Labour party civil war

[Guest MattP]

Sorry for ignorance, whats are these figures based on? 

 

No problem, I should have put the source with it, it's IPOS Mori poll comparison.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-labour-tories-poll-all-time-low-general-election-a7134761.html

[Alf Bentley]

Oppo ldr ratings after 10 mths:

Foot - 32

Kinnock -7

Smith +1

Blair +29

Hague -16

IDS - 9

Howard -15

Cameron -1

Ed M -7

Corbyn -41

 

 

Interesting stats.

They bear a close correlation to eventual election outcome:

- Blair (+29) won a landslide

- Smith (+1) probably would have won in 97, but with a much smaller majority

- Cameron (-1) squeaked in with a minority & tiny majority

- Kinnock (-7) & Ed M (-7) failed narrowly (though it took Kinnock 2 attempts)

- Foot (-32), Hague (-16), IDS (-9) & Howard (15) all got a pasting (or a P45 in IDS' case - amazing he was as high as -9!)

Certainly doesn't bode well for Corbyn, though we live in strange times...

 

An amazing supplementary stat is revealed: in the last 37 years, Blair & Cameron are the ONLY opposition leaders to become PM

 

Figures for Thatcher would be interesting, as my recollection (I was still young) is that she didn't get good ratings as opposition leader and mainly won because of Labour divisions, "Winter of Discontent" - people voting to get Labour out, not her in.

It took her a fair while to get popular, even among Tory voters - though it would have been about 50% adoration and 50% loathing by her second term.

[Thracian]

 

It's time for a new party. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Been suggesting it for months!   

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

My now/soon to be regular warning coming up if you're a Labour Party member with a vote.

Don't vote for the opportunistic narcissist Owen Smith. A snake oil salesman with any principles that will suit the occasion and his purpose.

[Rincewind]

I see that some are complaining about  the rules for voting being changed.

[Guest MattP]

Figures for Thatcher would be interesting, as my recollection (I was still young) is that she didn't get good ratings as opposition leader and mainly won because of Labour divisions, "Winter of Discontent" - people voting to get Labour out, not her in.

It took her a fair while to get popular, even among Tory voters - though it would have been about 50% adoration and 50% loathing by her second term.

 

I actually had a google for Thatcher after I found this and couldn't get anything, I presume they only started keeping these stats when Foot arrived. There is a huge correlation between the figures and comfirms what I think most of us expect, Corbyn would be heading for a huge defeat across the country,

[Guest MattP]

I see that some are complaining about  the rules for voting being changed.

 

The NEC this week reminded me of the bit in "Animal Farm" when the propaganda pig Squealer is caught up a ladder using whitewash to alter the original principles of the revolution.

[Alf Bentley]

The NEC this week reminded me of the bit in "Animal Farm" when the propaganda pig Squealer is caught up a ladder using whitewash to alter the original principles of the revolution.

 

 

I heard that the party is doing "Animal Farm" for its Xmas panto:

 

Casting:

Mr. Jones - Tony Blair

The Old Major - Tony Benn

Snowball - Jeremy Corbyn

Napoleon - John McDonnell

Squealer - Emily Thornberry

Boxer - Andy Burnham

Clover - Angela Eagle

 

Pretty cynical of Corbyn's opponents to change the election rules in such a way - but needs must sometiimes. I'd love to know who was behind that move.

Pretty stupid or vain of Corbyn to be out of the room talking to media & supporters when the decision was taken.

 

It always used to be the case that you couldn't vote in such party elections unless you'd been a full member continuously for at least a year. That makes sense to me (though I was once disqualified from voting as there had been a break in my membership).

 

It was insane of Miliband to introduce a system allowing a vote to non-members who'd paid £3 or new members who'd just joined purely for that purpose.

There are other ways of encouraging new members who are committed to the party's general aims, not just to a particular faction/leader in a vote: cheap membership for those not in F/T work, but reinstate the 1-year rule; alternatively, voting could be a secret ballot after a meeting, not postal voting without a good reason (more controversial).

[Guest MattP]

The £3 and the split could be the everlasting legacy of Miliband, that was probably a worse decision than the Edstone.

 

Have you seen the odds Alf? The bookies think this leadership election will be very tight, Corbyn opened at 1/3 and now you can get about evens - http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leadership-election

 

Imagine if Corbyn nicks it 51-49.

[Alf Bentley]

The £3 and the split could be the everlasting legacy of Miliband, that was probably a worse decision than the Edstone.

 

Have you seen the odds Alf? The bookies think this leadership election will be very tight, Corbyn opened at 1/3 and now you can get about evens - http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/labour-leadership-election

 

Imagine if Corbyn nicks it 51-49.

