A Sadiq Khan win in London would expose the failings of Jeremy Corbyn Watch

ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
With Oldham, Corbyn lead labour was doomed to loose badly according to the naysayers. A sure sign Corbyn was leading the labour party into oblivion that he would loose a red stronghold. Then labour increased majority and instead of being a sign of things to come the election didn't really mean that much either way after all. But now we are skipping that process altogether and moving up a level. :yes:

Not only do winning not mean much in the grand scheme of things, winning elections actually prophecies failure. For you see, a London Mayoral win for labour would be disastrous for the party. Nothing predicts electrical doom like wining elections. What's next? "Corbyn win in 2020 would be a disaster for Corbyn" headlines? :rofl:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/d...-jeremy-corbyn

"The election of a Mayor Khan would give Corbyn something to cheer about, but his party something sobering to reflect on too. It would send a larger message about the state of Labour, one that would be heard far beyond the boundaries of the capital. That message would say that a Labour politician who is savvy, practical and paints a persuasive picture of beneficial change can win power from a left-of-centre platform no matter what muck Conservatives throw at him. Corbyn would not find comparisons flattering."

Alright then. Lets do that. Lets replace Corbyn with a someone like Khan, get rid of all the problematic "don't shoot terrorists", dodgy IRA past stuff and lead labour from a centre left platform that Corbyn is already for the most part standing on. But being clones of the Tories is not leading from a centre left platform at all, which is all I can see the so called Blairites wanting to do.


But who knows? Maybe Khan will loose. That will mean Corbyn is doing fine surely and will totally not be used against him? After all, we seem to be living in bizarro land.
3
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
I think looking at the mayoral elections as a sign of Corbyn's success or failure is a bit stupid. Boris Johnson winning in 08 was a sign of absolutely nothing. The best indicator will be in May and even that is flawed. All this is academic anyway, there is no figure in the Labour party willing to challenge him. Some less hysterical coverage of British politics right now would be nice.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#3
(Original post by Aj12)
I think looking at the mayoral elections as a sign of Corbyn's success or failure is a bit stupid. Boris Johnson winning in 08 was a sign of absolutely nothing. The best indicator will be in May and even that is flawed. All this is academic anyway, there is no figure in the Labour party willing to challenge him. Some less hysterical coverage of British politics right now would be nice.
But it either matters or it doesn't. OP is more a response to the people who are using these elections to bash corbyn with when he looses, but then take the neutral stance of "it doesn't really mean much" when he does win. Now they are now even saying a win is a bad sign! It's either a test. In which case wins prove them wrong. Or like you say, it really isn't that clear what it means, if it means much at all.

I don;t like when people just self servingly warp whatever happens to fit their preferred narrative and throw any kind of consistency out the window. It makes them look dishonest and why should I listen to anything they say? So when they say they would like a center left Khan clone to lead labour in place of Corbyn I don't believe them. I don;t believe that they would support Corbyn's economic policies even if they were electable with a different leader. I think a lot of the people in the labour party are ideologically against it. They say that in a perfect world we would run with that but it isn't electable so you should run with us. Whilst I think a lot are sincere I think others are just liars that begrudgingly know they have to win support form the centre and left of the party.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
(It's lose not loose!)

I read that article and thought it was pretty stupid.

That said all the evidence shows tgat labour is in trouble. Corbyn is the same as Farage or Enoch Powell in that he is highly popular but not broadly popular and certainly more popular in Islington than in the north for example or the South East.

It's worth pointing out that in the Oldham by election that it was not only a safe labour seat but that the winning candidate was a Liz Kendall, trident supporter who told Corbyn not to come and visit.

I think that Corbyn has certainly shifted the overall position on the economy and maybe even trident. That said I think he needs to go if labour is to have any chance of being in government.
1
reply
KimKallstrom
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
Who genuinely said that Labour was "going to lose badly" in Oldham? Point us to an example please. It's one of the safest seats in the country with only UKIP any threat to get more than like 18 votes. For Labour not to win it by an absolute landslide like every election would have been a disaster. So you can't really call that a success or an example of commentators getting it wrong anything lol; don't even try it.
1
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
Noone thought labour were going to lose in Oldham... What a ridiculous statement.

I don't think the mayorals are a good reflection of party politics as it is more a popularity contest between two individuals. That being said I think Zac will probably win anyway.

The local elections will be a greater indicator of how Corbyn is doing.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by KimKallstrom)
Who genuinely said that Labour was "going to lose badly" in Oldham? Point us to an example please. It's one of the safest seats in the country with only UKIP any threat to get more than like 18 votes. For Labour not to win it by an absolute landslide like every election would have been a disaster. So you can't really call that a success or an example of commentators getting it wrong anything lol; don't even try it.
He didn't call it a success did he?
A bit of common sense on your behalf could have also figured by 'lose badly' he meant take a big hit to their majority, rather than taking a literal meaning.
All the predictions going into that by-election were that UKIP would run Labour very close and maybe even win it.
The headlines were waiting to say how a bad result would be entirely Corbyn's fault. Yet when Labour won comfortably, all those who were saying it was a big test, suddenly said it didn't matter at all and told us nothing.


You're right in that all that happened was Labour held a safe seat, but why when it looked like Labour might lose/be run close it was entirely to do with Corbyn, yet when Labour held firm, it had nothing to do with him?

