Yeah, who wants to win elections anyway, eh?
Given your desire for Labour to revert to its electoral dead-end, I assume you don't.
Corbyn is more electable than the next Blairite off the rank be it Cooper, Burnham or whoever.
As soon as the Tories realised they could pretend to be centrists plus keep all the old Tory trump cards (racism, low tax etc) New Labour didnt have a chance. New Labour and the Tories are basically the same to the average voter except New Labour crashed the economy, invited in loads of immigrants and sold the gold blah blah blah.
Give me any arguement that a New Labour MP might use to attack a Tory and I will knock it for 6 out of the park.
Corbyn is more electable than the next Blairite off the rank be it Cooper, Burnham or whoever.
Hmmmmm...... no, I don't agree.
In order to be electable, you need to have charisma. Your points above are valid, but most people don't vote for the parties or the policy, they vote for the person. I'm no fan of Tony Blair's, but what he did have was charisma..... and every single party leader (on both sides) since that point has been stunningly devoid of it.
The turning point for me was when Labour voted for the wrong Miliband - one was extremely electable, the other seemed like he would struggle to organise a school fete. All Cameron had to do was be more electable than Ed - a low bar.
The only remotely electable Snr labour politician at the moment seems to be Sadiq Kahn - but unfortunately I don't think the UK is ready for a minority PM
I’m no fan of Tony Blair’s, but what he did have was charisma…..
Sure, but he was declining badly by 2005, and was lucky that the Tories were such a rabble back then.
@batfink MORE electable 🙂 Check out the Labour leadership contest debates to see who has the most charisma out of the afforementioned.
I’m no fan of Tony Blair’s, but what he did have was charisma…..
Sure, but he was declining badly by 2005, and was lucky that the Tories were such a rabble back then.
Hahaha...... more of a rabble than they are now?
Check out the Labour leadership contest debates to see who has the most charisma out of the afforementioned.
No thanks 🙂 But there must be SOMEBODY in the Labour party with more charisma than Jezza, just on the basis that he has none (outside of the sort of charisma that only works on momentum members). I suspect that anyone with genuine leadership potential is keeping their powder dry.
"In order to be electable, you need to have charisma."
He's been elected, twice. Does Theresa May have charisma? John Major? Politics doesn't have to be a cult of personality, arguably it's worst when it is.
(yes, I know people claim Corbyn's appeal is a cult of personality, but the same people say he doesn't have one, so let's not pay that too much heed)
He’s been elected, twice
By a sub-population not representative (I suspect) of the wider electorate
Does Theresa May have charisma?
It's relative. She won against Jezza. As bad as she is, she's still better (in most peoples minds) than JC.
John Major?
As above, but Kinnock
Politics doesn’t have to be a cult of personality, arguably it’s worst when it is.
I agree completely, however, the reality is that it is.
I suspect that anyone with genuine leadership potential is keeping their powder dry.
So rather than standing up and showing some leadership, they are skulking in the shadows in some Machiavellian scheme for personal power. Sounds very Tory to me. Personally I find a good leadership trait in a politician is someone who will do the right thing even if it costs them personally.
I agree completely, however, the reality is that it is.
Yes, politics is all about the likability of the leader. Th detail and specifics of policies are less important. You need a popular character at the front repeatedly spouting populist one liners.
Formula for Labour to win is as follows;
- Find most likeable member of Labour party and put them in as leader
- Keep saying you will increase minimum wage, increase NHS funding, increase police funding, tax rich companies
Just say it every week so it is the only thing the electorate associates with the party. The tories, media etc, will rightly question where the money is coming from but that doesn't matter as the majority of electorate are not reading that or watching or listening to the politics based tv and radio that discusses it.
Hahaha…… more of a rabble than they are now?
No, but Labour were in power and had plenty of seats to play with. Look up their vote share compared to 2017...
I suspect that anyone with genuine leadership potential is keeping their powder dry.
This. Since the changing of the electoral rules and the colonisation of the party by Momentum everyone in the Labour party knows that if there was a leadership election tomorrow he'd get an even bigger majority no matter who he stood against. So they're all sensibly keeping their heads down.
