Forum menu
Labour centrist MPs queuing up to publicly stab their own leader in the back (didn't one actually boast that they would be happy to stab him in the front?)
Yup, it was Jess Phillips.
Their attacks on Corbyn were totally open, public, and brazen, and huge gift to the Tories.
Two years after Phillips made that comment Corbyn robbed the Tories of their comfortable majority by launching an election manifesto that both inspired people and gave them hope.
So the centrists redoubled their efforts, particularly in the accusations that he is a racist, and the rest is history.
Second, this "I want a person of the people as leader" stuff might fall into the category of "things that people bullshit to themselves and others about".
It goes back to needing reform in the way things are run. We need ”somebody of the people" to keep the elites in check, and to represent the interests of the people, but the interests of the people also intersect with that which is brought about through the powerful and wealthy, corporations, military, etc. The current competition to have one or the other is not in our interests. I can't imagine how a more collaborative governing system that balances the poles of needs more fairly would work. I know little about how the existing (sprawling?) system functions. Maybe AI could help with that 😬
AI? Put more analysis and decisionmaking in the hands of opaque tools controlled by unaccountable tech billionaires? Kinell, I'd rather have the country run by a junta of STW forum Big Hitters...
100% anecdotal but speaking to a bunch of people down my local pub in the last few days I'm somewhat surprised that pretty much everyone I know from a left leaning political viewpoint - who mostly voted Labour last election - has signed up to join Your* Party. Some of them have resigned as Labour members to do so. Who knows if this is typical outside this small Pennine town but it indicates a significant bleeding of grassroots support from Labour. Maybe there's something to this new part after all?
*Whatever it ends up being called.
Some of them have resigned as Labour members to do so.
Whilst I can understand many existing and former Labour Party activists being attracted to the new party I don't see many of Corbyn's former allies in the Labour Party willing to jump, in fact the complete opposite.
Corbyn himself would today still be a loyal Labour Party member had he not had the party whip removed. John O'Donnell, Diane Abbott, and Andrew Fisher, all very loyal Corbyn supporters, for example, have said they are staying put.
Obviously that might change in time as things develop but don't underestimate the commitment of Lefties in the Labour Party who have lived through all the New Labour years and still desperately hold onto this wonderful dream that they can one day return Labour to its socialist roots
don't underestimate the commitment of Lefties in the Labour Party who have lived through all the New Labour years and still desperately hold onto this wonderful dream that they can one day return Labour to its socialist roots
I don't really know what they're waiting for. It's plain for all to see that the Labour Party is now a barrier to change rather a vehicle for it. I can only assume that the likes of McDonnell, Abbott et al are worried they can't replicate Corbyn's success in winning their seats against a Labour candidate. Either that or it's a simple case of spite that they refuse to leave a party which so obviously wants them out.
I have no doubt that Diane Abbott could easily win against a Labour Party candidate, support for her in her constituency is at least as much as Corbyn's probably more.
Her nearest rival by far at the last election was the Green Party so she would not be disadvantaged being part of a red-green alliance.
I am afraid that it is just a deep commitment to the Labour Party imo. I guess that when you have spent a lifetime pushing back at the right-wing of the Labour Party giving up and throwing the towel in doesn't come easy.
I am afraid that it is just a deep commitment to the Labour Party imo. I guess that when you have spent a lifetime pushing back at the right-wing of the Labour Party giving up and throwing the towel in doesn't come easy.
Yeah I guess they don't want to hand the rightwingers the 'victory' they obviously want. Time to put pride aside though IMO and get on with it. The longer they stay in the Labour party the more their credibility diminishes. Sharing a party platform with the likes of Paul Mason is not a good look.
I can only assume that the likes of McDonnell, Abbott et al are worried they can't replicate Corbyn's success in winning their seats against a Labour candidate. Either that or it's a simple case of spite that they refuse to leave a party which so obviously wants them out.
Wikipedia says that John McDonnell is an independent MP, not a Labour Party one. Is that out of date now?
