Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[jimbob]

I tend* to have Friday breakfasts with a colleague who is interested in politics - his family sent him out of Iran when he was 13 because he wouldn't hide his contempt of the mullahs. Unsurprisingly, he's pretty forthcoming with his opinions away from an autocratic regime. He's never been a fan of Corbyn, but his teenage son was a fan, which I think is allowed in a teenager.

Apparently Corbyn's latest performance in PMQs was sufficient to change his mind - he now thinks Corbyn is utterly useless.

I used to think he was Rick from the Young ones, but after listening to his performance in PMQs I think he was more like Neil.

Although if he had stood up and said "Would the Prime Minister agree that the Brexit deal is really heavvvy, man?" it would actually have been an improvement.

*And have done so for the last sixteen years.

 

[imodium]

Clearly the plan post Brexit, was to support Brexit as to not bleed support to ukip and their obvious socialist values.
With that working so well evil insiders plan to usurp Corbyn by voting stay.
Or,
everyone can see labour are being labelled the anti Brexit party, hello alternate universe, and with the liberal party's upswing via being anti Brexit MPs scared of losing their seat are going against the whip, whom themselves are against the pro Brexit stance of Corbyn.

The guy has grassroot support, but that has to be dwindling now, the mirror and the guardian hate him but, if the next best option is owen smith (remember him) the party's screwed/over delete as appropriate.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

I'm betting the thread I started to ask this will get merged anyway so I'll re-ask here...

What is the problem anyways? Corbyn is trying to keep the Conservatives from turning England into another version of the 90s Maldives (sweatshop/tax haven) and he's LOSING support for doing so? I would think that would be something Labor would support, not oppose.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm betting the thread I started to ask this will get merged anyway so I'll re-ask here...

What is the problem anyways? Corbyn is trying to keep the Conservatives from turning England into another version of the 90s Maldives (sweatshop/tax haven) and he's LOSING support for doing so? I would think that would be something Labor would support, not oppose.

No I think you have that wrong. Corbyn is siding with the tories on this one and demanding his mps vote through leaving the EU.

 

[The Don]

I'm betting the thread I started to ask this will get merged anyway so I'll re-ask here...

What is the problem anyways? Corbyn is trying to keep the Conservatives from turning England into another version of the 90s Maldives (sweatshop/tax haven) and he's LOSING support for doing so? I would think that would be something Labor would support, not oppose.

No I think you have that wrong. Corbyn is siding with the tories on this one and demanding his mps vote through leaving the EU.

Their motivations are different but both May and Corbyn want Brexit, and as far as I can tell both seem to want a Hard Brexit (out of the EU, out of the EEU, out of the Council of Europe).

IMO May sees this as her opportunity to join the patheon of "greats" alongside Churchill and Thatcher. An ugly Brexit, a vigourous display of the "Dunkirk Spirit" and May can be the Prime Minister who "saved" the UK from Europe - despite the pain and consequences. After all Churchill is revered despite the tens of thousands of civilian deaths, Thatcher likewise despite the literal deaths in the Falklands and the figurative death of various industries. If we have to become a Parsnip Republic (like a Banana Republic but less sweet and with much worse weather) in the process then that's the price that had to be paid.

OTOH Corbyn sees a disasterous Brexit as opening the door to the establishing of a workers' utopia. Out of the ashes of the "failed" experiment with capitalism will rise a new UK economy based on cooperatives where workers and management will work in harmony, side by side, for modest rewards but where everyone who wants one will have a job and everyone who doesn't want to or cannot work will be well looked after.

The rest of the world will look at this example of economic nirvana and be inspired to implement their own versions. Corbyn will finally be recognised as the visionary he truly is

What a numpty !

 

[Craig B]

Corbyn sees a disasterous Brexit as opening the door to the establishing of a workers' utopia. Out of the ashes of the "failed" experiment with capitalism will rise a new UK economy based on cooperatives where workers and management will work in harmony, side by side, for modest rewards but where everyone who wants one will have a job and everyone who doesn't want to or cannot work will be well looked after.

The rest of the world will look at this example of economic nirvana and be inspired to implement their own versions. Corbyn will finally be recognised as the visionary he truly is

What a numpty !

I don't think his ideological motivation in the Brexit debate is as well developed as that. The details of the process of transition from capitalism to socialusm have always been hard to prophesy plausibly; and I don't think Corbyn has undertaken that task. I really believe it's as simple as this in the Leftwing Brexit camp: the EU is a capitalist cartel. If you are given the opportunity to vote for or against a capitalist institution, what should you do? You should vote against.

I think that's the sum total of the analysis here.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Ok, betwen those two posts at least I have a better idea...tyvm.