That rule change that Millibean brought in was the greatest gift the Tory party could have ever received. It was literally all their Christmases and Birthdays come at once. As the present state of things show it can also be a curse as well as a blessing.
For the country, in particular, and long suffering voters wathing in horror at our present political system
Any party in power does need an opposition that is at least functioning at some kind of level to keep it in check. The fact that the present labour party isn't even that has allowed them to dissolve into open civil war and descend into the total shambles that now passes for governance. Yet still they're ahead in the polls even as they tear into one another.
The truth is that Corbyn i unelectable for the same reason he's always been.... just too much baggage for most voters to swallow. Yes, the right wing press have made a meal of it, but trawling through his past is the gift that just keeps giving for them. He's an open goal.
And if Jezza scares the horses in marginal constituencies (the ones you have to win) then John Macdonnell, Len McCluskey and Dianne Abbot put the fear of God in them.
Our entire political system (in the present 2 party state) is totally broken and no longer fit for purpose, and Corbyn is a major part of the reason for that, and most certainly not the answer to it
In order to be electable, you need to have charisma
Even if we take this claim as true it is fairly clear he does have some. Your endless ranting about the Corbyn cult would tend to indicate that you actually agree as well. Cults are all about Charisma.
It may be that you feel his charisma isnt sufficiently broad but to claim he doesnt have any is nuts. Even if you dont see it yourself (I dont either for what its worth). May on the other hand really doesnt have any.
As Northwind says though this focus on "Charisma" is dangerous. That way you end up with glossy salespeople willing to say anything for the sale.
The turning point for me was when Labour voted for the wrong Miliband – one was extremely electable,
Ah yes the king across the water. The problem is though this hasnt been put to the test. Remember he was pretty much a clone of Blair. Blair of course knew that his approach only works so long. Thats why he resigned before going into an election he would have had a good chance of losing. The tories had got wise to the game and were able to play it just as well.
Our entire political system (in the present 2 party state) is totally broken and no longer fit for purpose, and Corbyn is a major part of the reason for that,
Yeah yeah. Corbyn, whilst not the right answer, is along the right lines. Actually having a left wing party as opposed to a party which whilst trying to triangulate the swing voters followed the tories ever rightward.
Your endless ranting about the Corbyn cult
Errrr..... this was my first post on this thread I think, are you confusing me with someone else?
Yes, the trouble is that politics is changing in this country at such a bewildering rate. If you look at the Tory party now they make the Cameron incarnation of a few years ago look like a bunch of Guardian-readers, they're so extreme.
And if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Momentum must feel flattered as the hard right UKIPers/Tommy Robinson supporters embark on doing to the Tory Party what Momentum has already done to Labour. To be honest, they've always been headed that way anyway.
But the upshot of this is that in the aftermath of Brexit we could be left with an electoral choice between a Jezza labour party who most people (rightly or wrongly) as 'Hard Left' (I don't personally), and an ultra-right wing Tory party led by one of the proper Brexit headbangers.
I don't think thats a choice many would feel particularly palatable. I already feel politically disenfranchised. I expect if this was the case, the vast majority of the countries voters would feel nobody really represented their views.
The irony being that it was a project to 'democratise' the two main parties that will have led us there. The law of unintended consequences, eh?
this was my first post on this thread I think, are you confusing me with someone else?
Sorry thought it was Binners. So are you still claiming he has no charisma? Given the excitable lot chanting his name at festivals and stuff I would say thats hard to support.
That rule change that Millibean brought in was the greatest gift the Tory party could have ever received. It was literally all their Christmases and Birthdays come at once.
I just don't get this, and I think this is the main area where we differ. The rule change Miliband brought in allowed a redistribution of power from the top of the party to the bottom. For all it's faults, it was an exercise in democratic empowerment. How can that be a bad thing? If it were up to me, all candidates for all parties should be elected in democratic primaries. You say our system is broken. I agree completely, but it's broken because those at the top who hold power, be they labour or tory, protect that power by disenfranchising everyone else.
