Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Labour Leadership Contest 2016 watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Who would you vote for - Jeremy Corbyn or Owen Smith?
    Results hidden until poll closes.

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aliccam)
    This is all just a bunch of personal assumptions, about electability
    Nope. Corbyn is the most unpopular opposition leader since polling began, and today we know Labour in this parliament has the worst polling of any opposition. No opposition has ever come back from this far behind to win the election. Corbyn is ****, everybody knows it. By denying it you just confirm the perception of you as cultists.

    There is already a centre left party the Liberal Democrats
    The liberal democrats aren't a centre-left party, they're a centre-party. Though I'm not surprised to hear you say that; Corbyn supporters are the kind of idiots who voted Lib Dem in 2010 and Green in 2015, in both cases thinking they were some kind of credible force for social democratic politics.

    As for a split, I don't think it will result in less. The vast majority of the 172 will resign their seats to re-stand as independents or under some kind of "independent Labour", causing 172 simultaneous byelections. There is a huge hunger out there for a serious, electable alternative to the Tories. Labour under Corbyn is incapable of providing that, and so the 172 will be re-elected, leaving Corbyn with a rump of 30 or 40. Eventually the rump will whither, and the trade unions will demand the hard left rump submit to the moderates or they will take their money elsewhere.

    In any case, if a split will be so bad, then Corbyn should step down to prevent it. But we know that he and McDonnell have said they will split the party before giving up power (well, I should say giving up office; they don't have any actual power and never will). That's because they don't care about winning government so Tory policies can be reversed; what they truly care about is taking permanent control of the Labour Party.

    If a split is to be painful, so be it. In the longer term it's better for the country and more likely to bring about a centre-left government than clinging to the political carcass that is the Labour Party. If Corbyn can't even win over formerly fanatically loyal party and trade union officers like me, he has no chance of winning the country (and maybe you should ask why he was so keen to antagonise us, party moderates, with idiotic stunts like going to the Stop the War Coalition dinner?)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Nope. Corbyn is the most unpopular opposition leader since polling began, and today we know Labour in this parliament has the worst polling of any opposition. No opposition has ever come back from this far behind to win the election. Corbyn is ****, everybody knows it. By denying it you just confirm the perception of you as cultists.
    Historic polling has no bearing on what is happening. No other party leader has been attacked so much by his own PLP and factions of the party. If it stops he and the Party are very likely to recover in the polls unless too much damage has already been done.

    As for a split, I don't think it will result in less. The vast majority of the 172 will resign their seats to re-stand as independents or under some kind of "independent Labour", causing 172 simultaneous byelections. There is a huge hunger out there for a serious, electable alternative to the Tories. Labour under Corbyn is incapable of providing that, and so the 172 will be re-elected, leaving Corbyn with a rump of 30 or 40. Eventually the rump will whither, and the trade unions will demand the hard left rump submit to the moderates or they will take their money elsewhere.
    I very much doubt under your scenario if even 60 MPs would risk resigning their seats. Each seat would be contested by Labour so splitting the vote even if the sitting MP somehow managed to get more of it. In seats where they were even remotely marginal they would lose.

    In any case, if a split will be so bad, then Corbyn should step down to prevent it. But we know that he and McDonnell have said they will split the party before giving up power (well, I should say giving up office; they don't have any actual power and never will). That's because they don't care about winning government so Tory policies can be reversed; what they truly care about is taking permanent control of the Labour Party.
    McDonnell was only responding to Owen Smith suggesting that the PLP might try to split the party. He was not suggesting it, it has just be spun to sound that way. Corbyn does want to win, even if you think he can't. Why should Corbyn take the fall for a split he has not created?

    If a split is to be painful, so be it. In the longer term it's better for the country and more likely to bring about a centre-left government than clinging to the political carcass that is the Labour Party. If Corbyn can't even win over formerly fanatically loyal party and trade union officers like me, he has no chance of winning the country (and maybe you should ask why he was so keen to antagonise us, party moderates, with idiotic stunts like going to the Stop the War Coalition dinner?)
    I don't know how you can claim to be loyal, when you talk about splitting the party, especially over something as petty as him going to a STWC dinner. He was was heading it up until he was elected leader, he is actually showing loyalty to his old associates, rather than casting them aside on a whim. If you are a real Labour supporter and union officer you should be able to recognise that Corbyn's policies are not especially left wing and certainly not much different to the one's Owen Smith is touting. Labour members like you should not be destroying the party without even putting forward honest and substantial alternatives.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aliccam)
    Historic polling has no bearing on what is happening
    Historical polling absolutely bears on this. No opposition has ever come back from this far behind to win an election, if you think he will then you're delusional. Ed Miliband was 12 points ahead for most of the parliament, and personally much more popular than Corbyn, and still went on to lose. Corbyn has no chance and it is sad how you are so contemptuous of reality. If you don't admit there's a problem, how can you fix it?

    recover in the polls
    Oh dear, you are so gullible. Corbyn was never at level pegging in the polls, he's always been significantly behind. It's quite funny how Corbynista are so credulous that if some Momentum hack tweets that Corbyn was level pegging the Tories in the polls then it must be true.