 

[jimbob]

Their motivations are different but both May and Corbyn want Brexit, and as far as I can tell both seem to want a Hard Brexit (out of the EU, out of the EEU, out of the Council of Europe).

IMO May sees this as her opportunity to join the patheon of "greats" alongside Churchill and Thatcher. An ugly Brexit, a vigourous display of the "Dunkirk Spirit" and May can be the Prime Minister who "saved" the UK from Europe - despite the pain and consequences. After all Churchill is revered despite the tens of thousands of civilian deaths, Thatcher likewise despite the literal deaths in the Falklands and the figurative death of various industries. If we have to become a Parsnip Republic (like a Banana Republic but less sweet and with much worse weather) in the process then that's the price that had to be paid.

OTOH Corbyn sees a disasterous Brexit as opening the door to the establishing of a workers' utopia. Out of the ashes of the "failed" experiment with capitalism will rise a new UK economy based on cooperatives where workers and management will work in harmony, side by side, for modest rewards but where everyone who wants one will have a job and everyone who doesn't want to or cannot work will be well looked after.

The rest of the world will look at this example of economic nirvana and be inspired to implement their own versions. Corbyn will finally be recognised as the visionary he truly is
What a numpty !

I don't think his ideological motivation in the Brexit debate is as well developed as that. The details of the process of transition from capitalism to socialusm have always been hard to prophesy plausibly; and I don't think Corbyn has undertaken that task. I really believe it's as simple as this in the Leftwing Brexit camp: the EU is a capitalist cartel. If you are given the opportunity to vote for or against a capitalist institution, what should you do? You should vote against.

I think that's the sum total of the analysis here.

Ok, betwen those two posts at least I have a better idea...tyvm.

I have highlighted the key point from those two

 

[Undesired Walrus]

For what reason(s) do you suppose Corbyn struggles so hard to connect with the electorate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Don]

For what reason(s) do you suppose Corbyn struggles so hard to connect with the electorate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO there are two basic reasons.

Firstly the policies he champions are largely out of date and/or irrelevant to the modern day. Jeremy Corbyn is still fighting the class war of his youth and hasn't moved his opinions or policies from those he first encountered in the 6th form. Like it or not society has changed significantly in the last 40-50 years. We are much less likely to be prepared to forego something for ourselves for the collective good and although poverty and inequality is still rife in the UK, it's less visible and less prevalent than it was back in the 1970's. My parents' lifestyle as middle-class professionals back in the 1970s was probably in the top 20%-30% but it was much less comfortable than the norm today.

Secondly, that wouldn't matter quite so much if he was a more motivating, engaging and enthusiastic individual. Even if the message is a bit outdated, if the person delivering the message is clearly enthusiastic and passionate about it then there's a chance that people will be attracted to it. Corbyn is such a wet blanket that even if his policies were sound and widely popular, he'd make them seem deary and outdated.

So we have unpopular policies delivered by a less-than-thrilling individual - IMO

 

[Undesired Walrus]

IMO there are two basic reasons.

Firstly the policies he champions are largely out of date and/or irrelevant to the modern day. Jeremy Corbyn is still fighting the class war of his youth and hasn't moved his opinions or policies from those he first encountered in the 6th form. Like it or not society has changed significantly in the last 40-50 years. We are much less likely to be prepared to forego something for ourselves for the collective good and although poverty and inequality is still rife in the UK, it's less visible and less prevalent than it was back in the 1970's. My parents' lifestyle as middle-class professionals back in the 1970s was probably in the top 20%-30% but it was much less comfortable than the norm today.

Secondly, that wouldn't matter quite so much if he was a more motivating, engaging and enthusiastic individual. Even if the message is a bit outdated, if the person delivering the message is clearly enthusiastic and passionate about it then there's a chance that people will be attracted to it. Corbyn is such a wet blanket that even if his policies were sound and widely popular, he'd make them seem deary and outdated.

So we have unpopular policies delivered by a less-than-thrilling individual - IMO

Yes, I really feel force of personality really makes such a big difference. I don't subscribe to the school of thought that policy should win the day and it shouldn't matter who delivers it. It should be the responsibility of those who advocate policies to do it in a way that can really engage with the population.

I think Corbyn has got where he is through the grandpa factor, a good example is our collective love for David Attenborough. We have a tendency to rebel against our parents and looking for another less imposing authority figure for guidance we find our grandparents. Blair= parent. Corbyn = wacky old granddad


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimbob]

IMO there are two basic reasons.