If we want to fix politics, reforms like those that Miliband brought in need to be expanded across the board and enshrined in law. Do that and we might just have a chance of re-engaging the population to giving a shit about their own and the country's interests and actually taking some responsibility for it. If the population were more engaged in politics, they wouldn't have voted for brexit. The only way you get them engaged is to give them more power through elections, and as far as I can see, that's exactly what Corbyn is trying to do within the labour party.
Given the present totally hopeless state of the labour party, the UKIPisation of the Tories and with the UK having voted for Brexit, you honestly think thats whats needed is more 'voices of the people' style grass-roots democracy?
Seriously?
I'd advocate the complete opposite. Hand over the logistics of running the country over to Tesco or someone who knows about stuff like that, and make damn sure that the general public have as little opportunity as possible to ever get anywhere near the decision-making process ever again!
I already feel politically disenfranchised.
I'm not sure I understand why. I can understand you not liking Corbyn (I'm generally agnostic on Corbyn but I can see why he annoys some people). But how do his party reforms or the policies they party have adopted disenfranchise you? You've already said you don't think they're 'hard left'. Seems to me there's a massive dissonance between the image of Corbyn and his supporters that is presented by the media and the reality. There seems to be this obsession that they're all headbanging militant trots who like nothing more than to spout off in committee meetings about the bourgeoisie oppression of the workers.
I know quite a few momentum people who got involved post-Corbyn and nothing could be further from the truth. Sure there are some old-school nutters from the 70s/80s, but most of them are young millenial types pissed off with the system looking for more radical solutions, or ex-environmental and social justice activists who are more interested in actually doing stuff than sitting in stuffy committee rooms. They're also mostly very middle class, very well educated, and have long histories in community activism, direct action, and all sorts of other grassroots political action. If the party is being taking over by anyone, it's being taken over by these people, and that as far as I can see is a massively positive thing.
you honestly think thats whats needed is more ‘voices of the people’ style grass-roots democracy?
What is needed is for people to feel engaged in the system. Not to feel like they are just expected to tick a box every five years and then sod off. Or to feel that their voice is secondary to those paying the parties to advertise to them.
They need to be able to look at the major parties and choose one which represents them. Whether that is the tories, Labour or Lib dems,, SNP/Plaid Cymru if applicable, preferably the Greens and then a more locally oriented party doesnt really matter. What we cant have is the situation we ended up in with new labour and the orange book lib dems where they just chased the tories on a large number of policies ever rightwards. So all politicians were seen as identikit taking a brief time in the public sector before going on to their reward from the private sector. That is where the populists found the voice. Being able to promise representation for a large number of people who didnt feel represented any longer.
Hand over the logistics of running the country over to Tesco or someone who knows about stuff like that
You do realise that there is a subtle difference between running a shopping chain (which has had a fair few problems) and running a country. Its a tad harder to shut down an underperforming town than a store and also the method of screwing the suppliers doesnt really transfer across.
I know it was the new labour dream to hand everything over to the experts in the private sector but that really hasnt turned out to well has it?
I think that the public have shown in pretty resounding style recently that they simply can't be trusted with democracy. If Brexit has demonstrated anything it's that handing the average UK citizen a massively important decision to make is like handing a hand grenade to a monkey who's sat smoking spice.
Will they carefully examine it and weigh up the options? Of course not, they'll read something on the side of a bus, then pull the pin out and try and eat it.
I don't want more public involvement in politics. Its the very last thing we as a society need. I want far less. If you want to join a political party, as they are at present, you should probably be sectioned for your own benefit. Or shot. Or left in a room with a spice-addled monkey who's just been given a hand grenade. I'm easy with any of those
I'm sorry, but given the events of the last few years, we'd be better off revoking the parliament and the constitution, and establishing a military dictatorship with whichever one of the chuckle brothers is still alive at the helm, and lots of guns. Lots of guns. And hand grenades. And spice. And monkeys.it can't be any worse than this, can it?
Well the choices seem to be:
1. Effective dictatorship with monkeys as above (see Saudi Arabia, Egypt, China) as role models
2. Status quo - ignore the plebs but then get screwed by protest votes like Brexit
3. Listen to people and address their real problems
Which of these choices sounds best? Which one does Labour most correspond to? Tories?
