Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It depends on the tories. As with the chasing lion, Corbyn doesn't have to be perceived as good, just better than the alternative.

Just to provide context Labour are 3/1 to win the next election not 1000/1 or anywhere close to it. 3/1 is still quite long odds though. They're 5/1 to have a majority.

The odds I see are also giving Scotland to vote for independence before 2024 (10/11) as more likely than a Conservative majority at the next election(11/10). That's promising.

 

[Francesca R]

You missed out a couple of my key points and introduce this idea of an 'American' centre which muddies the water.

Political centre is not absolute you said yourself it can drift.

Americal political stance in aggregation is to the right of most of Europe including the UK.

I am not speaking of some global aggregate in respect of the UK parties, hardly anyone can vote in multiple countries.

I make no statement about both big UK parties every being right or left of some global middle. I do doubt that they are ever both right or left of a UK middle.

 

[Francesca R]

You might as well say every elected party is centre since they got the biggest chunk of the vote.

It is usually the party that has captured the biggest share of the middle I think yes. No doubt there are exceptions maybe including Syriza in Greece.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

They are electable, but only because Labour has an utterly ineffective leader. All Labour need at the moment is someone who doesn't sabotage the party and who is vaguely competent. They *really* don't need to have stellar performance.

I think Ed Milliband would disagree with the above. Unless you don't see him as 'vaguely competent' in which case I don't think you're going to find anyone who fits the bill in the Labour Party.

Corbyn is becoming a scapegoat for all Labour ills but let's remember he hasn't lost an election yet. Think that puts him on a pretty short list of Labour leaders who can say that.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Political centre is not absolute you said yourself it can drift.

Its both absolute and relative, depending on context, and that's why I say its an oversimplification and not helpful at times.

I find the idea that Labour should simply keep moving to the right in order to appeal to Tory voters in the hope of getting elected a dangerous one because you end up in situations such as the one which it seems both you and I lament where there is no UK pro-immigration party.

Repeat this on a range of issues and it's not a pretty place to be.

 

[Francesca R]

I find the idea that Labour should simply keep moving to the right in order to appeal to Tory voters in the hope of getting elected a dangerous one

Sometimes it involves the Tories moving left.

you end up in situations such as the one which it seems both you and I lament where there is no UK pro-immigration party.

Agreed but I think voters left and right in the UK dislike immigration.

 

[jimbob]

I think Ed Milliband would disagree with the above. Unless you don't see him as 'vaguely competent' in which case I don't think you're going to find anyone who fits the bill in the Labour Party.

Corbyn is becoming a scapegoat for all Labour ills but let's remember he hasn't lost an election yet. Think that puts him on a pretty short list of Labour leaders who can say that.

He was more effective in opposition than Corbyn, and the government majority was larger.

I would say that he was borderline credible.

Brown showed that he was unsuited to being PM due to his inability to take decisions (preparing for a snap election and then postponing it).

Miliband showed a silly lack of judgement when he tired a debating-society stunt in speaking without notes and forgot to mention his key policy message. That alone made me think he wouldn't have been terribly good at the job - however since then, the Conservatives have only managed to look good in comparison to Labour because Labour has been utterly hamstrung, which wouldn't have happened under almost any other leader.

If Miliband were still leader of the opposition, I think that Labour would be in a far better state than they currently are.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Agreed but I think voters left and right in the UK dislike immigration.

But I think that's, at least partly, because there has been no strong voice in support of it and plenty of propaganda from the right against it. That's what I mean by dangerous. When people start to chase popularity rather than principles things start to crystallise around potentially quite unpleasant results and there is a lack of diversity and dissenting opinion. There's no way to change the downward spiral either. The 'centre' on immigration is becoming more and more hardline over time.

At the risk of a Godwin by your measure the Nazis were a centrist party in 1930s Germany and an equivalent of Labour standing against them might have just proposed concentration camps instead of extermination for the 'undesirables'

Shouldn't there be some level of principle involved somewhere?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

He was more effective in opposition than Corbyn, and the government majority was larger.

I would say that he was borderline credible.

Brown showed that he was unsuited to being PM due to his inability to take decisions (preparing for a snap election and then postponing it).

Miliband showed a silly lack of judgement when he tired a debating-society stunt in speaking without notes and forgot to mention his key policy message. That alone made me think he wouldn't have been terribly good at the job - however since then, the Conservatives have only managed to look good in comparison to Labour because Labour has been utterly hamstrung, which wouldn't have happened under almost any other leader.

If Miliband were still leader of the opposition, I think that Labour would be in a far better state than they currently are.

But he was still unelectable. And in fact the Tories were further ahead at the end of his leadership.

 

[jimbob]

But he was still unelectable. And in fact the Tories were further ahead at the end of his leadership.

I am not sure about him being unelectable - he lost an election, but some of the loss of support was due to there arising a highly effective alternative in Scotland.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I am not sure about him being unelectable - he lost an election, but some of the loss of support was due to there arising a highly effective alternative in Scotland.

Which hasn't gone away so if a Labour leader hasn't got a solution for it I'd say they are pretty much unelectable.

That solution may simply be to let Scotland go its own way and try to win in England but someone is going to have to make that call if that's the strategy.

Is there any Labour potential leader prepared to support the breakup of the UK?

 

[angrysoba]

I believe you're thinking of someone other than the UK Conservative party.

Well, they passed gay marriage.

 

[Francesca R]

Don't all tories think that the church can cure gayness given enough resources?

/not serious

 

[jimbob]

Don't all tories think that the church can cure gayness given enough resources?

/not serious

Cameron, Hague, and Gove don't, to choose some prominent ones.

May and Loathsome... you might have a point

 

[ceptimus]

The Lezzer of two Eagles has announced that she will announce her leadership bid on Monday

Now we may get to see how unelectable she is too.

 

[Francesca R]

Cameron, Hague, and Gove don't, to choose some prominent ones.

May and Loathsome... you might have a point

Theresa May has no kids though. That's a bit gay.

/not seriouser.

 

[jimbob]

Theresa May has no kids though. That's a bit gay.

/not seriouser.

Have you seen what Loathsome said on that topic?

In her interview Leadsom acknowledged that this must be a difficult subject for her rival. “I am sure Theresa will be really sad she doesn’t have children so I don’t want this to be ‘Andrea has children, Theresa hasn’t’ because I think that would be really horrible,” she said.

But Leadsom suggested that being a mother gave her an advantage. She said: “Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.”

She also said May “possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people. But I have children who are going to have children who will directly be part of what happens next”.

 

[ceptimus]

Just a reminder that this is the Corbyn thread. The Tory leadership thread is over there.

 

[Francesca R]

Have you seen what Loathsome said on that topic?

Yes. She opted not to make the debate about motherhood by pulling out the motherhood card and playing it first.

Well what do you expect with two women candidates, it'll just be a bitch fight.

/not seriousest.

 

[GlennB]

Hmmm ... with Eagle about to stand against Corbyn I wonder how The Mail will refrain from making negative references about Eagle's sexuality in order to boost Corbyn so that he continues to fail to threaten the Tories (from The Mail's pov, that is)? Or perhaps Dacre will just plain go for it, shamelessly?