?
Corbyn and the left have almost got complete control of the party.
I agree with a leadership contest will help Corbyn but the future of anyone who isn't on the labour left looks bad.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
Corbyn and the left have almost got complete control of the party.
I agree with a leadership contest will help Corbyn but the future of anyone who isn't on the labour left looks bad.
Yeah? Are chavs not a thing now? Or we could pretend they're not to sound more PC, but I don't see the point in that.
I know. And it is frustrating.
The issue is that there's no successor to Corbyn. He uniquely straddles various constituents in the party - the north london/south manchester metro liberal vote, the younger optimistic momentum vote, the working class union vote and the "looney left" SWP-type vote. No-one else currently in Labour can speak to those audiences with authenticity, and when Corbyn stands down they're likely to back various different candidates and, the left being the left, will probably start falling out over it. For now Corbyn is unassailable simply because those different activist bases are (largely) behind him, but his successor certainly won't have that advantage.
There won't be a leadership contest before the Tories pick their own leader first. They need to know who they're running against.
Your use of it is revealing. Chav is term used to insult a group the labour party would once have considered it exists to defend.
For the many not the few. Except chavs, obviously.
ps Please vote for us anyway.
Chav's a chav mate. Do we really have to do a pointless dance about the term? It is what it is. You know what it is, I know what it is, everyone knows what a chav is. What exactly is it revealing? That I'm not one to beat around the bush? Are we at a stage where 'chav' is too un-PC now?
And for some reason a lot of em couldn't handle a politician that didn't want to be involved in wars and decided to start voting elsewhere. Those that have gone that route have chosen it themselves (/been gullibly fed a lot of nonsense).
Anyway, I hope it is insulting to them, because those I'm speaking about here are Farage supporting Brexit voting wankers who would prefer to support the Tory party over Labour while it bleeds the country dry and fecks up everything in front of our eyes, especially for the working class, which includes me and family.
No one said anything shouldn't be for them. Unfortunately many are voting for the opposite.
Last edited:
Very weird take.
The failure of centrist Labour MP’s to make a mark with Change UK and the rise of Farage is only going to strengthen Corbyn’s position.
When are people going to finally realise that if Labour replaces Corbyn with someone associated with the People’s Vote campaign they’d be finished? Similar fate if they chose an overt Brexiter.
Because of the extreme split through demographics I don’t see a way through this other than what Corbyn is doing.
Perhaps when Labour stops losing votes to both pro Remain and pro Leave parties?
They've tried to be everything to everybody and have ended up being nothing to nobody.
Corbyn's popularity and Labour's polling are both falling quite quickly, so Im not sure why you think Change UK & the Brexit Party are helping him.
As for your last point, Labour's strategy of trying to straddle the Brexit divide was always based on the assumption that, eventually, party loyalty would prove to be a bigger factor than Brexit. At this moment that assumption looks increasingly shaky. As we saw in Scotland with the Indy Ref, some things in politics are bigger than traditional party politics and can force a wholesale realignment. As Labour found to their cost there, if that realignment goes against you, no matter how storied your history, you can lose out.
We're not there yet with UK wide politics, but its certainly possible something similar could happen. Corbyn's position only makes sense if Brexit goes away and business as normal returns. That's far from certain, and if politics does realign around Remain vs Leave as the primary question people ask when deciding who to vote for, Labour's current position of appeasing both but pleasing neither is high risk indeed.
Brexit is never going away because Europe is never going away - there’s endless negotiations still to come post brexit with Europe likely to be painted as the enemy. It certainly feels like there’s a realignment happening but at best, I can’t see anything other than coalitions ahead for years.
Progress out on tour to criticise the Labour leadership on election week 
Scum of the party that lot
Scum of the party that lotBlinder.
Is it that time again already? Lovely stuff.
It would be the end of democracy if uk had a 2nd referendum. Let's keep playing until I win sort of thing.
The weird thing is Corbyn has come out in favour of second referendum a couple of times. Their whole argument is going to be - get rid of Corbyn because he refuses to go on our awful marches and have the EU flag painted on his face.
Its wouldn't but there really is no reason why a new referendum so soon after should count more than the one in 2016.
Hey if he left and someone competent took his place I'd probably vote labour. As it stands I won't be next election.
Well, yeah, after stalling for something like three years. It's fairly clear that a lot of people who are anti-Brexit don't really trust him at all and it's fairly easy to see why when so much of his rhetoric surrounding Brexit has been astonishingly vague. Ultimately at this point the UK is polarised between a No Deal Brexit and remaining in the EU - clearly the latter option is better than the former for anyone who doesn't view Farage as a kindred spirit, and so during any ensuing campaign Remainers aren't going to want the face of the main Remain party to be someone who doesn't believe in their cause.
So you won't for funding the NHS, more housing, worker rights and possibly trying to do something about climate change because Corbyn is incompetent ? Remind why Corbyn is the stupid one in this situation ?
the other half of my post
34% of the population voted in these eu elections.
Had Labour done well in these elections Labour voters would be spinning it as an endorsement of Corbyn. Clearly. So I don't see why they should get off the hook when things go badly. Irrespective of turnout the main opposition party should be doing well in any election in which they stand. The fact they've instead had a dreadful night is clearly alarming.
It's not as if these trends aren't being replicated at Westminster - the parties vote has been falling and only the likewise Tory collapse is keeping them at the top of the pile, but if the Tories get a new leader who endorses No Deal fully they'll probably regain a lot of their vote back when the one-issue Brexit party. And now the Lib Dems are back in the game a lot of Remain leaning voters have someone else to turn to with the knowledge that said alternative actually has a chance of doing alright.