Been "trawling" other blogs and what i have established is
1. Its mainly ideology- the hate for EU Socialism? Unelected EU ministers, Sovereignty, etc.
2. Its not about money or quality of life
3. These people despise the EU
So not matter what the misery they want it.
The bottom line is this country is completely divided there is little or no grey area.
If you sit on the remain side of the fence its going to be a miserable country to live in.
Given the present totally hopeless state of the labour party,
We can argue over how well they should be doing, but your comment is ridiculous hyperbole.
They're 5 points behind in the polls to a government that has split in two, the two halves of which are openly slogging lumps out of each other, all while the country drifts towards economic armageddon, without looking like its got a *ing clue what to do about it other than double down and make it even more catastrophic
Meanwhile, the party on the opposite benches are totally incapable of articulating a vision that can convince a majority of people that they can offer a better alternative to THAT!! To Boris *ing Johnson!!!!
I don't know what your definition of 'hopeless' is, but to me, thats going to take some ****ing beating!!!
I'm with Binners, fractionally more hopeless than the most hopeless Government in living memory ought to meet any definition of hopeless.
I think that the public have shown in pretty resounding style recently that they simply can’t be trusted with democracy.
I'm convinced the very opposite is true. It's the basis for pretty much every political belief or opinion I have. The problem isn't democracy, it's the stupid way in which it's implemented. We vote every now and again for someone to represent us, with no guarantee that they will, and very little power to remove them if they don't. Hardly a surprise is it that people then either become apathetic, turn to snake-oil populists, or seek to blame others like foreigners and/or the poor? The only real solution is to give people power. Yes sometimes they'll exercise it in stupid ways, like brexit, but over time they will engage, learn and do better in future.
And just on a point of order. Any leader who's ever come along and claimed that they know the answer to everything, be it Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Thatcher, Reagan, Blair etc has been proven wrong by history, and billions have suffered because of it. Top-down unnaccountable government only serves one purpose, and that's to protect the power and interests of those who have it.
They’re 5 points behind in the polls
You're doing it again. Most opinion polls over the last couple of months are within the margin of error. Cherry-picking to suit your argument does you no credit.
the two halves of which are openly slogging lumps out of each othe
Unlike Labour eh? Where the moderates arent just disagreeing about Brexit but are in an all out war to destroy Corbyn and co. Admittedly they have gone a bit quiet recently but as per the antisemitism row its clear its just a truce time and they are more interested in trying to drag Labour rightwards as opposed to opposing the tories.
Also you havent provided your great solution. Remember o guru that the Labour heartlands are mostly pro brexit. Why should Labour sacrifice themselves to save the tories? Bearing in mind if they did so then the tories would use it as an opportunity to push through even more right wing policies.
Another PMQT where he didn't want to mention the B word.
WTF?
Another PMQT where he didn’t want to mention the B word.
WTF?
Because he is happy to see that it is going ahead as that's what he wants, he also hopes to keep a low profile so as few people as possible notice that he is gagging for brexit and a hard one as he doesn't want to be hampered by EU restrictions if he gets in.
So the opinion polls have labour ‘within the margin of error’ behind this flailing, bickering, utterly incompetent, totally rudderless administration?
What ambition! What vision! What leadership!
Dont worry folks. Everything’s going to be fine. Jeremy, Dianne And John have got this covered now that their path to number ten is assured
Dear God!
So the opinion polls have labour ‘within the margin of error’ behind this flailing, bickering, utterly incompetent, totally rudderless administration?
You were telling us that they are five points behind. Make your mind up.
Its you that said that, not me. The poll I read in the Observer on Sunday had them 5 points behind.
Some achievement!
Maybe he could have people make up a chant about it to sing at festivals?
Ooooooooh..... margin of errrooooooor.......
Its you that said that, not me. The poll I read in the Observer on Sunday had them 5 points behind.
Yeah, sorry to introduce a fact into your silly diatribe. Still, it's all here to quote back, the next time you accuse Corbyn's supporters of being juvenile.
Can I ask you seriously what your opinion is about Corbyns ‘position’ on Brexit?