Maybe Abbott feels that she can serve her constituents better by keeping the administrative machinery of the LP behind her while still speaking out and voting with her principles? I don't know exactly what is involved with running a constituency office and a parliamentary office, but I can imagine it is a lot of running around. I can see why it would seem like a big distraction even if it seems like a compromise politically. IDK - just suggesting it. Also - "spite" may be a bit harsh. Stubbornness or commitment are strong political tools sometimes.
Abbott, McDonnell and Corbyn are all in their 70s now. Surely at this stage of their careers they’re not thinking of standing again as MPs in 2029 when there are other forms of political action and leadership?
Corbyn seems just as energetic and sharp as ever (fair play to him - I hope I'm doing half as well as him at his age), and tbf what he has said about Your Party does seem to be about building something beyond him. Abbott, in the nicest way possible, doesn't seem to at as high a peak as she was in the past, and I don't know enough of McDonnell to speak.
Abbott, McDonnell and Corbyn are all in their 70s now. Surely at this stage of their careers they’re not thinking of standing again as MPs in 2029 when there are other forms of political action and leadership?
Oh absolutely this new party needs younger blood (it's a shame Polanski is already in the Green Party). The big beasts of the Labour left like McDonnell and Abbott will bring many supporters and activists with them, not to mention vast experience of running a parliamentary office and campaigns. I'd say most of the benefit though is optics. Doesn't look good if Corbyn's closest allies don't come with him.
Wikipedia says that John McDonnell is an independent MP, not a Labour Party one. Is that out of date now?
He is a member of the Labour Party but has had the Labour whip removed, same as Diane Abbott.
In terms of the new party needing younger leaders that is precisely the reason for the joint Corbyn- Sultana co-leadership. Sultana might be good but she is firstly very inexperienced as a politician and secondly doesn't have the level of recognition that Starmer has
And remember that whilst Corbyn will 80 next general election he is nevertheless the most popular politician with the under 25s. It might seem counterintuitive but Magic Grandad actually attracts younger supporters the very people who are vital for a new movement/party. He suits his moniker well.
Even with that 2.5M drop it was still better than Brown, Miliband, and Starmer, managed.
But he still lost and lost badly, which is all that really matters. You cant do anything in opposition
You cant do anything in opposition
Bit of a dilemma - is it better to have an opposition doing the right thing, or a government doing the wrong thing ?
Who on earth could have predicted the sheer level of vitriol directly by right-wing Labour MPs against the party leader who was overwhelming backed by Labour Party members?
My own politics is about where Corbyn is on lots of things, and I think Corbyn has singlehandedly done more damage to the average punter's view of left-wing politics than all the vitriol poured out by the RW press over the years, most of which after all was cartoonish, simply by being pointlessly, repeatedly self-inflectedly* inept on the national stage. (Badenoch is busy doing the same for Conservatism currently) I don't blame the press for doing what it did, it was always going to behave like that. I hold Corbyn responsible for his shambling failure to hold himself, or any of his leadership team accountable when it was clear to anyone in the party that he should have gone after 2017 (Hubris on a massive scale by his 'leadership team' which became comically authoritarian afterwards). It was clear from about 2 minutes in that he wasn't leadership material, and the longer he clung on, the clearer it became to everyone. I'm as happy to blame Starmer for his failures of leadership as I am to blame Corbyn for his, and Corbyn's were legion. He should retire off to his Allotment and leave the next generation to get on with repairing the damage he's left behind.
*not a word
Even with that 2.5M drop it was still better than Brown, Miliband, and Starmer, managed.
But he still lost and lost badly, which is all that really matters. You cant do anything in opposition
Well it was you who brought up the issue of a drop of 2.5m Labour votes in 2019, not me, and which is meaningless without context.
So I am giving it context. The drop of 2.5m which you refer to was in relation to the 12.9m that Corbyn managed to get for Labour in the 2017 general election.
And those 12.9m Labour votes in 2017 were the largest amount of votes that Labour has received since the 1997 general election, more than Tony Blair managed to get in the 2001 and 2005 general elections.
So a drop of 2.5m votes might sound like a lot, which is presumably why you drew attention to it, but it isn't that much when your point of reference is actually the highest amount of Labour votes in 30 years
And as for your claim that you can't do "anything" in opposition, nonsense, the poll tax was defeated and Margret Thatcher sacked because of effective opposition. Theresa May declared austerity over due to effective opposition from Jeremy Corbyn.
