Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

I feel like all the talk surrounding Watson's possible ousting kind of highlights a major problem in how Corbyn's critics approach him...they both simultaneously want to portray him as this soft, weak and naive leader who isn't ruthless or politically savvy enough to regain power for Labour, while simultaneously lamenting the notion that he's too ruthless with 'moderates' in his own party. Ultimately both don't work...if he's as ruthless as they say he is, then he's clearly got some political nous - at least when it comes to internal party matters. But again, if he is too naive and too weak, then surely moves to further cement his own power would contradict this notion?

It also highlights the 'moderate' wing of the party's hypocrisy insofar as they didn't seem to give much of a feck about party democracy being subverted back in 2015-16 when plenty of measures were considered to ensure Corbyn couldn't gain or retain power, and when the significant new membership was often downplayed because of its sympathies towards Corbyn.

Ultimately this is about holding power for both wings of the party...in that respect no one wing is holier than thou compared to any other, and no one wing can be seen as particularly competent or capable considering all their respective failures.
 
Kentonio said:
Now with Labour going hard left and the Tories hard right, the Lib Dems have pretty much free rein to scoop up the centre.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure I consider mild social democratic policy to be ‘hard left’... that’s more media framing than objective truth.

We don’t know how popular this supposed ‘centre’ currently is because we haven’t been able to test it. Lots of people self identify as being centre ground but I recall a large study a couple of years that showed in a blind policy test, most people were more aligned to the Green Party and Labour. The reality is that outside of Brexit, the Lib Dem’s would not be very relevant. This is very clear because if you asked most people to name a single policy of theirs unrelated to Brexit, they’d struggle.
 
ZupZup said:
I’m not sure I consider mild social democratic policy to be ‘hard left’... that’s more media framing than objective truth.

We don’t know how popular this supposed ‘centre’ currently is because we haven’t been able to test it. Lots of people self identify as being centre ground but I recall a large study a couple of years that showed in a blind policy test, most people were more aligned to the Green Party and Labour. The reality is that outside of Brexit, the Lib Dem’s would not be very relevant. This is very clear because if you asked most people to name a single policy of theirs unrelated to Brexit, they’d struggle.
Click to expand...

indeed.

Its policies.

In the end Labour has them. Lib/Dems will say Torries are bad.
 
Cheesy said:
I feel like all the talk surrounding Watson's possible ousting kind of highlights a major problem in how Corbyn's critics approach him...they both simultaneously want to portray him as this soft, weak and naive leader who isn't ruthless or politically savvy enough to regain power for Labour, while simultaneously lamenting the notion that he's too ruthless with 'moderates' in his own party. Ultimately both don't work...if he's as ruthless as they say he is, then he's clearly got some political nous - at least when it comes to internal party matters. But again, if he is too naive and too weak, then surely moves to further cement his own power would contradict this notion?

It also highlights the 'moderate' wing of the party's hypocrisy insofar as they didn't seem to give much of a feck about party democracy being subverted back in 2015-16 when plenty of measures were considered to ensure Corbyn couldn't gain or retain power, and when the significant new membership was often downplayed because of its sympathies towards Corbyn..
Click to expand...
Pretty much this.

Corbyn is both the worst leader of all time and the only person who can save Britain. But this view shouldn't come as a surprise anymore, ask Corbyn critics whats he's doing wrong and what he should do instead and they'll give a Keano like respond - ''Strong Spine'', ''A real opposition leader'' ''Destroying the Tories'' etc etc. Completely meaningless slogans, that don't amount up to anything. Ask them what they would do if put in charge of the Labour Party and again slogans reappear(The left wing politics seem to disappear, funny that) and the Brexit crisis is magically fixed.

The ''moderates''(Basically Liberals) are done, they don't have a answer to well the problems they in part caused. The crash in 08 and the reaction to it ruined them with the electorate but more importantly it killed their political ideology(Turns out it wasn't the end of history after all). Even if they were to win elections, all they will and can do is to further the crisis we are in(How the feck do Dems voters think a Lib Dem would help the country ?). So all they have left is to defend neo liberalism at all cost, to view the world as a moralistic HBO show and to write bad opinion pieces in The Guardian.
 
ZupZup said:
I’m not sure I consider mild social democratic policy to be ‘hard left’... that’s more media framing than objective truth.

