Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[The Don]

While he hasn't helped himself in a lot of ways it's pretty hard to deny that the media have had it in for him since Day 1 and have gone a long way to ensuring that their predictions of failure have come to pass.

True, but he's given them plenty of material to work with both before becoming leader and afterwards.

As have his own party continually undermining his position.

IMO the parliamentary Labour Party were right. The course that Corbyn has set the Labour Party on is electoral irrelevance for a generation. I cannot see how that serves either Labour Party voters or the UK population as a whole.

His capitulation over Brexit IMO shows how to get the wrong side of history, maybe the parliamentary Labour Party want to get the right side of this one.

Also, as ye sow, so shall ye reap. Corbyn has demonstrated decades of undermining successive leaders' positions.

He was never really given a chance to demonstrate his own incompetence.

I disagree, he has had decades to do it - and has done a spectacular job at it.

 

[Tolls]

That's not really been the case.
His own incompetence was there for all to see by New Year.
And then, of course, he topped it all with the whole Trident nonsense and then the Falklands by this time last year...

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

True, but he's given them plenty of material to work with both before becoming leader and afterwards.



IMO the parliamentary Labour Party were right. The course that Corbyn has set the Labour Party on is electoral irrelevance for a generation. I cannot see how that serves either Labour Party voters or the UK population as a whole.

His capitulation over Brexit IMO shows how to get the wrong side of history, maybe the parliamentary Labour Party want to get the right side of this one.

Also, as ye sow, so shall ye reap. Corbyn has demonstrated decades of undermining successive leaders' positions.



I disagree, he has had decades to do it - and has done a spectacular job at it.

I think it's hard to say the PLP are right when they don't seem to have any alternative. Corbin has been elected by the members. twice. If they try for a third time to oust him isn't the likelihood just the same result?

So to my mind they should either have the balls to quit and find a party that meets their needs or stay and try to make a silk purse from their sows ear.

Their plan of destructive sniping doesn't seem to help Labour in the long run either. For me one of the key problems labour have is that their MPs care about nothing other than keeping their jobs.

 

[jimbob]

That's not really been the case.
His own incompetence was there for all to see by New Year.
And then, of course, he topped it all with the whole Trident nonsense and then the Falklands by this time last year...

Ah, you picked my favourite example. There was a reasonable opportunity to seriously question the government's handling of flooding and a chance to show himself on top of his brief, and he demonstrated that he is thinking about fixated on irrelevant causes that are actively unpopular.

*Apart from some colonial guilt (difficult in a previously-uninhabited group of islands) I can't see why he thinks that the inhabitants should be ignored.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

That's not really been the case.
His own incompetence was there for all to see by New Year.
And then, of course, he topped it all with the whole Trident nonsense and then the Falklands by this time last year...

I think trident is one area where the problem was revealed. Corbyn didn't want to renew it. Labour does. If he had the support of his party he could have opposed it and had a clear opportunity to show his ability or lack of on a topic that he cares about.

Instead we get a silly fudge and a damp squib and everyone looks a bit silly. Compare and contrast the snp. They oppose it everyone gets in line more or less and they look like they have a clue.

 

[Tolls]

Trident showed he didn't actually understand how the party worked. It was party policy that had only just been voted on, and he was in no position to change that any time soon. It was an utterly pointless distraction.

 

[jimbob]

From another forum:

This is the testing time for the Corbyn transformation. The challenges are great and the times are tough – but we all know that this is the socialist opportunity of a lifetime.

Still, the imminent Gorton by-election will be a litmus test for Labour. Gerald Kaufman was hanging on by a thread - at the last election of the pre-Corbyn era, Labour got 67% of the vote, narrowly beating the Greens who had 9.8%. If Labour retain this seat, it will prove that the Corbyn transformation is delivering results.

I wonder whether folk like Clive Lewis or Paul Mason will get their Progressive Alliance.

 

[dudalb]

Now it's a plot against Jeremy Corbyn :



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39102703

I'd say that Jeremy Corbyn's political problems are of his own making...

So Corbyn is taking a page from Trump's playbook......

 

[The Don]

So Corbyn is taking a page from Trump's playbook......