 

 

The changes in the voting rules will certainly help Corbyn's opponents. If he was up against a strong opponent with wide-ranging support and some ideas with appeal to the left, he might well lose....but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

Wouldn't like to call the result now. Certainly closer than last time, but 1 or more of his opponents will have to perform well and campaign well among members to beat Corbyn. Partly also depends how many people on each side are prepared to cough up £25 and organised enough to do it within the 2-day period allowed. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious. Whatever their views, most people would agree that, due to Brexit, this is the most important period in politics for decades - certainly since Thatcher, but I'd argue since the Attlee/Churchill era. We desperately need one or more credible, functioning opposition parties to hold the govt to account and to be a credible alternative if the economy or negotiations go badly wrong and the Tories lose support. Instead, we have this fiasco!  

 

After an absence of about 15 years, I rejoined last year but haven't got active yet. I was looking forward to attending 1 or 2 meetings.....but now all local party meetings have been cancelled until after the leadership election!  

Whether that's out of a fear of angry scenes or violence, I don't know, as no reason was given. They might also think there's a risk of Corbynistas mobilising via local meetings and exerting more influence....though I wonder how many of them would do so?

 

That's one of the things I was looking forward to finding out by attending local meetings again. I'm sure the hardcore types linked to Trotskyist factions will be heavily involved again, as in the 80s, but the bulk of the Corbynistas seem to be more the sort to attend demos and act the keyboard warrior than to stage plots at local meetings, where they might encounter longstanding party members who disagreed with them.

[Guest MattP]

After an absence of about 15 years, I rejoined last year but haven't got active yet. I was looking forward to attending 1 or 2 meetings.....but now all local party meetings have been cancelled until after the leadership election!

Whether that's out of a fear of angry scenes or violence, I don't know, as no reason was given. They might also think there's a risk of Corbynistas mobilising via local meetings and exerting more influence....though I wonder how many of them would do so?

 

That's one of the things I was looking forward to finding out by attending local meetings again. I'm sure the hardcore types linked to Trotskyist factions will be heavily involved again, as in the 80s, but the bulk of the Corbynistas seem to be more the sort to attend demos and act the keyboard warrior than to stage plots at local meetings, where they might encounter longstanding party members who disagreed with them.

 

The official reason given on the Daily Politics by someone from the NEC was that they don't want to be seen to be arguing during an important election, but I think we know the real reason is the threats, intimidation, sexism etc has got out of control and during this campaign was only going to get worse.

 

I have no idea what the local meetings would be like, I did have an uncle who was a member (Leicester West) but he tossed his membership in the bin after McDonnell was made chancellor.

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

My now/soon to be regular warning coming up if you're a Labour Party member with a vote.

Don't vote for the opportunistic narcissist Owen Smith. A snake oil salesman with any principles that will suit the occasion and his purpose.

I see that Owen postponed his leadership bid launch 'out of respect for what has happened in Nice' which is newspeak for he doesn't want it to be overshadowed by events elsewhere but can also get a bit of extra publicity out of it in the meantime.

[Alf Bentley]

The official reason given on the Daily Politics by someone from the NEC was that they don't want to be seen to be arguing during an important election, but I think we know the real reason is the threats, intimidation, sexism etc has got out of control and during this campaign was only going to get worse.

 

I have no idea what the local meetings would be like, I did have an uncle who was a member (Leicester West) but he tossed his membership in the bin after McDonnell was made chancellor.

 

 

Seems an OTT response. When I was a member before, meetings were generally dull and bureaucratic, and were frequented by nice, well-intentioned small-c conservative people.

 

Apart from in a few locations, where firebrands have stirred things up, I doubt that it's much different now. I was a member throughout the 80s, when Militant and other highly-organised Far Left sectarian groups or entryist factions were active.....and most meetings were dull and civilised even then. Surely they could just cancel or discipline meetings in those few locations where there's a known problem?

 

Apart from a few places in London and Liverpool, maybe Brighton & Bristol, I imagine that it would be the same now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be astonished if all the old types have gone and been replaced by hordes of fiery young Corbynistas. I'd expect there to be a bit of a resurgence of the zealots linked to Trotskyist groups, but they're a small minority. I'd be astonished if many supporters of the Facebook Corbyn personality cult attend local meetings.

 

Any Labour members on here been to meetings recently?

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

I see that Owen postponed his leadership bid launch 'out of respect for what has happened in Nice' which is newspeak for he doesn't want it to be overshadowed by events elsewhere but can also get a bit of extra publicity out of it in the meantime.