We don’t know how popular this supposed ‘centre’ currently is because we haven’t been able to test it. Lots of people self identify as being centre ground but I recall a large study a couple of years that showed in a blind policy test, most people were more aligned to the Green Party and Labour. The reality is that outside of Brexit, the Lib Dem’s would not be very relevant. This is very clear because if you asked most people to name a single policy of theirs unrelated to Brexit, they’d struggle.
Click to expand...

The party currently debating whether to abolish private schools is ‘mild social democracy policy’?

That study you’re referring to means very little in reality. If you poll Americans purely on policy they are far to the left of where they actually vote. Yet time and again they re-elect Republicans who hardly represent their policy positions in the slightest. People mostly don’t vote based on pure policy positions, and never have.

If you want to see where people are likely to vote, then look at how they actually voted for decades. Sure we may see some swings over time, but the idea that they’re suddenly all going to wake up and vote for radically different positions is naive. People in Britain tend towards moderate safe politics which is why fairly moderate Tories usually do very well and why Blair managed to sweep the board for so long.
 
Kentonio said:
The party currently debating whether to abolish private schools is ‘mild social democracy policy’?

That study you’re referring to means very little in reality. If you poll Americans purely on policy they are far to the left of where they actually vote. Yet time and again they re-elect Republicans who hardly represent their policy positions in the slightest. People mostly don’t vote based on pure policy positions, and never have.

If you want to see where people are likely to vote, then look at how they actually voted for decades. Sure we may see some swings over time, but the idea that they’re suddenly all going to wake up and vote for radically different positions is naive. People in Britain tend towards moderate safe politics which is why fairly moderate Tories usually do very well and why Blair managed to sweep the board for so long.
Click to expand...
You do know the UK voted to leave the EU in 2016, right ?
 
Nothing wrong in principle with getting rid of Watson (does anyone really think the likes of Mandleson or Campbell wouldn’t do the exact same thing if their deputy leader spent all his time attacking his own party!?) but the optics of doing it now, and in the way they’ve tried to (by scrapping the position) falls right into the classic “same old dumb lefty factionalism” box and does them no favours.

Still, anyone claiming to be outraged by it is just outright lying. No one cares about Tom Watson. But it gives those inclined, and the media, ammunition to pretend to.
 
Last edited:
Cheesy said:
I feel like all the talk surrounding Watson's possible ousting kind of highlights a major problem in how Corbyn's critics approach him...they both simultaneously want to portray him as this soft, weak and naive leader who isn't ruthless or politically savvy enough to regain power for Labour, while simultaneously lamenting the notion that he's too ruthless with 'moderates' in his own party.
Click to expand...

That wouldnt be my criticism of this move against Watson. Mine would be it's the wrong battle at the wrong time. Headline on day 1 of the pre election conference: Labour leadership split by internal war/ hard lefts war against moderates. That Corbyn let it get to this stage.. that he allowed the focus to shift away from the Tories and back towards his own sides problems... Thats the criticism of his leadership.
 
Mockney said:
Nothing wrong in principle with getting rid of Watson (does anyone really think the likes of Mandleson or Campbell wouldn’t do the exact same thing if their deputy leader spent all his time attacking his own party!?) but the optics of doing it now, and in the way they’ve tried to (by scrapping the position) falls right into the classic “same old dumb lefty factionalism” box and does them no favours.

Still, anyone claiming to be outraged by it is just outright lying. No one cares about Tom Watson. But it gives those inclined, and the media, ammunition to pretend to.
Click to expand...

It's not the fact it's Tom Watson. The outrage comes from the motion to abolish the position of deputy leader to remove him, as opposed to going through the proper procedures to hold a vote on who should be deputy leader (I think it requires 20% of Labour MPs to pass).
 
esmufc07 said:
It's not the fact it's Tom Watson. The outrage comes from the motion to abolish the position of deputy leader to remove him, as opposed to going through the proper procedures to hold a vote on who should be deputy leader (I think it requires 20% of Labour MPs to pass).
Click to expand...

Which.... is what I said?

Also, the conference would’ve voted on it (so hardly some undemocratic night of the tiny sporks, is it?) and it was removed anyway (apparently at Corbyn’s insistence) so it’s not like anything actually worthy of any outrage happened at all?

But we both know that’s not how anyone is going to report on or react to it. Part of which, of course, is on Lansman.
 