Tbh, blaming the right-wing press for any and all ills affecting the Labour Party has been SOP for as long as I have been involved with the party - which is the early 80's. It seemed to be a well-entrenched tactic even then.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Trident showed he didn't actually understand how the party worked. It was party policy that had only just been voted on, and he was in no position to change that any time soon. It was an utterly pointless distraction.

You could say exactly the same about Corbyn as leader and all the moaning PLPers then?

That's my point. The party seems to be throwing a hissy fit rather than trying to get in with making the best of it.

Corbyn is the leader. There will be an election that Labour will lose regardless of who is in charge. Then Corbyn will go.

Some self reflection may suggest that damage limitation is sensible.

 

[The Don]

You could say exactly the same about Corbyn as leader and all the moaning PLPers then?

That's my point. The party seems to be throwing a hissy fit rather than trying to get in with making the best of it.

I'm not sure how they're supposed to do that. Corbyn is leading the Labour Party down a path towards electoral irrelevance. I'm not sure how the PLP is supposed to "make the best of it".

Are they supposed to pretend to support policies that they are known to be against ? Well Corbyn demonstrated how that comes across during the Brexit campaign.

Are they supposed to support policies which are damaging to the Labour Party and which will mean that the minimal influence that the Labour Party currently have over the UK's future will be diluted to homoeopathic levels ?

Corbyn is the leader. There will be an election that Labour will lose regardless of who is in charge. Then Corbyn will go.

But will he ?

And even if he does, unless there is a fundamental shift in the membership, the next leader will be cut from the same cloth. "Moderates" are leaving the party in droves which will mean that the Labour Party will likely disappear further down the rabbit-hole of 1970's student politics.

IMO the PLP are attempting to be a counterweight to this, attempting to retain the moderate members and stymie the most unelectable policies.

Some self reflection may suggest that damage limitation is sensible.

I think that's what the PLP are trying to do - limit the damage caused by Corbyn, the Corbynites and Momentum to the Labour Party in general and their electoral prospects in general elections over the next 20 years in particular.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm not sure how they're supposed to do that. Corbyn is leading the Labour Party down a path towards electoral irrelevance. I'm not sure how the PLP is supposed to "make the best of it".

Well by not publicly showing the party to be an incoherent shambles for a start. I would have thought an MP in this situation would have tried to keep a low profile, hunker down and do their best for their constituents as much as they can. But as you say 'electoral irrelevance' which seems to be code for 'I might lose my job' is what concerns them.

Are they supposed to pretend to support policies that they are known to be against ? Well Corbyn demonstrated how that comes across during the Brexit campaign.

I'm not really aware of any policies that Labour MPs are unwaveringly against. They seem to be happy to adopt whatever they think the public wants to hear. Sometimes differently on a day to day basis.

Are they supposed to support policies which are damaging to the Labour Party and which will mean that the minimal influence that the Labour Party currently have over the UK's future will be diluted to homoeopathic levels ?

Well they've been happy to support policies which were damaging to the Labour Party in the past under Blair so what's new?

But will he ?

Yes. Seriously, he's not some evil genius. Like every other politician he will have his shot then give someone else a go.

And even if he does, unless there is a fundamental shift in the membership, the next leader will be cut from the same cloth. "Moderates" are leaving the party in droves which will mean that the Labour Party will likely disappear further down the rabbit-hole of 1970's student politics.

A fundamental shift in the membership? This sounds rather ominous. Should the members be kicked out for not being ideologically pure or just not allowed to vote for their leader? How do we decide who are the right sort that we should listen to?

This is the nub of the problem. The PLP are at odds with the membership and seem to think they are more important. Rather than attempting to convince the membership they throw the toys out the pram in a hissy fit when they don't get whatever it is they want.

IMO the PLP are attempting to be a counterweight to this, attempting to retain the moderate members and stymie the most unelectable policies.

By openly sabotaging the party?

I think that's what the PLP are trying to do - limit the damage caused by Corbyn, the Corbynites and Momentum to the Labour Party in general and their electoral prospects in general elections over the next 20 years in particular.

Not at all. They have an aim of getting Corbyn out ASAP and are happily destroying the party in the process. Barely one of them has the courage of their convictions to do anything significant other than moan and whinge.

