Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

Pogue Mahone said:
I'm not really trying to blame anyone. There's no doubt that more investment in the NHS, education and housing would mitigate the negative effects of immigration being experienced by the poor. And this will be a neverending challenge. Less of an issue when the economy is booming but much harder to implement during a recession.

My main point is that it feels as though the refusal to even acknowledge that, yes, immigration does pose a lot of of challenges to certain sections of society that has lost votes for Labour and gained votes for UKIP. Which is a shitty state of affairs.
Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of perception. The way I see it is that while it's implied in the lefts calls for greater spending, they are reluctant to say it's due to immigration because just the use of that word in the context of spending is fuel for daily mail headline writers.

I can't deny that in the UK and USA, the right has had a clearer message for a long time now.
 
Flying high said:
I guess it's a matter of perception. The way I see it is that while it's implied in the lefts calls for greater spending, they are reluctant to say it's due to immigration because just the use of that word in the context of spending is fuel for daily mail headline writers.

I can't deny that in the UK and USA, the right has had a clearer message for a long time now.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly spot on. Corbyn tried with his proposal to revive the Immigration impact fund but thats gone quiet really.

Id have much more confidence in this country being tolerant if the goverment showed active measures to balance things out. Its a PR game and Labour in the past has tried to keep quiet on this issue as they know it doesnt play well with them, all thats done is create a UKIP sized hole.

I've said before Labour should repackage existing migration controls, the public wouldn't have a clue and it would create at least some sense that they recognise the issue.
 
Flying high said:
I guess it's a matter of perception. The way I see it is that while it's implied in the lefts calls for greater spending, they are reluctant to say it's due to immigration because just the use of that word in the context of spending is fuel for daily mail headline writers.

I can't deny that in the UK and USA, the right has had a clearer message for a long time now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the nub of the issue. Trying to solve a problem of scarce resources during an economic downturn in a way that is inclusive and compassionate AND good for the economy requires complicated and nuanced strategies that don't make good sound-bites. Far easier to sell a pitch that involves fecking over foreign countries/people to "MAGA" or "Bring our Britain back".
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Immigration is a tricky one. It definitely brings a net gain to the economy. Any (sensible) economist will tell you that. Let's not ignore the word "net", though. There are upsides and downsides, with the upsides dominating and providing an overall economic positive for the country as a whole. They aren't distributed equally, however. There will be segments of society (and geographic regions) who primarily experience the downside (typically the poor and disadvantaged) while others are more likely to reap the benefits (typically employers and landlords)

It can be very hard for someone who is mainly experiencing the downsides of immigration to listen to rhetoric about "net benefits" when that's not been your personal experience. It's the refusal of the left to acknowledge this phenomenon that has added fuel to the Brexit/Trump fires IMO.
Click to expand...


1. I think the centre let has been falling over itself to "listen to concerns" about immigration for years, and it hasn't helped, it's just legitimised more and more baseless anti-immigration sentiment

2. The areas with the highest anti-immigration sentiment are, broadly, those with the lowest levels of immigration

3. Many of the downsides of immigration that people perceive are more rooted in toxic cultural identity politics than legitimate anxieties. e.g. "I hear too many foreign languages on the high street", "there's too many polish shops", "my supermarket has a polish section", etc. We can have a serious discussion about the important of cultural belonging and identity — it clearly is an deep rooted human trait — and how people can start to feel alienated in their home country (a feeling many pro-Europeans have felt acutely since June). But when someone opposes immigration because of the signs of immigration they see, e.g. polish shops, well that ship has sailed. Unless we are discussing deportations. I wonder how long until the British right starts fanning those flames.
 
Flying high said:
I can see this subject means a lot to you. Like you said, I didn't quote you or make this a response to you or anyone in particular. But I am interested to know if you won't vote labour, then who? No politician will ever get 100% agreement on all policies from anyone, why is it impossible to vote labour with Corbyn in charge, when, if you are even slightly left of centre, I doubt you'd agree with even half of May's policies.

My analysis could hardly be described as a glowing endorsement of Corbyn. It just seems to me that he is being held to so much higher standards than everyone else, just because he doesn't act like the normal Westminster politician. For me, he is a great deal closer to what I would like to see in a leader. The world should be about cooperation, not competition. Compromise, not war.

People lead in different ways. If we, as a country, can only handle someone who can regurgitate platitudes without substance to be our PM, then that is just sad and needs addressing before we all end up living in Idiocracy.
Click to expand...