Last edited:
Kentonio said:
If you want to see where people are likely to vote, then look at how they actually voted for decades. Sure we may see some swings over time, but the idea that they’re suddenly all going to wake up and vote for radically different positions is naive. People in Britain tend towards moderate safe politics which is why fairly moderate Tories usually do very well and why Blair managed to sweep the board for so long.
Click to expand...

My personal feeling differs because I feel like we are starting to get to a time where we are in uncharted territory for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the mainstream media are losing a lot of the influence they once had. For years, elections have practically been decided on media manipulation alone... but because of the growth of social media, they no longer hold the same power.

The idea that people are going to get more conservative as they get older might not be quite so true when you have a whole generation that have largely been left behind this country’s economic policy and austerity. A generation worse off economically than their parents.

Younger people are becoming more politically aware and starting to vote in greater numbers.

I’d say the longer term future prospects for the Tories actually look pretty bleak in my opinion.
 
Smores said:
It's a tough argument for anyone to make that the party shouldn't get rid of Watson. Never a big deal when the Tories make a change but for Labour it's always a meltdown apparently.

I would like Benn or Cooper brought in to the shadow cabinet role to appease the centrists though. Agree or disagree with their general voting history they've both done good work on brexit. Far more than Watson has done at any point ever.
Click to expand...
Yep. Johnson just removed 20 MP's but one change in Labour is a "civil war". :rolleyes:
 
Red Dreams said:
Polls mean nothing.

When the campaign starts, parties will have to run on policies.
Click to expand...
Parties also have to run with or against perceptions formed in the previous few years, which is what polls imperfectly measure. Those who say polls don’t matter usually do so because the polls are not in their favour. If Corbyn was miles ahead, we wouldnt hear the end of it from the polls don’t matter crowd.
 
nickm said:
Point still stands. Labours house is burning down and they wanted to chop down the annoying tree in the garden.
Click to expand...
How is Labours house burning down? You still got faith in your poll after their accuracy the last 2 elections?

Sensationalist rubbish. You should write for a tabloid, one with a bright name.
 
nickm said:
Parties also have to run with or against perceptions formed in the previous few years, which is what polls imperfectly measure. Those who say polls don’t matter usually do so because the polls are not in their favour. If Corbyn was miles ahead, we wouldnt hear the end of it from the polls don’t matter crowd.
Click to expand...

Does Labour and Corbyn have problems?
Yes.

In any GE a party has to offer policies that help people.
Labour does that.
I am not aware of what the other parties offer. What do they offer that will change the predicament the country is in?

When the campaigning starts all this will become clear. Its not about winning. What after?

How can the course be changed?
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
That's your argument, not mine. I never said that.
Click to expand...

The big problem here is that the fundamental USP that Corbyn was sold on was his honesty and respect for democracy ‘new politics’, a big part of that was a respect for the will of the membership, yet his brief tenure as leader of the Labour Party has only revealed him to be a duplicitous liar like the rest of them.
 
Last edited:
Classical Mechanic said:
The big problem here is that the fundamental USP that Corbyn was sold on was his honesty and respect for democracy ‘new politics’, a big part of that was a respect for the will of the membership, yet his brief tenure as leader of the Labour Party has only revealed him to be a duplicitous liar like the rest of them.
Click to expand...

It really hasn't, but it's reassuring to think that when you're voting for actual twats.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
The big problem here is that the fundamental USP that Corbyn was sold on was his honesty and respect for democracy ‘new politics’, a big part of that was a respect for the will of the membership, yet his brief tenure as leader of the Labour Party has only revealed him to be a duplicitous liar like the rest of them.
Click to expand...
The big problem here is that you are making up arguments against points I never made. I merely pointed out the inaccuracies of polls over recent years.

As for your generalisations. You'll need to be a little bit more specific about these duplicitous lies?

Top tip: If you suspect an MP of that, a good way to check is looking at their voting record. I suggest you do that for Johnson, Swinson and Corbyn to start with.
 
Andrew Fisher (policy bloke) has apparently gone. Tasty conference so far.
 
berbatrick said:
Second referendum
Click to expand...

A second referendum with some hypothetical new deal he's secured? No deal? May/Boris' deal? Will Labour be for Brexit or Remain?

