Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Because the people who voted for them didn't realise that a centrist party that had spent the previous two decades talking about coalition governments might actually form a coalition government.

Oh, and their bloody stupid move pre-2010 election of signing some daft "we will not budge on this" thing re: uni fees. Just handed people a stick to hit them with, for something they really were in no position to enforce.

Was it that they formed a coalition or who they formed it with? It seems odd to suggest that the correct reaction to the collapse of Lib Dems for abandoning their principles and adopting Tory policies to get some power is to abandon your principles and become more Tory to get some power.

You can't be serious. Where is the evidence of this left wing surge in the electorate?

Scotland for a start.

I think that is true however there has to be a point where it is going too far left and the new supporters added are outweighed by those lost. I suspect, were he be given his way fully, Corbyn would have crossed that line. There is also the individual x factor appeal that attracts people irrespective of the politics. I think Corbyn lacks that.

I agree. However all the other possibles lack it too.

 

[The Don]

I think that is true however there has to be a point where it is going too far left and the new supporters added are outweighed by those lost. I suspect, were he be given his way fully, Corbyn would have crossed that line. There is also the individual x factor appeal that attracts people irrespective of the politics. I think Corbyn lacks that.

I think your last point is crucial. Regardless of his politics, Jeremy Corbyn does not seem to be the type of person to enthuse and motivate the public at large.

 

[Lothian]

I think your last point is crucial. Regardless of his politics, Jeremy Corbyn does not seem to be the type of person to enthuse and motivate the public at large.

Yes It is vital labour have been there with the dour Michael foot and Ed Miliband and it didn't work. However it did work when they were lead by a charismatic Tory.

 

[Darat]

You can't be serious. Where is the evidence of this left wing surge in the electorate?

In the research..you know the thing I mentioned p) . Now I appreciate I haven't provided the link to the research I'm on my phone and don't have access to my bookmarks but I have provided it in the past you may be able to find it with a search on my posts I'll try to remember to post the link later on today.

 

[Darat]

Yes It is vital labour have been there with the dour Michael foot and Ed Miliband and it didn't work. However it did work when they were lead by a charismatic Tory.

Freudian slip I think you meant lead by a charismatic Tony......


Or not

 

[Tolls]

Was it that they formed a coalition or who they formed it with? It seems odd to suggest that the correct reaction to the collapse of Lib Dems for abandoning their principles and adopting Tory policies to get some power is to abandon your principles and become more Tory to get some power.

Because one thing that the Liberals (the LibDem predecessors) were hit with was that they only ever propped up Labour governments. This was something they attempted to move away from as they were, after all, supposed to be a largely centrist party.

As a party for whom coalitions were not anathema (PR pretty much implies coalition government), expecting them to not give way on some issues in order to push others, and to drive policy in a direction more in keeping with their position, baffles me.

Then again, they were utterly hopeless at pointing out their successes, and letting the Tories give them the **** to deliver.

 

[MikeG]

Because one thing that the Liberals (the LibDem predecessors) were hit with was that they only ever propped up Labour governments. This was something they attempted to move away from as they were, after all, supposed to be a largely centrist party.

As a party for whom coalitions were not anathema (PR pretty much implies coalition government), expecting them to not give way on some issues in order to push others, and to drive policy in a direction more in keeping with their position, baffles me.

Then again, they were utterly hopeless at pointing out their successes, and letting the Tories give them the **** to deliver.

Exactly.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If Lablur 'supporters and voters' want the party to be different then they should join and have a vote.
Otherwise stop complaining that a party is doing what the members want and not what they want.

 

[MikeG]

Are you really suggesting that everyone who votes for a political party should join that party to ensure that it reflects their views?

 

[JihadJane]

Are you really suggesting that everyone who votes for a political party should join that party to ensure that it reflects their views?

It's the only way they'll have any say in who leads the party.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Because one thing that the Liberals (the LibDem predecessors) were hit with was that they only ever propped up Labour governments. This was something they attempted to move away from as they were, after all, supposed to be a largely centrist party.

