One would hope so, but the problem is that it's not just a question of branding but of policies. When momentum last tried to take over labour, sorry when militant tendency did, I believed they were defeatable, hence I eschewed the SDP when formed. I just don't get that feeling now, I would back a breakaway, and if there isn't one it will have to be the Libs. I still hope I'm wrong of course.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
One would hope so, but the problem is that it's not just a question of branding but of policies. When momentum last tried to take over labour, sorry when militant tendency did, I believed they were defeatable, hence I eschewed the SDP when formed. I just don't get that feeling now, I would back a breakaway, and if there isn't one it will have to be the Libs. I still hope I'm wrong of course.
What's wrong with the policies already announced? I think they're golden.
I agree with that
I mean a majority of pre 2015 labour members voted against Corbyn last time
It should hopefully be clear to momentum their policies can't convince the traditional labour base and you would think perhaps a momentum party... Possibly headed by Jeremy and some of his allies might be the best move for them to stay true to their ideals.
But yeah if not it's time for new new labour or Lib lab etc and that would get my backing as well
Without being specific, when the manifesto is so close, every policy is spending money, which any fool can do. They are going to have to convince people that they can balance a budget. Just saying invest a lot instead of spend doesn't do that, unfortunately.
In fairness if 10,000 police officers for £300,000 is indicative of the quality message they intend to deliver they might as well ditch the manifesto right now.
Does anyone genuinely think Corbyn will resign after Labour's inevitably resounding defeat? The man's more stubborn than Wenger.
I think he will have to because the defeat will be that bad... I suspect he would even struggle to pull a shadow cabinet together
He wouldn't care, more space to fill with a motley crue of left-wing acolytes, plus he can point to the fact that some of the safest Labour seats are with some of his biggest supporters.
It would be so untenable it would almost be funny (If it wasn't for the fact that you know the whole Brexit and holding the government to account)
Even if he did do it I suspect there would be a chunk of mps resign enmass... I do wonder if he could even retain union funding / backing if it's as bad as polls suggest it could be and he tries to stick it out
She did eventually find and give the correct figures.
With Len McCluskey propping him up the funding is indefinite. And didn't the en masse resignation thing already happen?
I think you are overlooking two factors in particular, issues of relevance irrespective of Daily Mail headlines.
Firstly, there is the failure on the part of government in responding to the globalised, post-industrial age. The myriad forgotten communities, be their nominal allegiance to Labour or the Tories, were not going to remain docile forever.
Secondly, is the historical context to the immigration debate in the UK. Both the messaging and tension significantly pre-dates Brexit and the modern Ukip era. I've just been reading this article below, and i'd recommend it to you in this instance if you have the time (really a quite interesting piece).
We were already Eurosceptic in this country though, even including people who ultimately voted for Remain. And for the long-standing opponents to the project, this was very possibly their one and only shot (they'd already been misled over Lisbon and earlier EU policy). The conduct of Cameron's faux negotiations only added more fuel to the fire.
How immigration came to haunt Labour: the inside story
New Labour failed to predict a surge in immigration – and their miscalculation has shaped British politics ever since. Could they have handled it differently?
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/mar/24/how-immigration-came-to-haunt-labour-inside-story
Last edited:
Perhaps from unite but all the other unions?
As for the resignations I think if (when) he delivers the fewest labour mp's since ww2 and he tries to stay in charge then I suspect many mps would resign from the party
Don't know about that, I mean how many art galleries can one country have.
I mean stay as mps either independent or perhaps even a (new) lab / lib coalition.
The problem is that those own goals were completely avoidable. No one made Corbyn pick McDonnell for Shadow Chancellor. He did that. No one made him give Diane Abbott a position in which she'd receive genuine airtime; again, he did that. Both have made very dodgy comments in the past. Neither were forced to do that. No one forced Corbyn to go on a train with empty seats, and claim that there weren't empty seats.
He's had some shite thrown at him too, yeah. Stuff like not wearing a suit, or not singing the national anthem at an event...I couldn't care less about stuff like that. But he's still had plenty of gaffes. And quite honestly, I don't think he's gotten it much worse than Miliband did, who was highlighted as being too weak to be PM for reasons including his own dad's political history, and a facial expression he made while eating a sandwich.
It's a GE. There'll be a manifesto. Not entirely unexpected.
