives. I have no desire to discuss Lincoln, Trump, or any other U.S. politician past or present except as it relates to Jeremy Cornyn. The way I'm comparing Trump to Corbyn says nothing about what I think of either Trump or Cornyn.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I did not bring Lincoln into this discussion either and will cease to post further on him in this thread, not even to illustrate your inaccuracies.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
If you support a politician you vote for them. If you don't vote for them, you don't support them. It's a a fairly binary thing.
It's clearly a binary thing for you. I'm glad the world is so clear and straightforward in your eyes.
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath support, and have not votes? Can support save him?
Even so support, if it hath not votes, is dead, being alone.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
If you support a politician you vote for them. If you don't vote for them, you don't support them. It's a a fairly binary thing.
It's clearly a binary thing for you. I'm glad the world is so clear and straightforward in your eyes.
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath support, and have not votes? Can support save him?
Even so support, if it hath not votes, is dead, being alone.
I can't vote for him. I'm not a member of the Labour party, and neither am I resident of his constituency.
Where I live, the local Labour MP is a decent bloke, but I'm very good friends with the PPC for the Greens. Council elections - I used to vote LibDem, but now don't. And the councillors are entirely Labour, save for a few LibDems. Up until recently, the Greens didn't put up a ward candidate, and I considered standing for them myself, but then someone else stepped up, and I voted for them instead.
If Corbyn - and the membership of the party - can plot a proper leftist course for the whole party, then I'll most likely switch my vote.
I don't see anything inconsistent about this approach whatsoever. I'm a swing voter, but on the left.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I'm also a swing voter on the left.
It's been pretty disappointing.
I voted Labour in 1997 - what a disappointment as they lurched to the right. Now they are in such disarray I can't vote for them.
After 1997 I swung between Green and Lib Dems. Then the Lib Dems joined the right in coalition.
So that leaves me with Green - who have no real leaders.
I'd like to be able to vote SNP!
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If Corbyn - and the membership of the party - can plot a proper leftist course for the whole party, then I'll most likely switch my vote.
I don't see anything inconsistent about this approach whatsoever. I'm a swing voter, but on the left.
Ok. So you are saying (if I may paraphrase) that Mr Corbyn is indeed a vote-attractor for you, but less powerful (at the moment) than the vote-repellant forces of the rest of the PLP?
Obviously I disagree with your apportionment of blame, but I can see where you are coming from.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