Effective opposition can be, well, you know, effective. In fact better "effective opposition" than winning a general election and then doing exactly what the previous shower of ****s did ........IMHO
He should retire off to his Allotment and leave the next generation to get on with repairing the damage he's left behind.
I strongly suspect that's exactly what he's planning to do. Strange take though, lets not forget that despite his shortcomings and mistakes (show me a politician who doesn't have any) much of the abuse and criticism he endured was at the hands of people who would normally be expected to accept his democratic mandate and get behind him, and their failure to do that empowered and enabled his political opponents in other parties. Forgive the analogy but it sounds a bit like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt.
I assume also that given Starmer's evident shortcomings, you think he too should accept reality and resign in favour of someone more palatable to the electorate?
And as for your claim that you can't do "anything" in opposition, nonsense, the poll tax was defeated and Margret Thatcher sacked because of effective opposition. Theresa May declared austerity over due to effective opposition from Jeremy Corbyn.
Thatcher went because of Europe and being stabbed in the back by her own MPs, specifically Howe and hesletine. May would have declared austerity over anyway as it was her pr spin.
Thatcher went because of Europe and being stabbed in the back by her own MPs, specifically Howe and hesletine.
Of course it was nothing to do with the massive and ridiculously effective campaign against the poll tax did it? She was stabbed in the back by her MPs as a direct result of opposition pressure and subsequent success in polls which indicated she would lose an election. Trying to claim that Thatcher's downfall had nothing to do with the opposition is plain daft.
So why did Kinnock not romp to victory in 1992, then?
Err, because Thatcher was no longer PM?
So well-known barnstorming political whirlwind John Major outshone Kinnock?
So why did Kinnock not romp to victory in 1992, then?
And Danny hits the nail on the head !
For the last 40 odd years the British electorate has been desperate for change. Voters don't appear to have any firm ideological commitment or vision concerning this change but it is a rejection of the status quo.
Thatcher initially promised some sort of revolution in which everyone would become billionaires, after 10 years of mass unemployment and crumbling services she ran out of steam and became a liability to the Tories as voters increasingly wanted change.
The Tory Party's response was to eventually sack her and repackage themselves under a new leader. No need to vote Labour in 1992 voters could have change under the new improved formula Tory Party offered by John Major.
Only of course no change occurred and unsurprisingly 5 years later Labour won a huge landslide victory with 13.5m votes. Almost immediately support for Labour fell and it wasn't until 2017, twenty years later, that Labour started to enjoy the same level of support as they had in the 1990s.
Voters want change, that is what the last general election was all about, and it will be what the next general election will be all about.
So well-known barnstorming political whirlwind John Major outshone Kinnock?
You do realise who won a landslide victory a year ago don't you ?
Admittedly Labour's most charisma-free leader ever wasn't up against much but his trump card was that he offered "change".
There was no need for Starmer to be a barnstorming political whirlwind to win a landslide victory.
Well, I'm sure the return of Corbyn will have Brexit Britain confessing its sins, realising its mistakes and embracing socialism en masse.
Well if missing the point was a skill you would be a master craftsman.
Unlike when he was leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn won't necessarily have to garner approximately 40% of the vote to have any influence on government policy.
Quite possibly just 15% of the vote, which one pollster has already put the new party on even before its launch was formally announced, could possibly be sufficient to get Corbyn, or another representative of the party, sitting on the government front benches in the House of Commons.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/politics/uk-politics/corbyn-sultana-party-labour-polling/
In such a scenario Corbyn's Party wouldn't be tremendously weaker than the Labour Party.
And it could be the basis of a Labour-Green-Corbyn-SNP-PC coalition government blocking a Reform-Tory alternative.
Has the senile old git even managed to come up with a name for this new party yet? 🤣
Deep Red? Red Reform?
Must be a bit worrying that a senile old git who can't even figure out what to call his party is already looking like getting as many votes as Starmer's Labour party?
Have you also counted how many chickens he's got based on the number of eggs at his allotment?
Have you even counted how many straws you are desperately clinging to?