I agree with TurnerGuy. Corbyn wants Brexit just as much as Rees Mogg. The harder the better (oo-er missus!). The only difference between him and the Tory headbangers is that he’s made the concession that we should be in ‘a’ customs union. And he was totally bounced into that by Kier Starmer, completely against his instinct.
So why do his disciples keep faith in him, given this?
Genuine question, as i’m Intrigued by this totally contradictory position of (IMHO) unquestioningly supporting a position that is clearly not in their interests, and is essentially (again IMHO) a right wing coup?
i’d really Like to know your opinion on it. Feel free to carry on insulting me, but if you could talk me through your opinion onCorbyns Brexit ‘policies’ (such as they are) thet’d be great
Thanks in advance...
Can I ask you seriously what your opinion is about Corbyns ‘position’ on Brexit?
I'd be happy to debate Corbyn with someone whose mind is more open than yours
So why do his disciples keep faith in him, given this?
Because there is a lot else to like, basically.
I’d be happy to debate Corbyn with someone whose mind is more open than yours
By which you mean people with the same opinion as yourself and the beardy messiah
Hats of. Very Corbyn and Momentum. And you're not even being ironic. Perish the thought you might indulge in doing anything but hurl insults at those with a diffrent point of view, eh? Just ignore the wider debate and convincing other people of your arguament? Carry on preaching to the converted.
You stay in that cosy echo chamber of yours, wrapped in the comfort blanket of knowing you're right and occupying the moral high ground, becuse... erm... well.. .. just. because, right!.
No answers then? Quelle surprise....
By which you mean people with the same opinion as yourself and the beardy messiah
Your only interest seems to be slagging off Corbyn and his supporters, stridently regurgitating insults, yet having the brass neck to claim that you're the one being insulted and that Corbyn's supporters are juvenile.
As an exercise in proving my point, you could hardly have done a better job. If you ever become an adult, people may be more inclined to engage with you .Right now I have zero interest.
Still no answers then?
Do you want me repeat the question?
Corbyns Brexit ‘strategy’....?
The idea that Corbyn wants a hard brexit is utter nonsense - same as the rest of the lies put about by the press about him -
Lets see one single quote from him saying that.
Corbyns brexit strategy - you maen the labour parties position. Labour is a democratic institution and more so now and Corbyn does not set polciy Its . laid out in a series of speeches and papers.
Its maybe not one you agree with but its there ( I don't agree with it)
Basically its we cannot ignore the will of the people but we must limit the damage and avoid a hard border in NI and be no worse off as a result. So remain in a customs union. But then you would know this if yo actually listened to what is coming out of the labour party rather than what the press invent about it.
I am going to pull you up on another one. You keep on ranting about reselection. Name one MP that has been ousted. Not even Hoey has and you must agree she has no place in the labour party
They’ve not got mandatory reselection through yet, doesn’t mean they’re not going all out to get it!
Stands to reason though. More opportunity to concentrate on endless ‘procedure’ and naval-gazing, People’s front of Judes/Judeans People’s Front style factionalism and head in the sand ignoring of stuff like actually trying to win an election
Hey... 1981 called... they want their ‘politics back. It went really well last time around
Still no answers then?
You seem to be lacking in basic comprehension.
People’s front of Judes/Judeans People’s Front style factionalism
It seems to be Tourettes...
Still no answers then?
Jezza? Brexit? No...?
Still no answers then?
Not for you, as I've already said. Was it too difficult for you to understand?
What if somebody else asks?
Are you vetting all the recipients of your/Jezza’s wisdom?
People have posted a lot about Corbyn and Labour's brexit strategy but that doesn't really seem to be what you're in this thread for. If you actually want to know, go back and read the posts that you ignored.
What if somebody else asks?
Are you vetting all the recipients of your/Jezza’s wisdom?
I'll happily discuss politics with people who aren't acting like posturing children. And I'm pretty sure that Corbyn's views are widely reported.
People have posted a lot about Corbyn and Labour’s brexit strategy but that doesn’t really seem to be what you’re in this thread for.
Well, quite.