The only argument that can be made here for this not being a shocking night for Labour is that supporters of their party were the only ones who didn't bother to turn out, while supporters for other parties did. And that's still a worry in itself insofar as it then shows Labour quite clearly aren't able to motivate people to vote for them when it comes to the countries most important issues. Losing in places like Islington is genuinely dreadful for the party however they want to spin it - any Lib Dem who'd said they'd win any vote there a couple of years back would've rightfully been laughed at by Labour supporters.
Tories and Tory Lites always want to make it about personalities.
The reality is any election is about the issues as mentioned above.
Whichever imbecile the Tories elect, do you think they will improve the country?
The will balance the budget on the back of the poor to reduce them to penury.
The reality is any election is about the issues as mentioned above.
Whichever imbecile the Tories elect, do you think they will improve the country?
The will balance the budget on the back of the poor to reduce them to penury.
Thornberry
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-second-referendum-remain-party-a8931371.html
That sounds suspiciously to me like the start of an "unofficial" leadership campaign
I could vote green who have all that you listed on their manifesto. An actual remain party, and one i feel are far more for the people than the current labour party.
If I was from the UK this is how I'd be thinking too.
Don't necessarily agree but just goes to show how fecked the party is.
Mason does mention an important point. Soft Brexit is no longer possible, so there's no point fighting for it. Labour have to chose a side and live with it.
Really?
I genuinely don't understand this rhetoric.
An ill-informed, lied-to population took part in a vote, with questionable campaigning and funding laws broken, and came to a conclusion, separated by a swing of 2%.
With more idea of what Brexit means, after 3 years of political wrangling, and aware of the misdeeds in how it was originally sold, do you not think the result would be more indicative of how the populace really feel?
Or, is it just a case of, "We won! No jinx. No comebacks. Nar! Nar! Nar! Not listening now!"
The remainers lied just as much throughout the campaign. Some of them remainers are also very violent in voicing their opinion calling anyone who doesn't agree with them a bigot and worse thus coercing other people into voting remain.
Then there's the case of the SJW's who oppose brexit. Who wants to be on their side anyway apart from London?
If it weren't for the London vote, we would be talking about a landslide victory for Brexit in that referendum.
If we ignore bits where most people leave, yeah, Brexit wins double.
You've been spending too much time on Reddit.
You're doing a "defined by the company you keep" accusation (against a vague concept) while supporting the side which stabbed an MP.
You haven't made any kind of case against a second referendum, in this reply. In fact, the highlighted part would suggest you agree that the first one is flawed.
Do you have anything else, other than 'because'?
The decision making of the electorate was manipulated in a deceitful way by both sides which will happen again in any election and during this 2nd referendum if it were to happen.
Politicians lie, a politician's career is based on making your lies as convincing as possible and your ability to nullify any damage to your credibility when you are found out.
Both the conservatives and the labour party have been elected countless times on lies and have done completely the opposite of what they promise after re-election but yet before this brexit situation developed, the electorate kept voting them in.
The UK should use this opportunity to unite, whatever the result and defeat the status quo. So far, the government is failing the country big time and the electorate needs to focus on getting people in power that whatever the outcome, brexit or no brexit are able to actually lead the country forward
and not this referendum nonsense.
One thing is certain, if the brexit decision would be reversed, the UK's negotiating position will be much weaker in the EU than it was before the original decision to leave was taken.
It's not possible without a GE but with one (and an extension) it is.
Seems like what Corbyn is angling at given interviews today. Full support for a confirmatory referendum (which they've already voted for) but if it ends up being a GE Labour will still be a soft brexit party.
If i were them I'd run the GE based on a soft brexit policy subject to another in/out referendum prior to negotiations to check the will of the people. Not sure how popular it would really be but seems to be the logical position for Labours base.
Only one side broke the law.
Politicians lying is not news. What did make the news was £350m for the NHS per week.
A lie which everyone tried to distance themselves from after.
Also, there was no thought or preparation made for any kind of deal.
If some leavers knew that by leaving we'd lose benefits but still have to commit to freedom of movement, they may have said "No way then!"
As for uniting the country, that will never happen now.
Cameron's last ditch attempt to win an election, by promising a referendum, introduced a rift that will remain for decades.
As for the last part. I don't see how our position in Europe would be weakened, when we still have the same number of votes.
feck sake.
Why yes if you take away everything about Brexit then the opposition party should be miles a head BUT brexit is pretty complex and effects different parts of the labour vote.
?
I not arguing that Labour did well last night.
You can make that argument for why the country shouldn't have another referendum. If less than 40% of the electorate turned out for EU elections then clearly the country isn't screaming to have another say on EU membership.
Yesterday results show what we already know there is a portion of the electorate that just votes brexit, this portion is too big to be completely ignored by both major parties but also small enough that they can well pretty much be ignored for 90% of the time.
They are never going to get into power so its pointless.
I get not voting Labour leader was some war crinimal who goes around the world collecting pay checks(Em....I wonder who)but look with the current Left wing Labour Party you have the polices, the infrastructure, the party base etc and your going throw all this way because Corbyn has stalled on calling for a ''People Vote''(He literally call for one again today) ?
If you want a more left wing Britain then you have to suck it up and vote Labour. You may not like it but we've got about 11 years before the world turns into a Children Of Men. So just do it......................... please.
The only option other than Real Labour which we have now compared to Tory Lite which we had before are the Torries.
And they are the reason we are in a mess now.
And they are the reason we are in a mess now.
Neither are labour with Corbyn in charge.
I don't have to vote labour at all, you do understand that right?
I personally don't think he'd make a great leader of the country. And the constant calls for general elections in recent times is nauseating. Says you care about getting into power first, and Brexit second. The people it affects, third.
Hes just not the person I'd be comfortable voting into power. I'm not going vote conservative, so I'll just have to go elsewhere and face the consequence.