Quite possibly just 15% of the vote, which one pollster has already put the new party on even before its launch was formally announced, could possibly be sufficient to get Corbyn, or another representative of the party, sitting on the government front benches in the House of Commons with a Reform government.
FTFY.
Has the senile old git even managed to come up with a name for this new party yet?
Simply Red?
Has the senile old git even managed to come up with a name for this new party yet? 🤣
Good point well made, there aren't enough grown-up questions like that one on this thread, it deserves an answer.
I hear that the senile old git won't be deciding on the name of his new party ! 🤣
Have you also counted how many chickens he's got based on the number of eggs at his allotment?
Also a good point. UK opinion polls margin of error is considered to be +/- 3% so I am sure there is nothing for Labour to worry about if a poll puts both themselves and a Corbyn led party on 15%
Besides, the general election isn't for another four years so that I am sure that with Labour's growing popularity everything will be alright on the night, and that talk which suggests that Sir Keir Starmer could be the first Prime Minister in UK history to lose his seat in a general election are nothing to worry about.
I think the 'centrists' need to take a wee minute to regather themselves.
This has probably been the most incompetent launch of a party in living memory. And Corbyn is Corbyn. And yet despite all this they are still potentially just as popular as Starmer's Labour. What's going to happen if they find a name to call themselves?
How about a song while you consider your next witty comeback?
This has probably been the most incompetent launch of a party in living memory.
Oh I don't know, when was the last time a party was launched and within days they had 600,000 people, about twice as many as the Labour Party membership,.signed up?
I reckon that the organic and somewhat chaotic feel of the party rather than a slick professional PR exercise might actually be part of its appeal and strength.
Labour (who dreamt up that name btw?) perhaps offers a more professional and less amateurish political presentation but its single greatest problem is its disconnection with its voters.
Excited messy shenanigans launch of a party = whatever. Still looking positive.
Yet the most disasterous first year for a Labour government with such a massive opportunity wasted, that centrists actually voted for = total and utter collapse of the Labour party's lead and they've not even begun.
Of course there are parallels.
Seriously clutching at straws. A bit of reflection at the state of your spreadsheets?
Oh I don't know, when was the last time a party was launched and within days they had 600,000 people, about twice as many as the Labour Party membership,.signed up?
I reckon that the organic and somewhat chaotic feel of the party rather than a slick professional PR exercise might actually be part of its appeal and strength.
In software this is known as reclassifying a bug as a feature 🙂
Hey, if they are still looking for a name maybe they could call themselves Change UK? As far as I remember no political party has ever used that particular name...
Ere mattyfez, Sebastian Murphy in the Daily Express apparently shares your mocking ridicule :
“Thank Christ Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana are here to give us a laugh,” wrote Sebastian Murphy in the Daily Express. “Labour’s loopy Left have bravely broken free of Starmer’s stultification to bring us a political party that is easily the funniest thing since the anti-Brexit centrists Change UK.”
The article makes an interesting point :
A radical party with a highly divisive leader, thrown-together structure and frequent internal rows already exists, and it’s called Reform. Its poll lead suggests that voters are less interested than journalists in party processes.
easily the funniest thing since the anti-Brexit centrists Change UK.
And yet that Daily Express columnist shares your disdain for anti-Brexit centrists.
Funny old world, eh?
And Sir Keir Starmer a committed zionist shares my disdain at the sight of starving children in Gaza.
'Tis indeed a funny ol' world Danny
And yet that Daily Express columnist shares your disdain for anti-Brexit centrists.
Funny old world, eh?
Being committed to rejoining the EU was good.
Being committed to failed neoliberal policies was not and was the primary reason for their rapid disappearance into the abyss.
Labour are currently going through the same process only at a slightly slower pace (whilst also being Brexiteers so at least the Daily Express can approve of that).
And Sir Keir Starmer a committed zionist shares my disdain at the sight of starving children in Gaza
Well, he says he does. And don't forget that "Israel does have that right" to cut off food and water.
Starmer probably means that he doesn't like the sight of children being deliberately starved on the telly.
Which I guess is still something that me and him can both agree on. I tend to look away or flick to another channel.