I’m genuinely intrigued to know why Momentum/Corbynistas are so glowing in their praise of a man who has a life long anti-EU agenda, wanted to trigger article 50 the day after the referendum, has totally failed to hold this shambolic governments insane attitude to Brexit to account, and has a personal Brexit agenda that doesn’t seem much different from Boris Johnson’s
Am I missing something?
Do feel free to enlighten me to my misconception of this huge inherent contradiction....
binners reminds me of a ukipper, ranting gammon faced at a low ceilinged country pub. Same rant every night.
Yet no-one will explain the contradiction
makes you think...
The idea that Corbyn wants a hard brexit is utter nonsense – same as the rest of the lies put about by the press about him
he's been very strongly anti-EU for most of his career and every now and again he slips out a comment that confirms he still has this view, or does something sneaky like saying 'a customs union' so that everyone things he wants to stay in 'the customs union' because they haven't noticed the semantic difference.
I am like binners, I can't believe that you guys are naive enough to think that he doesn't.
If he really wanted a soft, or no, brexit then why is he not being very vocal about it which would gain him much greater support than he has now ? unless he is even less competant than I think he is.
I'll leave these here to wind people up...
https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/14/jeremy-corbyn-wants-hard-brexit-labour
I'm sure if you listened you here the explanation. You enjoy the sound of your own voice too much to listen to anyone else.
Yet no-one will explain the contradiction
Its only a contradiction if you are a member of the anti corbyn cult . If you dont its not difficult to see how most momentum and co members can agree with him on some things but disagree on others.
Outside of true cults there really isnt a requirement to agree with the leader on everything.
If May went to the polls now with a promise of a 2nd referendum in her manifesto, she'd get all the right-wing Brexit fanatics (because they'd have no choice but to vote for her) and all the remainers (because they'd want the referendum and will realise by then that Labour are pro-Brexit) and she would sweep to power on a massive majority, and be a victorious PM for the next five years. By the time of the _next_ election, JC would probably have retired, a disappointed man.
anti corbyn cult
What did you call me?
having dipped my toe into this thread - I think I'll back slowly towards the door
As unpopular as it might sound, we need a new Tony Blair.
The people of Britain are not generally enamoured of people that can be made to sound a bit 'extreme'. Party politics is not the same as politics.
Does anybody genuinely think that the Labour Party wouldn't either already be the party of Government, or would be in short order, if David Milliband had been voted to the post rather than his brother ? If not then one would suggest you think about it some more.
Britain is generally quite moderate, you seriously have to play to that.
Apart from the fact that such labour policies as taking trains an utilities back into public ownership are hugely popular. these are positions labour have moved to under Corbyn and would never have under a technocrat like Blair. YOu have to remember that Blair became less and less popular as he tightened control over the party, removed its internal democracy and moved the party to the right
I am certain David Milliband would have met the same fate as his brother as he simply does not have the instincts and positions to engage those on the left.
Under Corbyn labour has become reenergised and has a much bigger active membership.
Labours position on the EU is there if you want to see it. I briefly outlined it above. Its not the position I want to see but the position is there, its been well stated.
Britain is generally quite moderate, you seriously have to play to that.
The current Labour party policies are moderate, so what is the problem.
If he really wanted a soft, or no, brexit then why is he not being very vocal about it which would gain him much greater support than he has now ?
And you are calling other people naive. How do you think coming out with no brexit would go down with the Labour voters who voted brexit? How do you think a hard brexit would go down with Labour voters who voted remain?
Brexit is not party political. It is a game you cannot win (which is why the Tories are finding it so hard) so he is being vague and staying in the middle as his best chance.
Read the article TurnerGuy posted above. Corbyn wants exactly the same as Iain Duncan Smith on Brexit - which right now, politically, and for the forceeable future, is the only game in town.
They may come at it from different directions, but neither of their viewpoints could in any conceivable way be described as ‘moderate’
Hence me repeatedly asking the Corbyn fans how they’re squaring this circle? I’m genuinely interested, as It’s the elephant in the room and a massive inherent contradiction
Another Piece worth reading if you're still harbouring any illusions about where Jezza stands on Brexit
Keir Starmer clashed with Corbyn on Brexit 'to brink of resignation'
https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/negotiating-brexit/
A Labour government will end the uncertainty for our farmers and food producers by securing continued EU market access allowing British farmers and food producers to continue to sell their products on the Continent.