I completely detest Theresa May, believing that she's one of the worst possible by-products Brexit could have produced. If anybody was familiar with her prior to becoming PM, they should certainly be worried now. That said, with her riding the crest of the Brexit wave, it's utterly incomprehensible to me that somebody can so recklessly entrust her with guiding the UK forward. Even though he was more in favour of leaving the EU than people would have cared to admit, his showing in holding the government accountable and getting the best possible deal has been uninspiring. It told me everything I needed to show about his lack of leadership abilities.

I don't want an idiot who regurgitates nonsense. Being a leader is much more than that, and it's completely disingenuous of anybody if they frame it as a case of being absolute substance vs. absolute style. Similarly, for anybody to ever think we'd realistically have a politician in power based solely on policies is wishful thinking to the extreme. Without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, the leader who strikes the best balance in the UK right now is Nicola Sturgeon. Although I haven't done any extensive reading about her, it's apparent enough why she'd appeal to the swing voters like Corbyn never could. South of the border and nobody stands out. It's a very depressing time for British politics.
 
Fener1907 said:
I completely detest Theresa May, believing that she's one of the worst possible by-products Brexit could have produced. If anybody was familiar with her prior to becoming PM, they should certainly be worried now. That said, with her riding the crest of the Brexit wave, it's utterly incomprehensible to me that somebody can so recklessly entrust her with guiding the UK forward. Even though he was more in favour of leaving the EU than people would have cared to admit, his showing in holding the government accountable and getting the best possible deal has been uninspiring. It told me everything I needed to show about his lack of leadership abilities.

I don't want an idiot who regurgitates nonsense. Being a leader is much more than that, and it's completely disingenuous of anybody if they frame it as a case of being absolute substance vs. absolute style. Similarly, for anybody to ever think we'd realistically have a politician in power based solely on policies is wishful thinking to the extreme. Without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, the leader who strikes the best balance in the UK right now is Nicola Sturgeon. Although I haven't done any extensive reading about her, it's apparent enough why she'd appeal to the swing voters like Corbyn never could. South of the border and nobody stands out. It's a very depressing time for British politics.
Click to expand...

It seems there is probably more we agree upon than not.

My understanding then is that you don't feel you can vote for any of the current likely candidates? Fair enough if that is the case. I just think that we'll never get a good selection of people to vote for. The best we are likely to get with the current system is to be roughly alligned with one of them. If we don't vote that way, then the result is the voices of those who vote another way will be heard more clearly. So if Corbyn gets the kicking in an election that the media is hoping for, then the impression that a well meaning type who doesn't fit the mould, has no place is politics will be further entrenched.

BTW, I think the wishful thinking tag has some merit. Whether there is merit is wishful thinking, I really don't know.:)
 
Flying high said:
It seems there is probably more we agree upon than not.

My understanding then is that you don't feel you can vote for any of the current likely candidates? Fair enough if that is the case. I just think that we'll never get a good selection of people to vote for. The best we are likely to get with the current system is to be roughly alligned with one of them. If we don't vote that way, then the result is the voices of those who vote another way will be heard more clearly. So if Corbyn gets the kicking in an election that the media is hoping for, then the impression that a well meaning type who doesn't fit the mould, has no place is politics will be further entrenched.

BTW, I think the wishful thinking tag has some merit. Whether there is merit is wishful thinking, I really don't know.:)
Click to expand...

I'm sure we do agree on a lot of things. You're correct in thinking that I can't vote for any of them. I've never been an advocate of the idea that it's better to vote for somebody than nobody at all. If the politics of some aren't the politics you care for and the ones you'd otherwise turn to for leadership look lost, where do you go from there.

As for Corbyn, I think he's taken enough of a kicking and even discredited himself to the extent that a general election will be completely futile and do nothing in terms of setting precedents. Whilst inevitable that he'll have his supporters who believe his politics until the end, he's taken too many missteps to salvage much else from the damage. Labour shouldn't look beyond his politics, but they'd be better off looking beyond him.
 
Batten down the hatches folks. It's surely only a matter of time.

I predict the PLP will this time nominate either Jess Phillips or Wayne Shaw, the latter coming complete with a pie with a Labour rosette drawn on top in ketchup.
 
I think that pattern of UKIP losses being Conservatives gain will be repeated elsewhere really.

Not sure Labour can win those votes back. Definitely not by opposing Brexit as some here want. Only hope is the non-voters really
 
Last edited:
Adisa said:
He's like Wenger. He's finished but refuses to go.
Click to expand...

I said before the circumstances on brexit dictate he should hand over the reigns so someone else who can aggressively debate brexit. However, i dont think it'll have a huge effect.

Labour will only win a majority as things start to wrong with brexit.
 
Smores said:
I think that pattern of UKIP losses being Conservatives gain will be repeated elsewhere really.