As a party for whom coalitions were not anathema (PR pretty much implies coalition government), expecting them to not give way on some issues in order to push others, and to drive policy in a direction more in keeping with their position, baffles me.

Then again, they were utterly hopeless at pointing out their successes, and letting the Tories give them the **** to deliver.

Because they could have formed a coalition with Labour but chose the Tories instead abandoning the voters who didn't want a Tory government and didn't vote for the LibDems expecting them to make one happen.

You can agree or disagree with that view but its quite clear that the example of the LibDems should be at least a warning to a party that suddenly moving right may not endear you to voters as much as you might think.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Are you really suggesting that everyone who votes for a political party should join that party to ensure that it reflects their views?

Clearly not. Reading comprehension: F

He's saying if you don't like the leader there's a process to change it and its not moaning that the party doesn't do what you want or scweaming and scweaming until you're sick.

 

[Lothian]

Freudian slip I think you meant lead by a charismatic Tony......


Or not

There was no slip, and you clearly knew who I was talking about.

 

[Noztradamus]

Are you really suggesting that everyone who votes for a political party should join that party to ensure that it reflects their views?

Yes. Just call the princely sum of £3 a tax you pay in order to be take part in the poll.

 

[Craig B]

Are you really suggesting that everyone who votes for a political party should join that party to ensure that it reflects their views?

No. But they have to join if they want to participate in electing its leader.

 

[MCel58]

I think your last point is crucial. Regardless of his politics, Jeremy Corbyn does not seem to be the type of person to enthuse and motivate the public at large.

Do we actually now understand what will enthuse the public at large. There appears to be an appetite for something new that addresses the issues of poorer working class areas as demonstrated by the Brexit vote.
This is not the time to just return to the old formulas. Whether we like it or not people have been joining the Labour Party in huge numbers and paying their £3. That may be part of a real desire for what is on offer from political parties to be changed. The U.K. is a more divided nation than was recognised before Brexit and retrenchment into just offering up the same old stuff will I suspect not be popular.

 

[lionking]

Do we actually now understand what will enthuse the public at large. There appears to be an appetite for something new that addresses the issues of poorer working class areas as demonstrated by the Brexit vote.
This is not the time to just return to the old formulas. Whether we like it or not people have been joining the Labour Party in huge numbers and paying their £3. That may be part of a real desire for what is on offer from political parties to be changed. The U.K. is a more divided nation than was recognised before Brexit and retrenchment into just offering up the same old stuff will I suspect not be popular.

What chance to you give Labour of forming government under Corbyn? it's 1000/1 for mine.

 

[MCel58]

What chance to you give Labour of forming government under Corbyn? it's 1000/1 for mine.

I don't give him much chance at all but neither do I give anyone else in the present Labour Party much chance. However, that does not necessarily mean that some of his politics are not finding traction. A more charismatic leader could deliver a better choice for the UK voters. The Blairite project has been critically damaged. Voters want a real choice now not just varying shades of the same thing from both Labour and Tories. Whatever else Brexit was it should be a wake up call that what the political class was delivering is not what people want. Unfortunately there are now parties like UKIP waiting to exploit that unless the main stream parties sit up and listen.

 

[lionking]

I don't give him much chance at all but neither do I give anyone else in the present Labour Party much chance. However, that does not necessarily mean that some of his politics are not finding traction. A more charismatic leader could deliver a better choice for the UK voters. The Blairite project has been critically damaged. Voters want a real choice now not just varying shades of the same thing from both Labour and Tories. Whatever else Brexit was it should be a wake up call that what the political class was delivering is not what people want. Unfortunately there are now parties like UKIP waiting to exploit that unless the main stream parties sit up and listen.

I've argued earlier that two centrist parties with policy differences is a viable scenario, as it is in Australia.

But more to the point, the first objective of a serious party with a chance of winning power is to have an electable leader. Labour is sacrificing any chance of power by stubbornly sticking to ideological purity. Stupidity.

 

[Darat]

How is sticking with Corbyn "ideological purity"?