As our trading relationship with the EU changes it is vital that we retain unrestricted access for our goods and services.
Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union.
Sorry - but Labour position just doesn't work. They want freedom of movement of goods but not people. EU have already said no to this.
If not then one would suggest you think about it some more.
Thought about it and its still fantasy. Blairs trick only worked until the traditional voters realised he loathed them. He jumped in time to not be bitten by it. David Milliband wouldnt have done any better.
Also Blair was anything but moderate in several areas. Its just most of them he was aping the tories so it got portrayed as tory since if both parties agree on it then surely its moderate?
Labours policy under Corbyn (such as it is) is exactly the same position as Boris Johnson was advocating...
1. Have cake
2. Eat it
Its complete cloud cuckooland nonsense. How many times do the EU have to repeat that 'the 4 freedoms are indivisible'. But Corbyn knows this is unachievable and would inevitably lead ultimately to a Hard Brexit. But this is what he wants just as much Boris does. For very different reasons, but it doesn't really matter how you get somewhere, does it? Just the fact that you're there.
And the economic calamity of a hard Brexit will be just as catastrophic under a labour government as a Tory one, and would hit the working classes (who labour allegedly represent) the hardest
Ah, but red unicorns comrade.
Corbyn's position on brexit is largely irrelevant. He's not a dictator, he's the leader of a democratic party, and he's trying to make it more democratic. If the party decides to oppose brexit, support it, or something in between, it will be the decision of members, not some autocratic committee. If anyone wants to influence that, the options open to you are obvious.
I just don't understand this obsession with Corbyn and what he may or may not have said in the past or what his position is on this or that. He probably is anti-brexit, I don't think he's the type to change long held principles. The question we should be asking is not whether he's pro or anti brexit, but whether he will try to force through his own opinions against the wishes of the party he leads. Everything I hear from him, and everything he's done since he's become leader suggests that he won't. The battle on brexit within labour is not persuading Corbyn, it's to persuade the party.
Read the Guardian Article about Kier Starmer Daz. I'm sorry, but loads of things like that prove Corbyn is just like any other politician. They're all for democracy until the point where they get into power and it then disagrees with them,. Then suddenly the previous enthusiasm wanes and they go very cold on the principle. He's no different. Except that with him, after all his rebellions, it has the added whiff of rank hypocrisy!
Remember the 3-line whipping of his MP's both to trigger Article 50 and then to scupper the motion for remaining in the Single Market? Oh, the irony. As with every other politician, ignore what they say and watch what they actually do. He's been supportive of Brexit all the way and has had to be railroaded into even the slightest of concessions to the hardest of Brexits
I just don’t understand this obsession with Corbyn and what he may or may not have said in the past or what his position is on this or that.
We have a two horse political system. And one is fit only for glue. So yes, I will take great interest in what the leader of the opposition does / say.
The battle on brexit within labour is not persuading Corbyn, it’s to persuade the party.
The membership is mostly remain. The problem is the voters.
The question we should be asking is not whether he’s pro or anti brexit, but whether he will try to force through his own opinions against the wishes of the party he leads.
He already has done. The split in the Brexit vote was so narrow that if an enthusiastic Remainer was leader of the Labour Party Remain would have won. It inconceivable that the leader of the Labour party couldn't swing 1pc of votes.
Since then he's used the whip to get his MPs to vote the way he wants on Brexit.
You can argue those decisions were right/wrong but you can't argue Corbyn as Leader of the Labour party hasn't made a massive difference, in spite of the views of his party.
I read the Starmer article at the time. I still don't see the issue. Of course Corbyn is going to argue his position and being leader, his arguments inevitably carry more weight, but it doesn't mean he can dictate policy. He has to bring the party with him. If he can't we won't be leader for very long. If the membership keep voting him in despite his brexit stance, then that's their decision and it should be respected.
And as for the 3-line whips, that was inevitable, and the result of political strategy, not Corbyn's personal position. If they hadn't whipped the party, the tories would have howled about how labour weren't respecting 'the will of the people' and trying to block brexit. We've already gone over how labour need leave voting constituencies to win an election so what choice did they have?