 

[Tolls]

It's not the PLP that's openly doing the sabotage.

As I said, with Trident as an example, Corbyn doesn't actually know how the party functions. As a backbencher no one gives a toss whether he campaigns against party policy. As the leader it is his responsibility to try and at least pay lip service to it.

That is the root of most of the issues, which inevitably makes the party look a shambles.

The same goes for Momentum. They really don't know what they're doing and often, because of the way the party works, come across as revolutionaries...which is hardly a good look.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It's not the PLP that's openly doing the sabotage.

I disagree. At best you could probably argue they are both as bad as each other.

Most Labour members oppose Trident as far as I know.

The damaging thing is the soap opera around these things and the infighting rather than the policy itself. The scary/ridiculous thing is that the Wicked Witch seems strong and gets brownie points from the public when she smiles and cockily says she'd happily nuke innocent people if she wanted to.

Of course, in 2017 being against that kind of thing is seen as a vote loser along with caring about refugees, not hating brown people and maybe looking after those less fortunate than yourself.

 

[The Don]

Well by not publicly showing the party to be an incoherent shambles for a start. I would have thought an MP in this situation would have tried to keep a low profile, hunker down and do their best for their constituents as much as they can. But as you say 'electoral irrelevance' which seems to be code for 'I might lose my job' is what concerns them.

No, I used the phrase deliberately. For the past eighty years, the Labour Party has been a major factor in UK politics either being the party of government or the opposition. Right now IMO there's a very real chance that after the next couple of general elections, it will be neither and instead will be a fringe party with little or no influence on government policy. Your contention that the best way for the PLP to behave is to meekly acquiesce to this.

If their constituents require a social democratic party to ensure that their rights are protected then the responsible way to do this IMO is not to abandon the field but to fight tooth and nail to ensure that Corbyn and the Corbynites don't get their way because the result will be tens of seats swinging from Labour to Conservative or UKIP.

I'm not really aware of any policies that Labour MPs are unwaveringly against. They seem to be happy to adopt whatever they think the public wants to hear. Sometimes differently on a day to day basis.

Really ? I thought that it was Corbyn who was regularly flip-flopping and changing his message. He was publicly pro-Brexit, then anti-Brexit and then pro-Brexit again as he was buffeted by public opinion.

OTOH the Blairite wing has been pretty consistent in their message.

Well they've been happy to support policies which were damaging to the Labour Party in the past under Blair so what's new?

Policies that got them elected three times, unprecedented for a Labour government. The re-writing of the Blair years, as if in 1984, has been one of the most insidious attacks that Momentum have unleashed.

Yes. Seriously, he's not some evil genius. Like every other politician he will have his shot then give someone else a go.

And the Labour Party, in the thrall of Momentum will elect someone similar, or possibly even more extreme as the likes of me, moderate Labour Party members, leave the party.

A fundamental shift in the membership? This sounds rather ominous. Should the members be kicked out for not being ideologically pure or just not allowed to vote for their leader? How do we decide who are the right sort that we should listen to?

It's something that we've been seeing these last couple of years. Moderate Labour Party members like me are leaving the party which means that the likes of Momentum will exert greater and greater influence. The current Labour Party processes while very democratic mean that the "checks and balances" over extremes which the PLP and unions used to wield have gone so the chances of a Kinnock or Smith coming through to start to lead the party back to electability.

This is the nub of the problem. The PLP are at odds with the membership and seem to think they are more important. Rather than attempting to convince the membership they throw the toys out the pram in a hissy fit when they don't get whatever it is they want.

....and the membership are at odds with both reality and the wider electorate. The PLP is attempting to temper the membership whereas Corbyn and his conspiracy theories are just fanning the flames.

By openly sabotaging the party?

That's your view but in many cases the "sabotage" is to get Corbyn and his cronies to follow agreed party policy (Trident being an example) or listen to the supporters (two thirds of whom are anti-Brexit).

Not at all. They have an aim of getting Corbyn out ASAP and are happily destroying the party in the process. Barely one of them has the courage of their convictions to do anything significant other than moan and whinge.

It's an interesting view that they are trying to destroy the party. My, admittedly partial, view is that they're trying to rescue the party from the same group of "activists" who tried to destroy it nearly 40 years ago.