You're sharp, no doubt about it. Thanks for that.
I'm really not to sure, I can see some of them saying(The old Labour right will always stay)simply because of the name recognition of the Labour Party and then add to that the voting system here and I can't see any sort of new party succeeding. Also what would be the politics of this new party, some of muddled centrism that harps back to the days of New Labour.
What do the Corbynites on here actually want JC to do after the election, if you assume a result in line with the current polls (50ish seats lost, 100+ majority for the Tories)?
The Buzzfeed article linked on the last page pushes the suggestion that the left wing activists are going to push for another similar candidate with everything they've got, blaming the 'centrists' in the party for defeat.
- Should Jeremy resign?
- Would one of 'his' candidates be able to get the support of 15% of MPs and get on the leadership candidate?
- If not, what's the outcome? Would you rather Jeremy holding on to power if there's no potential for a like-minded MP to stand as his replacement? Or do you prefer a situation where he quits, the MPs don't allow someone from his wing to stand, and then Momentum splinter off to run as their own party?
The Buzzfeed article linked on the last page pushes the suggestion that the left wing activists are going to push for another similar candidate with everything they've got, blaming the 'centrists' in the party for defeat.
- Should Jeremy resign?
- Would one of 'his' candidates be able to get the support of 15% of MPs and get on the leadership candidate?
- If not, what's the outcome? Would you rather Jeremy holding on to power if there's no potential for a like-minded MP to stand as his replacement? Or do you prefer a situation where he quits, the MPs don't allow someone from his wing to stand, and then Momentum splinter off to run as their own party?
New name, logos, colour scheme and all that seems a bit of a faff. The "centrists" can start their own party.
The list of failed and defunct far-left parties from the uk is as long as your arm. They know for certain they'll get nowhere on their own, their only chance is through Labour, and they'll stick to it like grim death.
Last edited:
Far-left never gets old
Corbyn to go and for everyone either side of the party to recognise a unity candidate is required. That doesn't mean going back to a blair model but recognising its vital to balance the needs of the party and membership.
Doesn't have to be a momentum candidate, someone slightly more centrist than Corbyn would be fine. Keep the policy as its nearly all popular anyway.
I said at the time if Owen Smith had given me a reason to vote for him i would have done, same policies and less baggage but he was just as useless.
Also on this point, as your clearly absolving blame via that phrasing. Its going to be important to recognise the party would have lost 3 GEs in a row rather than just blaming it all on Corbyn.
There's huge work to be done all round. Work that really wasn't done last time.
Unfortunately, to the people who insist on mattering in the party, it sure does.
Far-left never gets old
It's a catch-all term I suppose. Corbyn has been filmed happily declaring himself as a Marxist, so he fit's that bill for me.
Well they'll be calls for him to come back no doubt and they'll all happily ignore all the baggage and history in that case.
Whats wrong with being a Marxist? Just means you associate to some ideals not that you're a communist. The Labour party does share principles.
Marxist seems to be have morphed into the equivalent of being a nazi these days.
Corbyn will go when he is beaten in a leadership election.
In the sense that it's electoral suicide you're right. Good luck selling common ownership to the British in the 21st century.
Would you still vote for him if he lost 100 seats in June?
Wrong question. I would still vote for him if Labour lost 100 seats in June.
Both sides should certainly take a portion of the blame for all that's gone wrong in the past couple of years - no doubt about that, although I do think there's a decent chance the wing supporting Corbyn will try to completely lump it on the centrists, the media, and people being selfish and voting Tory. Which won't really suffice...considering defeat is ultimately defeat, no matter how it comes.
...Okay.
Nothing, except that ten people have eleven different ideas what this actually means. Unsurprisingly the label creates confusion. People who call themselves Marxists should understand that this puts them on the far left side of the political spectrum. If one is not a follower of the original teachings of Marx (hardly anyone is nowadays), you could just use a label that is more precise.
Just be realistic about one thing though... if its that bad it will be the worst result since 1931 (which they lost to the national government after labour collapsed)
take than anomaly out and it would be the worst result since 1918 when labour were still a relatively new and minority party.
What you are essentially saying with that vote is I will cut off my nose to spite my face... its a perfectly legitimate option but honestly it seems daft to me.
It seems crazy that "only" doing as bad as foot in 83 would probably be seen at this point as a major success by some