Not sure Labour can win those votes back. Definitely not by opposing Brexit as some here want. Only hope is the non-voters really
Click to expand...

They would lose them anyway whatever they had done I think. They've been too close to the Tories on the issue and I can't see any reason why anyone, for whom Brexit is an important topic either way, would vote for them.

Even if the wheels start to fall off Brexit I can't see how Labour have differentiated themselves from the Tories enough to get people to ditch the Tories in favour of Labour.
 
NinjaFletch said:
They would lose them anyway whatever they had done I think. They've been too close to the Tories on the issue and I can't see any reason why anyone, for whom Brexit is an important topic either way, would vote for them.

Even if the wheels start to fall off Brexit I can't see how Labour have differentiated themselves from the Tories enough to get people to ditch the Tories in favour of Labour.
Click to expand...

Well the approach was to prevent further losses from the Labour brexit voters rather than produce any gains. If Labour had been seen to block brexit it may have permanently lost these.

Labour now has to differentiate itself, the question is whether people care enough about any of the terms of Brexit. Labour may just benefit by way of being the opposition when Brexit goes tits up.
 
You need to use the right language for a start, reflect the changed circumstances for the country.

Let's take state aid, what is the party's future position? Be it for the likes of Nissan, the UK steel industry, or new foreign investment.

On immigration, will Labour be significantly reducing visa fees (presently these are quite steep)? What sort of entry criteria should there be going forward?
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
Well the approach was to prevent further losses from the Labour brexit voters rather than produce any gains. If Labour had been seen to block brexit it may have permanently lost these.

Labour now has to differentiate itself, the question is whether people care enough about any of the terms of Brexit or Labour will benefit by way of being the opposition when Brexit goes tits up.
Click to expand...

Sure. But the way they've gone about it is going to limit their ability to win votes long term in my opinion.

Unless they have the sense to hang Corbyn out to dry for a few years and hope he personally accrues the negativity but the party as a whole remains unscathed.
 
I live in Copeland and Corbyn has basically lost Labour the stranglehold they have had here for many years by coming out and saying he is anti-nuclear. An absolute no no in an area where Sellafield gives most of the area jobs. The down part is now the Conservatives have won the people voting for that have basically now got their own hospital shut down. A true lose-lose situation.
 
The issue now, isn't even getting ready for the 2020 GE. It's about surviving it in a meaning form. This party is in trouble.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Sure. But the way they've gone about it is going to limit their ability to win votes long term in my opinion.

Unless they have the sense to hang Corbyn out to dry for a few years and hope he personally accrues the negativity but the party as a whole remains unscathed.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the A50 vote in particular? I wouldn't expect those pissed off at Labour not voting to block the vote (which they couldn't anyway) would stay away if Labour then push against the terms in a way they agree with.

If they go to Lib Dems fine, a coalition is probably the only future for Labour anyway.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
I live in Copeland and Corbyn has basically lost Labour the stranglehold they have had here for many years by coming out and saying he is anti-nuclear. An absolute no no in an area where Sellafield gives most of the area jobs. The down part is now the Conservatives have won the people voting for that have basically now got their own hospital shut down. A true lose-lose situation.
Click to expand...
Politics in this country is depressing.
 
McDonnell is a car crash. His message was basically, "we will listen to the people but not those that don't want Jeremy".
 
An opposition losing a seat is unheard of. An opposition losing a seat they've held since 1930's is an unprecedented disaster.
How can anyone still defend this man?
 
By the swings it looks like UKIP voters returning to the Conservatives is a big problem for Labour at the moment. National polling suggests that too.

Not entirely sure how you fight that. Are there 5-10 percent of conservative voters who would consider a centrist Labour Party at the moment? What about the conservative remain voters? Surely not all Tories are completely nuts and happy with the chaotic Brexit we are hurtling towards.

The voters Labour is losing to the Lib Dems are important too. Basically Corbyn's Brexit position is a joke and he should have resigned when he suggest Article 50 should have been submitted on the morning of the referendum result.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
I live in Copeland and Corbyn has basically lost Labour the stranglehold they have had here for many years by coming out and saying he is anti-nuclear. An absolute no no in an area where Sellafield gives most of the area jobs. The down part is now the Conservatives have won the people voting for that have basically now got their own hospital shut down. A true lose-lose situation.
Click to expand...

It's also an incredibly narrow-minded and regressive stance considering the enormity of the climate change issue.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
You still backing your boy then?
Click to expand...
Give me an alternative.
Adisa said:
Click to expand...

They lost Copeland when Jamie the Abstainer immediately went into the nuclear energy business after quitting. Trying to pitch the potential downgrade of the local hospital as the number 1 issue, when not even the former Labour MP thought it was worth sticking around to defend, is a lost cause. Even before you factor in voters being idiots.
 