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...use-jeremy-corbyn-shutting-down-brexit-debate

Also worrying for Labour, before a probable general election in which Brexit would be certain to dominate, the survey found that almost seven out of 10 voters (69%) now believe Corbyn’s policy on Brexit – to back a second referendum while not recommending either Leave or Remain – is unclear.

In contrast, well over half of voters think the Conservatives (58%), the Liberal Democrats (59%) and the Brexit party (70%) have clear Brexit policies. Opinium also found for the first time that Remain voters were now just as likely to vote for the Liberal Democrats as for Labour.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
Pretty much this.

Corbyn is both the worst leader of all time and the only person who can save Britain. But this view shouldn't come as a surprise anymore, ask Corbyn critics whats he's doing wrong and what he should do instead and they'll give a Keano like respond - ''Strong Spine'', ''A real opposition leader'' ''Destroying the Tories'' etc etc. Completely meaningless slogans, that don't amount up to anything. Ask them what they would do if put in charge of the Labour Party and again slogans reappear(The left wing politics seem to disappear, funny that) and the Brexit crisis is magically fixed.

The ''moderates''(Basically Liberals) are done, they don't have a answer to well the problems they in part caused. The crash in 08 and the reaction to it ruined them with the electorate but more importantly it killed their political ideology(Turns out it wasn't the end of history after all). Even if they were to win elections, all they will and can do is to further the crisis we are in(How the feck do Dems voters think a Lib Dem would help the country ?). So all they have left is to defend neo liberalism at all cost, to view the world as a moralistic HBO show and to write bad opinion pieces in The Guardian.
Click to expand...

Yeah...you'll know yourself I've been critical of Corbyn at times, but the reaction to this from Labour moderates determined to see themselves above politicking when it was basically what the Blair government was often lauded for is fairly silly. In a way I wonder if it's a group of people now perpetually out of power trying to reinvent themselves in a feel-good way - their tactics don't win them elections anymore and they know their ideas aren't particularly inventive or interesting, so instead they're appealing to the notion that they're civil and above it all. When it comes to actual politics there's just a general nothingness to them.

At least the Lib Dems can claim to be strong on Brexit...Labour figures like Watson are inherently undermined in their criticisms of Corbyn insofar as they're still in the party, thereby they're enabling and furthering the very leader they claim to hate by ensuring he has a larger group of MP's and making it easier for him to stay in power. Own Smith was slating him today...but the question has to be asked why he's in a political party whose leadership have a platform that's just utterly out of tune with his own.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
The big problem here is that the fundamental USP that Corbyn was sold on was his honesty and respect for democracy ‘new politics’, a big part of that was a respect for the will of the membership, yet his brief tenure as leader of the Labour Party has only revealed him to be a duplicitous liar like the rest of them.
Click to expand...

There's an element of truth to that, but then at the same time surely his detractors should like this, insofar as one of their initial criticisms of him was that he wouldn't win power because he's soft and naive? Again, the issue here is that once that facade is increasingly taken away, it becomes clear that a lot of Corbyn's detractors don't like him because they don't think he's a "strong" leader - they dislike him because they fundamentally disagree with his policy platform.
 
Red Dreams said:
Polls mean nothing.

When the campaign starts, parties will have to run on policies.
Click to expand...

This would work as an argument if it weren't for the fact Labour fans here and on social media consistently use polls for their advantage when they're doing well in them. Not to mention the most common lament of the Lib Dems back in the day was how shite their polling was.
 
Corbyn will have to fight to remain coy and neutral. Don't think he gets away with it this time. I hope they sort it out. Go pro remain. Even if they lose, they lose honestly. This too clever for your boots facing both ways thing is tiresome now.
 
Cheesy said:
This would work as an argument if it weren't for the fact Labour fans here and on social media consistently use polls for their advantage when they're doing well in them. Not to mention the most common lament of the Lib Dems back in the day was how shite their polling was.
Click to expand...

In forums polls are the yardstick so I can understand this.

For decades the country has been lied to. Brexit is merely the final lie.
It was never the solution.

The question that the parties need to answer is what they are going to do for working families so they do not go under.
That still leaves immigration. To stop/send back?

The reality is if everyone does not pull together, we are not going to get out of this quagmire.
 
When people get scared by the state of the country and current events, they want strong leaders with firm positions. A lot of people prefer to risk going the wrong direction as long as there is a clear direction. Corbyn’s ambiguous position is polling horribly. It couldn’t be any more clear that he’s fecking this up at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.