Firstly the policies he champions are largely out of date and/or irrelevant to the modern day. Jeremy Corbyn is still fighting the class war of his youth and hasn't moved his opinions or policies from those he first encountered in the 6th form. Like it or not society has changed significantly in the last 40-50 years. We are much less likely to be prepared to forego something for ourselves for the collective good and although poverty and inequality is still rife in the UK, it's less visible and less prevalent than it was back in the 1970's. My parents' lifestyle as middle-class professionals back in the 1970s was probably in the top 20%-30% but it was much less comfortable than the norm today.

Secondly, that wouldn't matter quite so much if he was a more motivating, engaging and enthusiastic individual. Even if the message is a bit outdated, if the person delivering the message is clearly enthusiastic and passionate about it then there's a chance that people will be attracted to it. Corbyn is such a wet blanket that even if his policies were sound and widely popular, he'd make them seem deary and outdated.

So we have unpopular policies delivered by a less-than-thrilling individual - IMO

Yes - and he is also quite dim, both in his lack of analysis, and his slow-wittedness as well as what even I can see is a tin ear for political judgement.

This government would be handing any competent opposition opportunities on an almost daily basis, but whenever Corbyn gets a whif of ..."momentum" he seems to think that instead of driving the point home, it is time to take advantage of it and go off on one of his hobby horses. He keeps doing it. If your opponent is making a meal of it, you *don't* point out your more unpopular ideas, in the hope that people will start to take notice of you.

Yes, I really feel force of personality really makes such a big difference. I don't subscribe to the school of thought that policy should win the day and it shouldn't matter who delivers it. It should be the responsibility of those who advocate policies to do it in a way that can really engage with the population.

I think Corbyn has got where he is through the grandpa factor, a good example is our collective love for David Attenborough. We have a tendency to rebel against our parents and looking for another less imposing authority figure for guidance we find our grandparents. Blair= parent. Corbyn = wacky old granddad


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The highlighted part. That has put it better than I had before. He *looks* like a nice person. But that can only get you so far.

 

[MikeG]

This thread needs bumping on the day that Labour lost a safe seat (that they've held for over 80 years) to the governing party in a mid-term election, after 7 years of austerity. How are Corbyn supporters going to explain this one away?

 

[lionking]

This thread needs bumping on the day that Labour lost a safe seat (that they've held for over 80 years) to the governing party in a mid-term election, after 7 years of austerity. How are Corbyn supporters going to explain this one away?

Ah, but the ideological purity.......

 

[The Don]

This thread needs bumping on the day that Labour lost a safe seat (that they've held for over 80 years) to the governing party in a mid-term election, after 7 years of austerity. How are Corbyn supporters going to explain this one away?

Oh, I'm sure that there lots of ways to explain it away, the right-wing press, the less than enthusiastic support from the parliamentary Labour Party, that the public in that constituency isn't yet ready for the Corbyn message, that Labour weren't pro-Brexit enough and so on......

IMO the truth is that he is an uninspiring leader with unpopular policies failing to lead a rudderless party - but apart from that, it's all good

 

[MikeG]

The Daily Mirror:

"Corbyn is the Albatross around the party's neck".

And:

"Two words describe Labour's humiliating loss in Copeland: Jeremy and Corbyn"

"The position now is Corbyn's an electoral liability, deeply unpopular with many voters who consider him neither competent or credible. Turning it round will be difficult, perhaps impossible. A party with a leader who doesn't look or sound a potential Prime Minister isn't sniffing power.

The choices are to unite behind Corbyn, find a new leader or carry on destroying itself. Labour losing one of its own constituencies isn't hitting rock bottom. The party's still digging."

That from Labour's in-house publication (yeah, I know). Does anyone still think that Labour can win a general election under Corbyn?

 

[MikeG]

Ah, but the ideological purity.......

Indeed.

Quietly, the Lib Dems might just be sneaking up on Labour. They were the biggest gainers in Stoke in percentage terms, and the second biggest in Copeland. Maybe Labour should be focusing more on them than on the ridiculous Ukip, whose fox was well and truly shot on the day of the referendum results last year.

 

[Tolls]

I wonder how much affect Corbyn's generally anti-nuclear stance had?
It's a fairly big industry for that constituency.

 

[The Don]

The choices are to unite behind Corbyn, find a new leader or carry on destroying itself.

The history of the Labour Party would IMO suggest Option C, at least for the next decade.

Labour losing one of its own constituencies isn't hitting rock bottom. The party's still digging."

By 80's standards of making themselves unelectable, they're barely scratching the surface....

That from Labour's in-house publication (yeah, I know). Does anyone still think that Labour can win a general election under Corbyn?

Jeremy Corbyn and Dianne Abbot - maybe ?

 

[MikeG]

.....Jeremy Corbyn and Dianne Abbot - maybe ?

I'm not even convinced that Corbyn wants to win a general election.

ETA.........just to be clear, the first two of those quotes in your post above are not my words, but those of the Daily Mirror.