Last edited:
Dobba said:
Give me an alternative.

They lost Copeland when Jamie the Abstainer immediately went into the nuclear energy business after quitting. Trying to pitch the potential downgrade of the local hospital as the number 1 issue, when not even the former Labour MP thought it was worth sticking around to defend, is a lost cause. Even before you factor in voters being idiots.
Click to expand...

What I would say, Is that Jamie Reed was an utter clown and left before he was pushed. He got offered a nice cushy job at Sellafield and jumped while his reputation was still at an average level. The Corbyn comments were the icing on the cake well and truly though. There was no coming back from that.
 
I find it hard to comprehend seeing people in here, the media and in general who have previously insisted on a big tent approach now slate Labour for not focusing on the Labour remain voters.

It not only reeks of hypocrisy but worse than that it shows the reason they were fine on Labour doing so on issues such as welfare wasn't politics it was because they didn't care about the issue or weren't affected.
 
Smores said:
I find it hard to comprehend seeing people in here, the media and in general who have previously insisted on a big tent approach now slate Labour for not focusing on the Labour remain voters.
Click to expand...

If Corbyn was making a big tent approach on Europe, that might be a fair comment. But he isn't.
 
Unmutual said:
If Corbyn was making a big tent approach on Europe, that might be a fair comment. But he isn't.
Click to expand...

The term might not be the perfect fit but i disagree, they went with the decision to appeal (or not push away) to a wide base by voting for article 50 rather than the conceding to the will of the core base.

All we've heard over the last year is complaints that Labour haven't done that. I say Labour and not Corbyn because the decision to do so was one with wide support amongst the MPs.
 
Smores said:
The term might not be the perfect fit but i disagree, they went with the decision to appeal (or not push away) to a wide base by voting for article 50 rather than the conceding to the will of the core base.

All we've heard over the last year is complaints that Labour haven't done that. I say Labour and not Corbyn because the decision to do so was one with wide support amongst the MPs.
Click to expand...

Again, this isnt just about the Article 50 vote. This is about the failure to champion a version of soft Brexit based around ongoing single market membership, one that could appeal to Remainers & also honour the outcome of the referendum. That was the big tent option. Corbyn ruled out single market membership because of state aid rules of all things, offered nothing else, then whipped in favour of giving May a free hand in negotiations with the EU. That's why Remainers are unhappy.
 
Unmutual said:
Again, this isnt just about the Article 50 vote. This is about the failure to champion a version of soft Brexit based around ongoing single market membership, one that could appeal to Remainers & also honour the outcome of the referendum. That was the big tent option. Corbyn ruled out single market membership because of state aid rules of all things, offered nothing else, then whipped in favour of giving May a free hand in negotiations with the EU. That's why Remainers are unhappy.
Click to expand...

Nonsense 90% of the discussion has been moaning about the A50 vote and its hypocrisy across the board. People are willing to abandon principle to help on welfare because of bad polling but a definitive rreferendum and it MUST be fought.

Secondly what you've laid out is exactly what Labour has been championing until May laid out it wouldn't happen after which they demanded impact analysis of us leaving. I don't think people understand that May had a free hand irrespective, could they have championed harder? Probably but it would have been seen as blocking article 50 and the precious polling said that was bad. Cant have it both ways.
 
Smores said:
Nonsense 90% of the discussion has been moaning about the A50 vote and its hypocrisy across the board. People are willing to abandon principle to help on welfare because of bad polling but a definitive rreferendum and it MUST be fought.

Secondly what you've laid out is exactly what Labour has been championing until May laid out it wouldn't happen after which they demanded impact analysis of us leaving. I don't think people understand that May had a free hand irrespective, could they have championed harder? Probably but it would have been seen as blocking article 50 and the precious polling said that was bad. Cant have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Calling people hypocrites for agreeing with the welfare cuts but disagreeing with the A50 decision is weird, because you seem have made the opposite journey. I assume you dont consider yourself a hypocrite, so dont call others out. Better to accept that, despite the strong parallels, both are finely weighted issues and its possible to be on one side of the debate on one and on the other the next time.

On the other point, Corbyn has never suggested single market membership. He was pressed to confirm it during the leadership contest and ruled it out.
 
Dobba said:
It'll only get greater from here when the inevitable leadership race kicks off again. Bring it on.
Click to expand...

I dont really expect a leadership contest any time soon. As evidenced by your comment, it would rally his supporters, and MPs know that. They also know its given Corbyn an excuse for his performance, and turned a lot of members against them. At this point either Corbyn stands down, or he goes into 2020, at which points he's responsible for what happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.