That's the big inconsistency.
Either Corbyn is responsible for the result or not. You can't pick and choose.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by Davij038)
(It's lose not loose!)

I read that article and thought it was pretty stupid.

That said all the evidence shows tgat labour is in trouble. Corbyn is the same as Farage or Enoch Powell in that he is highly popular but not broadly popular and certainly more popular in Islington than in the north for example or the South East.

It's worth pointing out that in the Oldham by election that it was not only a safe labour seat but that the winning candidate was a Liz Kendall, trident supporter who told Corbyn not to come and visit.

I think that Corbyn has certainly shifted the overall position on the economy and maybe even trident. That said I think he needs to go if labour is to have any chance of being in government.
Aye. The point is though, that either Corbyn is responsible for the result or he isn't. Rather that the current approach which would hold him responsible if Labour loses but say it has nothing to do with him if Labour wins.

It's inconsistency to suit a narrative.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Bornblue)
Aye. The point is though, that either Corbyn is responsible for the result or he isn't. Rather that the current approach which would hold him responsible if Labour loses but say it has nothing to do with him if Labour wins.

It's inconsistency to suit a narrative.
I think it's more of a case of being an underlying factor than being an outright reason in itself.

Labour wasn't in the best of shape for 2015 but the perceived weakness of ed Miliband probably didn't help.



Sadiq was very clear on LBC that he disagrees with Corbyn on some issues and will 'put London first' as it were.


I do agree that Corbyn is essentially damned no matter what he does which is all the more reason for him to go.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by Davij038)
I think it's more of a case of being an underlying factor than being an outright reason in itself.

Labour wasn't in the best of shape for 2015 but the perceived weakness of ed Miliband probably didn't help.



Sadiq was very clear on LBC that he disagrees with Corbyn on some issues and will 'put London first' as it were.


I do agree that Corbyn is essentially damned no matter what he does which is all the more reason for him to go.
True.
I think it will depend on how the May elections do. If Labour do as badly as expected I think he will go.

Be an interesting set of elections for sure.
0
reply
xxvine
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by KimKallstrom)
Who genuinely said that Labour was "going to lose badly" in Oldham? Point us to an example please. It's one of the safest seats in the country with only UKIP any threat to get more than like 18 votes. For Labour not to win it by an absolute landslide like every election would have been a disaster. So you can't really call that a success or an example of commentators getting it wrong anything lol; don't even try it.
Sky and The Daily Mail were saying the may lose the seat
0
reply
KimKallstrom
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by xxvine)
Sky and The Daily Mail were saying the may lose the seat
I can't speak for Sky but the Daily Mail articles are all still online so I've had the opportunity to have a look at a few in light of your claim. Just as I suspected, none of them say that. They just say Labour's majority might be get hit hard. Hardly the same thing.....
0
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by Bornblue)
True.
I think it will depend on how the May elections do. If Labour do as badly as expected I think he will go.

Be an interesting set of elections for sure.
It's a really weird position knowing I'd better serve my political wishes by not voting for labour. Genuineley considering not voting.

Ill probs cave and vote labour though.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by redferry)
It's a really weird position knowing I'd better serve my political wishes by not voting for labour. Genuineley considering not voting.

Ill probs cave and vote labour though.
It depends on the candidate and for me that's been the case since I started. I wouldn't voted for somebody I didn't like even if I agreed 100% with the party.

Talk to the candidate- if they're a moron go to the next best option and so on and if they're all rubbish don't bother.
0
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by Davij038)
It depends on the candidate and for me that's been the case since I started. I wouldn't voted for somebody I didn't like even if I agreed 100% with the party.

Talk to the candidate- if they're a moron go to the next best option and so on and if they're all rubbish don't bother.
See Im active enough in the Labour party to know my local councillors. All really loveley, talk to them a lot. Part of the reason I'll probably end up voting, I feel too mean not doing so, like I couldn't look them in the eye again also I poured too much blood sweat and tears into the party last election to not vote for them. I will be withdrawing my campaigning assistance instead.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by redferry)
It's a really weird position knowing I'd better serve my political wishes by not voting for labour. Genuineley considering not voting.

Ill probs cave and vote labour though.
As will I.
Not out of support for labour, out of hatred for the Tories and everything they stand for.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by redferry)
See Im active enough in the Labour party to know my local councillors. All really loveley, talk to them a lot. Part of the reason I'll probably end up voting, I feel too mean not doing so, like I couldn't look them in the eye again also I poured too much blood sweat and tears into the party last election to not vote for them. I will be withdrawing my campaigning assistance instead.
Likewise.

I may campaign though time willing. I'm in the South east and all of the labour candidates are Pretty shell shocked to put it mildly and note that the few local members who voted Corbyn generally did little to no canvassing where they would have seen how the oblivious would respond to Corbyn. All of them voted Kendall .

I think Corbyn has opened up a new economic narrative which I support strongly but that man is too toxic by far.
0
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by Davij038)
Likewise.

I may campaign though time willing. I'm in the South east and all of the labour candidates are Pretty shell shocked to put it mildly and note that the few local members who voted Corbyn generally did little to no canvassing where they would have seen how the oblivious would respond to Corbyn. All of them voted Kendall .

I think Corbyn has opened up a new economic narrative which I support strongly but that man is too toxic by far.
Going out doorstepping is too depressing these days. Bleugh.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (47)
25.97%
No (134)
74.03%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed