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

Ubik said:
Indeed, it's been ruled out on multiple occasions. As has retaining freedom of movement, with Corbyn criticising it as being used to drive wages down. It's a strange situation.
Click to expand...

I find Labour's abandonment of the principle of freedom of movement to be completely baffling. Owen Jones wrote recently that it's become politically toxic, but I'd argue it's politicians running away from it and ceding ground to Farage and co that has allowed it to become toxic. We've never really had a debate on the issue of freedom of movement. Another fairly extraordinary reality of Brexit.
 
Silva said:
1 second in a 100 meter sprint is huge. Centrists can't even do a decent fecking analogy.
Click to expand...

You think the analogy didn't work because 1 second is significant in a 100 meter race?


Literally don't know where to begin. I think you were on safer ground when you randomly said "Iraq!" on occasion.
 
Okay

I think Club A will win 3-0

You think Club B will win 1-0

Club A wins 2-1 aet. You can't claim to have been right.

"Centrists can't even do analogies, there isn't even a football team called Club B..."
 
Oscie said:
On the basis that what undermined those who didn't win was primarily their inability to 'win' the media. Kinnock not being successful in reaching out to the right-wing press, Brown looking like he'd had someone up his bum each time he tried to smile and Ed and his bacon sandwich and temerity to have a Dad once, much to the chagrin of the Daily Mail.

Even still all to a man handled the media better than Corbyn does. All would have managed the media in the 12 months in the run up to the election better than Corbyn did. Corbyn barely has any allies in the traditional liberal wings of the media that Brown, Kinnock and Milliband had. Were Team Corbyn to have concentrated on at least that then everything mightn't have been such an uphill struggle. Corbyn's lack of interest in making allies even among those in the media who might be considered generally sympathetic, has been a huge mistake.
Click to expand...

You're conveniently ignoring Brexit here. Blair won over The Sun, but Murdoch wasn't backing any Labour party that were committed to stopping/nullifying Brexit. This again gets to the crux of the problem though: liberal wings of the media don't back Corbyn, or do so tentatively, because they're liberal and not left-wing. In this respect anyone who's left-wing is fecked. Telling left-wing people to then just not bother trying to attain a left-wing government isn't going to work, because they're tired of a party which doesn't represent them.
 
Oscie said:
I thought the runner up would finish in 11.49 seconds. As it turned out he finished in 10.49 seconds. He still finished 2nd. I wasn't dramatically wrong overall.
Click to expand...
As the people, whose analysis you're now lauding as fact, were almost all saying that Corbyn would lose Labour seats, the runner is running in the wrong direction in your analogy.
Cheesy said:
You're conveniently ignoring Brexit here. Blair won over The Sun, but Murdoch wasn't backing any Labour party that were committed to stopping/nullifying Brexit. This again gets to the crux of the problem though: liberal wings of the media don't back Corbyn, or do so tentatively, because they're liberal and not left-wing. In this respect anyone who's left-wing is fecked. Telling left-wing people to then just not bother trying to attain a left-wing government isn't going to work, because they're tired of a party which doesn't represent them.
Click to expand...
Brexit and Leveson 2. Both of which the Murdoch and Dacre press would definitely have overlooked had Corbyn smiled more, or something.
 
Ubik said:
Indeed, it's been ruled out on multiple occasions. As has retaining freedom of movement, with Corbyn criticising it as being used to drive wages down. It's a strange situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, much as Corbyn's had a lot of momentum (heh) I worry that when he commits either way he may be a bit fecked. A proper hard Brexit will nullify a lot of support for him, but a soft Brexit will also alienate a solid base of Northern leave voters who'll feel betrayed. He's in a bit of a no-win situation. Looking ahead to the longer-term though...I wonder if it might be wise for Corbyn to take the hit on his approach here, since he's not in government anyway, for a new left-wing leader to then later replace him and condemn his approach while still retaining his fundamental policy ideals presuming Brexit (hopefully) is being looked upon in a bad light by most of the general public by then.
 
Dobba said:
Brexit and Leveson 2. Both of which the Murdoch and Dacre press would definitely have overlooked had Corbyn smiled more, or something.
Click to expand...

Aye, Blair was very successful in his day but political landscapes change and his approach doesn't really work anymore. By the end of his tenure people had figured him out and even revered figures like Mandelson and Campbell were arguably quite amateurish in how they consistently exposed themselves to scandal in spite of their reputations as background manipulators. Blair managing to get a majority in 05 was basically due to the quirks in a flawed voting system, and by that point voter participation had fallen to dangerously low levels. All the while he was alienating a core Labour base by courting another base who'd flock back to the Tories as soon as Cameron came in.
 
Cheesy said:
You're conveniently ignoring Brexit here. Blair won over The Sun, but Murdoch wasn't backing any Labour party that were committed to stopping/nullifying Brexit. This again gets to the crux of the problem though: liberal wings of the media don't back Corbyn, or do so tentatively, because they're liberal and not left-wing. In this respect anyone who's left-wing is fecked. Telling left-wing people to then just not bother trying to attain a left-wing government isn't going to work, because they're tired of a party which doesn't represent them.
Click to expand...


What strange use of the word 'conveniently'
 
Oscie said:
Okay

I think Club A will win 3-0

You think Club B will win 1-0

Club A wins 2-1 aet. You can't claim to have been right.

"Centrists can't even do analogies, there isn't even a football team called Club B..."
Click to expand...
I mean, that is a closer analogy. But much like this in analogy, you can't see the season for the games.
 
Cheesy said:
Yeah, much as Corbyn's had a lot of momentum (heh) I worry that when he commits either way he may be a bit fecked. A proper hard Brexit will nullify a lot of support for him, but a soft Brexit will also alienate a solid base of Northern leave voters who'll feel betrayed. He's in a bit of a no-win situation. Looking ahead to the longer-term though...I wonder if it might be wise for Corbyn to take the hit on his approach here, since he's not in government anyway, for a new left-wing leader to then later replace him and condemn his approach while still retaining his fundamental policy ideals presuming Brexit (hopefully) is being looked upon in a bad light by most of the general public by then.
Click to expand...
I think he's fine as long as he doesn't put it on a mug tbh.
 
Dobba said:
As the people, whose analysis you're now lauding as fact, were almost all saying that Corbyn would lose Labour seats, the runner is running in the wrong direction in your analogy.
Click to expand...

Yeah I thought he would too.

But you were also wrong, unless you actually went into the election thinking Corbyn would lose meaning you backed a leader who you thought would lead to a Tory win. Is that what happened?

It's either that or you thought he'd win, in which case you're hardly in a position to point out my prediction errors.
 
Silva said:
Yeah, I really can't imagine why left wing voters might be excited by the trend that shows them a path to a left wing government. Such strange people.
Click to expand...

Hmm, do you not think the 2017 election was Corbyn's high water mark?

He was starting with very low expectations, against high expectations for May, who turned out to be rather incompetent. The Brexit referendum was recent enough for the students and young to turn out in large numbers, but many if not all of these things will be different next time around. May will (surely) be gone, and everyone will expect even greater things from JC. The only hope he has is that Brexit goes disastrously, and he can capitalise on the job the Tories have done in negotiating an unpopular withdrawal.
 
Oscie said:
What strange use of the word 'conveniently'
Click to expand...

You're ignoring my point here. Your argument that Labour would've won the last election with any post-Foot leader other than Corbyn ignores the significant social and political shifts we've seen since then. Blair did well in his day but would likely get savaged in an election now. In the same way that Thatcher was once the most imperious political figure in the land but would've probably befallen a similar fate to Major in 97 had she somehow stayed on. Times change. There's a clear dissatisfaction among the liberal left with centrist politics, as is being evidenced across a number of European countries, and just pretending that isn't a thing doesn't help.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
Hmm, do you not think the 2017 election was Corbyn's high water mark?

He was starting with very low expectations, against high expectations for May, who turned out to be rather incompetent. The Brexit referendum was recent enough for the students and young to turn out in large numbers, but many if not all of these things will be different next time around. May will (surely) be gone, and everyone will expect even greater things from JC. The only hope he has is that Brexit goes disastrously, and he can capitalise on the job the Tories have done in negotiating an unpopular withdrawal.
Click to expand...

This is reasonable, low expectations vs horrible opponent.

Can't deny he did better than I expected but I still expected him not to be PM when the last vote was counted.
 
Cheesy said:
You're ignoring my point here. Your argument that Labour would've won the last election with any post-Foot leader other than Corbyn ignores the significant social and political shifts we've seen since then. Blair did well in his day but would likely get savaged in an election now. In the same way that Thatcher was once the most imperious political figure in the land but would've probably befallen a similar fate to Major in 97 had she somehow stayed on. Times change. There's a clear dissatisfaction among the liberal left with centrist politics, as is being evidenced across a number of European countries, and just pretending that isn't a thing doesn't help.
Click to expand...


I'm not ignoring your point, your use of words to suggest everything I say is a result of some kind of conspiracy is simply annoying, that's all. I didn't mention Brexit because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. Nor was it particularly relevant to the point you're making either. So much so that in this post you haven't mentioned it either.

So stop with the 'You've conveniently not mentioned something I don't particularly find important enough to mention either' thing.
 
Oscie said:
I'm not ignoring your point, your use of words to suggest everything I say is a result of some kind of conspiracy is simply annoying, that's all. I didn't mention Brexit because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. Nor was it particularly relevant to the point you're making either. So much so that in this post you haven't mentioned it either.
Click to expand...

My general point is that a centrist Labour leader cannot win a general election right now because that leader would unanimously reject a hard Brexit, and in turn would alienate swathes of Labour voters who supported Brexit and would thus feel ignored and patronised. That's not unrealistic or unfair, I don't think.
 
Oscie said:
I'm not ignoring your point, your use of words to suggest everything I say is a result of some kind of conspiracy is simply annoying, that's all. I didn't mention Brexit because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. Nor was it particularly relevant to the point you're making either. So much so that in this post you haven't mentioned it either.

So stop with the 'You've conveniently not mentioned something I don't particularly find important enough to mention either' thing.
Click to expand...
Oscie said:
All would have managed the media in the 12 months in the run up to the election better than Corbyn did.
Click to expand...

Agenda more than conspiracy. Who the fecks plans 12 months for a snap election?
 
Silva said:
Agenda more than conspiracy. Who the fecks plans 12 months for a snap election?
Click to expand...


Leaders who think maybe it's an idea to prepare?

What else is an opposition leader doing if it isn't readying himself and his party to win an election whenever it may come?
 
In any consideration of how a centrist Labour leader would fair in any election, I think we've also got to consider Scotland. There isn't really any room for a centrist leader to succeed in Scotland right now, and barring a sudden SNP collapse that means a hypothetical centrist leader would be working from 35-40 less seats than Blair/Brown were automatically. Granted, the left's popularity in Scotland remains somewhat limited, but it's proven slightly more successful than Miliband/Murphy did so far.
 
Silva said:
Since you're such a clever boy, tell us, when's the next snap election?
Click to expand...


You're aware that the leader of the opposition isn't a temporary position for which the advert goes up on Indeed 5 weeks before election day, aren't you? It's kind of a full-time role where the primary focus is to ready your party to win elections.


What's the job of the leader of the opposition?

To prepare for government but only 5 weeks before an election is called.

Again: new norms and all that.
 
Silva said:
Agenda more than conspiracy. Who the fecks plans 12 months for a snap election?
Click to expand...
Any other post-Foot Labour leader would have developed time travel to go back and secretly plan in advance, so to let May still trigger the snap election. But publicly enough that the Murdoch and Dacre press would have noticed how much they actually like him. But secretly enough that the people who view Murdoch and Dacre as the scumbags they are didn't turn on Corbyn for cosying up to them.
 
Dobba said:
Any other post-Foot Labour leader would have developed time travel to go back and secretly plan in advance, so to let May still trigger the snap election. But publicly enough that the Murdoch and Dacre press would have noticed how much they actually like him. But secretly enough that the people who view Murdoch and Dacre as the scumbags they are didn't turn on Corbyn for cosying up to them.
Click to expand...

Also Murdoch would have somehow ended up supporting an anti-Brexit Labour leader, because reasons.
 
Oscie said:
Leaders who think maybe it's an idea to prepare?

What else is an opposition leader doing if it isn't readying himself and his party to win an election whenever it may come?
Click to expand...

Fighting against factions arising from his surprising ascent to the leadership and a distinct lack of PLP support?
 
Oscie said:
You're aware that the leader of the opposition isn't a temporary position for which the advert goes up on Indeed 5 weeks before election day, aren't you?
Click to expand...
And you're aware that snap elections only get called when the ruling party thinks it's a nailed on victory aren't you? Tell us, how did Jeremy do compared to Brown and Labours favourite Milliband?
 
Everyone in politics should have been on high alert for a snap election the moment Cameron announced he was going to resign in June 2016. Describing the election of a year later as some kind of unforeseen event that poor planning could be forgiven is quite a stretch.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Fighting against factions arising from his surprising ascent to the leadership and a distinct lack of PLP support?
Click to expand...

Not saying he wasn't dealing with other issues. The idea that it wasn't his job to prepare for an election until he knew when the date of one was however is one of the weaker excuses.
 
Oscie said:
Everyone in politics should have been on high alert for a snap election the moment Cameron announced he was going to resign in June 2016. Describing the election of a year later as some kind of unforeseen event that poor planning could be forgiven is quite a stretch.
Click to expand...
Perhaps by being ready to produce, say, an amazing manifesto and use the election to win seats and increase the vote by a higher margin than any leader for almost a century? It's a shame Jeremy failed in all of that.
 
Silva said:
Perhaps by being ready to produce, say, an amazing manifesto and use the election to win seats and increase the vote by a higher margin than any leader for almost a century? It's a shame Jeremy failed in all of that.
Click to expand...


'Amazing manifesto' forgive me but that really does read like someone who's unhappy that they've come across a criticism of their favourite Justin Bieber track on Tumblr.

"Oh I don't know maybe it's because he's the most AMAZING BEAUTIFUL PERSON IN THE WORLD!!!"

This is where we're back into 'politicians shouldn't be supported like football teams' territory. Thinking his manifesto was 'amazing' is something you're entitled to believe. Not really relevant though, is it? I love his beige jackets. Subjectively it's irrelevant.
 
Oscie said:
'Amazing manifesto' forgive me but that really does read like someone who's unhappy that they've come across a criticism of their favourite Justin Bieber track on Tumblr.

"Oh I don't know maybe it's because he's the most AMAZING BEAUTIFUL PERSON IN THE WORLD!!!"
Click to expand...
"WHY DIDN"T HE DID BETTER?"

"manifestos are for children"

keep digging buddy
 
In fairness to Oscie on this, pretty much my only prediction that's proved correct of late is that there'd be a snap election. Though that probably speaks more to how unlikely it was than anything.

Cheesy said:
My general point is that a centrist Labour leader cannot win a general election right now because that leader would unanimously reject a hard Brexit, and in turn would alienate swathes of Labour voters who supported Brexit and would thus feel ignored and patronised. That's not unrealistic or unfair, I don't think.
Click to expand...
I think that's true, but I think it's also true that there's bugger all pressure on remainer-Tories to vote anywhere else at the moment, swelling their vote. They aren't gonna vote Lib as that lets Labour in (and vice versa). So we've got this weird retrenchment to two-party politics at a time when it's arguably more fractured than it has been in a long time.
 
Silva said:
"WHY DIDN"T HE DID BETTER?"

"manifestos are for children"

keep digging buddy
Click to expand...


How will I have to dig before I pass your 'Unless you can tell me the date of the next election you can't say opposition leaders should prepare for elections' stance?
 
Ubik said:
In fairness to Oscie on this, pretty much my only prediction that's proved correct of late is that there'd be a snap election. Though that probably speaks more to how unlikely it was than anything.
Click to expand...


I don't think anyone called the 2017 election right.

If you thought Corbyn would get annihilated you were wrong.

If you thought Cobyn would win, you were wrong.

I don't get why only one group of predictors get their predictions rubbed in their face, the others didn't get it right either.
 
Oscie said:
I don't think anyone called the 2017 election right.

If you thought Corbyn would get annihilated you were wrong.

If you thought Cobyn would win, you were wrong.

I don't get why only one group of predictors get their predictions rubbed in their face, the others didn't get it right either.
Click to expand...
there were literally dozens of us predicting a hung parliament
 
You must log in or register to reply here.