    I very much doubt under your scenario if even 60 MPs would risk resigning their seats. Each seat would be contested by Labour so splitting the vote
    Actually they'll all "risk" it when they get deselected later in the parliament. At that point they have absolutely nothing to lose. Corbyn is such a moron he doesn't realise how much he is risking the end of the party by supporting reselection. As for splitting the vote, many of these MPs are popular and all of them will enjoy the advantages of incumbency, as well as likely pick up votes from lib dems and moderate Tories (as well as those who want to make trouble for the Labour Party). The effect of 172 of them resigning at once means this new Labour faction will get massive coverage in what will almost be a mini-general election of Corbyn against the moderates. I place my money on the moderates when it is the general public who get to decide.

    McDonnell was only responding to Owen Smith suggesting that the PLP might try to split the party.
    And he said he'd be willing to split the party, if it came to that. End of.

    I don't know how you can claim to be loyal, when you talk about splitting the party, especially over something as petty as him going to a STWC dinner.
    I don't know if you're not very bright or you're being dishonest. Who said I was talking about splitting over the STWC dinner only? That was a perfect example of where Corbyn deliberately antagonised the moderates who pleaded with him not to go. He made his bed, now he sleeps in it.

    If you are a real Labour supporter and union officer you should be able to recognise that Corbyn's policies are not especially left wing and certainly not much different to the one's Owen Smith is touting. Labour members like you should not be destroying the party without even putting forward honest and substantial alternatives.
    It's not Corbyn's economic policies that I disagree with (for the most part, some of them are particularly idiotic but for the most part they are salvageabe). It's his decades of associations with groups that call for all Jews worldwide to be killed. It's his repeatedly befriending people who want gays to be put to death. It's his utter incompetence and total unsuitability for the job,
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Historical polling absolutely bears on this. No opposition has ever come back from this far behind to win an election, if you think he will then you're delusional. Ed Miliband was 12 points ahead for most of the parliament, and personally much more popular than Corbyn, and still went on to lose. Corbyn has no chance and it is sad how you are so contemptuous of reality. If you don't admit there's a problem, how can you fix it?
    This situation has never occurred on this scale before. There is a problem, but it is with the failure of the PLP to support their leader. Something [though it shouldn't have been necessary) is being done, another leadership election, which Corbyn is going to win with possibly an even larger majority. There is a reasonable chance that it will be enough some of the more sensible members of the PLP to get behind him. If they continue to ignore the membership, then it is very likely Labour will lose the next election, through nothing more than its own stupid fault.



    Oh dear, you are so gullible. Corbyn was never at level pegging in the polls, he's always been significantly behind. It's quite funny how Corbynista are so credulous that if some Momentum hack tweets that Corbyn was level pegging the Tories in the polls then it must be true.
    I didn't say anything about level pegging, I just said about polls improving. Corbyn supporters are not a tribe, cult or group that all think and behave the same. They are just ordinary people who are fed up with the self interested politicians we have had to put up with for years, who have encouraged things to get to the current level of inequality, and are peddling the myth that austerity somehow works.



    Actually they'll all "risk" it when they get deselected later in the parliament. At that point they have absolutely nothing to lose. Corbyn is such a moron he doesn't realise how much he is risking the end of the party by supporting reselection. As for splitting the vote, many of these MPs are popular and all of them will enjoy the advantages of incumbency, as well as likely pick up votes from lib dems and moderate Tories (as well as those who want to make trouble for the Labour Party). The effect of 172 of them resigning at once means this new Labour faction will get massive coverage in what will almost be a mini-general election of Corbyn against the moderates. I place my money on the moderates when it is the general public who get to decide.
    Corbyn has never suggested reselection. he has only ever pointed out that it will occur naturally with the boundary changes. If all the 172 resigned, even though they won't, the public would look at not just them, but the whole Labour party as a joke, and loads of them would lose out to an anyone but Labour reaction. Corbyn supporters unlike those against him are not in denial about the damage that is being inflicted on the party, but see the alternative of simply more of the same type of government being perpetuated as even worse.

    I don't know if you're not very bright or you're being dishonest. Who said I was talking about splitting over the STWC dinner only? That was a perfect example of where Corbyn deliberately antagonised the moderates who pleaded with him not to go. He made his bed, now he sleeps in it.
    It is quite a silly reason to get in a huff. Isn't being anti-war a good thing? I know Blair won with a pro-war stance but I don't think most voters still see that as having been a good idea.

    It's not Corbyn's economic policies that I disagree with (for the most part, some of them are particularly idiotic but for the most part they are salvageabe). It's his decades of associations with groups that call for all Jews worldwide to be killed. It's his repeatedly befriending people who want gays to be put to death. It's his utter incompetence and total unsuitability for the job,
    You bang on about these associations as if he was writing their manifestos for them or is somehow responsible for their worst actions. He made four Iranian TV appearances, he did not endorse in any way what they are doing and you know that. A lot of the public don't even know anything about Hamas or Iran and are highly unlikely to base their vote on it. Tony Blair bombed and killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and still got elected.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.