 

[The Don]

BBC article regarding the Labour leadership situation. I think it's a good article but then again it largely aligns with my own views - so I guess I would think that

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39113671

The views of Labour First - moderate Labour Party members:

Their view is that if Mr Corbyn was simply replaced by someone with similar politics, Labour would have missed an opportunity to appeal to a wider electorate who believe the party is now too left-wing.

 

[MikeG]

.......the membership are at odds with both reality and the wider electorate........

That's the nub of the argument. The membership are an unrepresentative minority who are wildly out of tune with the electorate in general, and potential Labour party voters in particular. The party has been infiltrated by a group of extremists who are eviscerating it (not deliberately, but ignorantly).

You can't win elections from the extremes in the UK. If you abandon the centre ground, the other major party will take it and not even bother to say thank you. Labour have to be careful that they don't so abandon it that the Lib Dems supplant them as the opposition, leaving Labour to fight at the extremes with the Greens and Ukip.

 

[ceptimus]

I can't see the Lib Dems taking over while they have little Timmy Farron at the helm. He's even more useless as a leader than Jeremy.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...farron-liberal-democrats-revolt-a7464371.html

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

That's the nub of the argument. The membership are an unrepresentative minority who are wildly out of tune with the electorate in general, and potential Labour party voters in particular. The party has been infiltrated by a group of extremists who are eviscerating it (not deliberately, but ignorantly).

You can't win elections from the extremes in the UK. If you abandon the centre ground, the other major party will take it and not even bother to say thank you. Labour have to be careful that they don't so abandon it that the Lib Dems supplant them as the opposition, leaving Labour to fight at the extremes with the Greens and Ukip.

I'd love to know what extreme policies you think Labour is adopting. Let's not forget that ukip hold sway over both Tory and labour now despite nobody voting for them ever.

If the plp want a moderate centre right party with red ties then why don't they start one and win the next election led by Quentin Softlad or whoever they can find.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

No, I used the phrase deliberately. For the past eighty years, the Labour Party has been a major factor in UK politics either being the party of government or the opposition. Right now IMO there's a very real chance that after the next couple of general elections, it will be neither and instead will be a fringe party with little or no influence on government policy. Your contention that the best way for the PLP to behave is to meekly acquiesce to this.

If their constituents require a social democratic party to ensure that their rights are protected then the responsible way to do this IMO is not to abandon the field but to fight tooth and nail to ensure that Corbyn and the Corbynites don't get their way because the result will be tens of seats swinging from Labour to Conservative or UKIP.



Really ? I thought that it was Corbyn who was regularly flip-flopping and changing his message. He was publicly pro-Brexit, then anti-Brexit and then pro-Brexit again as he was buffeted by public opinion.

OTOH the Blairite wing has been pretty consistent in their message.



Policies that got them elected three times, unprecedented for a Labour government. The re-writing of the Blair years, as if in 1984, has been one of the most insidious attacks that Momentum have unleashed.



And the Labour Party, in the thrall of Momentum will elect someone similar, or possibly even more extreme as the likes of me, moderate Labour Party members, leave the party.



It's something that we've been seeing these last couple of years. Moderate Labour Party members like me are leaving the party which means that the likes of Momentum will exert greater and greater influence. The current Labour Party processes while very democratic mean that the "checks and balances" over extremes which the PLP and unions used to wield have gone so the chances of a Kinnock or Smith coming through to start to lead the party back to electability.



....and the membership are at odds with both reality and the wider electorate. The PLP is attempting to temper the membership whereas Corbyn and his conspiracy theories are just fanning the flames.



That's your view but in many cases the "sabotage" is to get Corbyn and his cronies to follow agreed party policy (Trident being an example) or listen to the supporters (two thirds of whom are anti-Brexit).



It's an interesting view that they are trying to destroy the party. My, admittedly partial, view is that they're trying to rescue the party from the same group of "activists" who tried to destroy it nearly 40 years ago.

So what if the membership are at odds with the public? It's their party. They get to have their views represented and the public vote on it. The public can vote Tory if they want Tories. If these unhappy plp MPs don't like it form their own party.

Labour have been an opposition in name only far longer than Corbyn has been in charge.