It's fair enough if people don't like Corbyn, or disagree with his policies. But really all this cult of personality stuff is fantasy. I don't know anyone who supports Corbyn, either in momentum or not who blindly worships him like is portrayed here and in the media. The only cult in the labour party is the passionate devotion of new members to the project of transforming the party and subsequently the country with a new type of progressive politics. Corbyn's job right now is to sort out the party, the job of sorting out the country will probably be passed to someone else.
Of course Corbyn is going to argue his position and being leader, his arguments inevitably carry more weight, but it doesn’t mean he can dictate policy.
In spite of examples where, rightly or wrongly, he has done precisely that.
And as for the 3-line whips, that was inevitable, and the result of political strategy, not Corbyn’s personal position.
Whether that's true or not it's still an example of Corbyn dictating policy. You can argue it was the right policy, but it was still a choice the leadership can choose to make. A committed remainer would have (perhaps wrongly) made a different choice and whipped the other way.
Corbyn’s job right now is to sort out the party, the job of sorting out the country will probably be passed to someone else.
It has already been passed to someone else.... The Tories. In perpetuity.
The electorate has already made its mind up about 'The Project' and passed judgement. Its decided that this absolute car crash of a government is a safer option.
Just look at this absolute shambles. Has this country ever been in such an unholy mess? Yet the labour party is still trailing in the polls, and seems pathologically incapable of taking advantage of the situation. And to be honest Corbyn and his cabal don't even look that interested in doing so. Lets talk about mandatory re-selections and rural bus services instead, eh?
If you're not 10 - 20 points clear of these idiots, who are a total rabble, fighting each other like rats in a sack, then you're beyond hopeless. You're not fit to be called an opposition. This is a gilt-edged opportunity. Its never going to be easier. If you can't do it now, you never ever will
Apart from the fact that such labour policies as taking trains an utilities back into public ownership are hugely popular
Well yes and no.
people want to think that they can take back control of the trains and utilities then the price for both will drop, everything will become efficient and they will benefit massively.
the reality is taking them back will cost significant cash to nationalise them then bribing them up to the standard that people imagine they should be will take tens of billions in investments and updates, millions in ongoing subsidies and decades of work.
now by the time any progress has been made the massive costs will have made the public angry and they will be shunted off to the private sector in order to recoup some cash.
would it benefit the population, maybe. Will it be done, probably not. For any decent progress to be made a politician needs to stand up and say you will have to pay considerably more tax for decades, while having poor service and reduced benefits to get the payout for your kids. No politicians have said this apart from the Brexi ones recently.
we are a nimby country that doesn’t want to pay for progress
If people actually voted for the things they say they'd vote for then the Tory party would never ever have won an election
The electorate has already made its mind up about ‘The Project’ and passed judgement. Its decided that this absolute car crash of a government is a safer option.
They did? When?
Was that a couple of years back when, at the time, the government was seen as a superbly capable set of hands. Something which only disappeared after the less than stellar results at the polls. Remember May only called the election since it was forecast to be a massacre.
Perhaps though if you "moderate" types hadnt been busy attacking Corbyn and trying to create a self fulfilling prophecy that he is unelectable it might have ended up differently.
You dont seem capable to learning the lesson though. I do wonder what makes someone dedicate themselves so heavily to attacking Corbyn and so aiding the hard right. Is it because you no longer have a political party dancing to your minority views?
One of the big problems for Labour is that Brexit is dominating - it's using up all the political oxygen. Labour are stuck in a position where they cannot please the remainers/ second referendum or hard core brexiters. Labour members are overwhelmingly remainers but lots of traditional labour voters are hardcore brexiters. I have a feeling that this is impacting the polls as Labour dither in the middle.
There is actually a really good debate on economic ideology and policy to be had between Lab and Tory which just isn't happening. On the back of the conference season all the non-tabloid press said that the Labour offering was interesting, coherent and new ( and dangerous from Telegraph etc which is a compliment) - but not more debate came from it because of bastard Brexit.