Launching today on a quieter (he hopes) Sunday with a promise to literally rebuild Britain, creating 50 million jobs or something that will sound wonderful. Oh and by telling people they should back him and not Angela Eagle now she has triggered the contest. Because he wasn't going to do that of course!

I once had the misfortune to hear him open a conference with what was supposed to be a 15 minute speech and he went on for 50 minutes telling everyone how wonderful he is whilst largely missing the focus of the day. Still he was the focus of his day!

A former Pfizer lobbyist who was happy to see privatisation of elements of the NHS, principles like Pokemon Go. Pop up when you want them to and to attract your attention but just as ephemeral. Twunt of the highest order.

[Rincewind]

Interesting piece in the Independent today about Corbyn. I await to see if anyone posts it.

[Jimothy]

Interesting piece in the Independent today about Corbyn. I await to see if anyone posts it.

Have you actually read it all?

[Darkon84]

A small insight in to the lack of leadership shown by JC and (as already known) his complete inability to converse with anyone who doesn't already share the same viewpoint.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/mp-corbyn-fired-me-during-cancer-treatment-10504995

[purpleronnie]

Anyone see Johanna Baxter on CH4 news?  Holding back tears, I understand she's had some nasty emails etc...but when you look around the world to see acts of incredible strength in political upheavals it does make ours seem wimpy.

 

At this rate I'll be looking to renew my Liberal democrats membership.

[Webbo]

4 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

Anyone see Johanna Baxter on CH4 news?  Holding back tears, I understand she's had some nasty emails etc...but when you look around the world to see acts of incredible strength in political upheavals it does make ours seem wimpy.

 

At this rate I'll be looking to renew my Liberal democrats membership.

You don't get any of this in the nasty party.

[purpleronnie]

6 minutes ago, Webbo said:

You don't get any of this in the nasty party.

Mark Clarke ?

[Guest MattP]

On 7/17/2016 at 07:54, Rincewind said:

Interesting piece in the Independent today about Corbyn. I await to see if anyone posts it.

 

If it's the one I've just been sent then I'm sick of it tbh, yeah he's a "man of peace" and was right about Iraq, but let's not also forget what would have happened had this pacifist ran the World for the last 100 years.

 

Hitler would've been able to exterminate European Jewry. Without the NATO alliance, the USSR would've been able to steamroll through continental Europe. Saddam Hussein would've been able to erase a UN member state from the face of the earth and Iraq would still presently be the private property of his genocidal mobster family. Slobodan Milosevic would've established a greater Serbia, that included within its borders an ethnically cleansed Bosnia Herzegovina and Kosovo and the Taliban government would still be in control of most of Afghanistan, with any other international terrorists there as their welcome guests.

If that's a world you're satisfied with, then let it rest on your conscience, but you certainly can't claim the moral high-ground over it.

[Guest MattP]

P.S Does anyone know when the voting forms arrive for this?

[Alf Bentley]

13 minutes ago, MattP said:

P.S Does anyone know when the voting forms arrive for this?

 

There's a 2-month leadership campaign. So, presuming neither of the candidates is murdered (), I'd be surprised if the voting forms are distributed before September.

 

If you've coughed up £25 (or taken out a full membership ), I hope that you plan to do your civic duty to help the nation have a viable opposition, Matt. You're not voting Messiah JC II to destroy the Reds, are you?  

 

By the way, you're quite right about the blame Miliband (and others) should get for the decision to set up this stupid leadership voting system. When I was a member last time, back in the 80s/90s, you couldn't vote unless you had at least a year's continuous, paid-up full membership to your credit. I know that because I was unable to vote in one election in the 80s because my membership had lapsed for a couple of months when I moved to a different area. If there had been no £3 "registered supporters" last year and the only members voting had been signed up for at least a year, it's highly unlikely that Corbyn would ever have been leader. Same applies to the idiot MPs who signed Corbyn's original nomination papers even though they didn't support him - just to make sure "the voice of the far left was heard" (including Margaret Beckett!). Without them, he wouldn't have had enough nominations to be on last year's ballot paper....and I say that as someone who would have reluctantly voted for him last year. Things might not have been brilliant under Burnham, Cooper or whoever, but they'd be a damn sight better than this.

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

There's a 2-month leadership campaign. So, presuming neither of the candidates is murdered (), I'd be surprised if the voting forms are distributed before September.

 

If you've coughed up £25 (or taken out a full membership ), I hope that you plan to do your civic duty to help the nation have a viable opposition, Matt. You're not voting Messiah JC II to destroy the Reds, are you?  

 

By the way, you're quite right about the blame Miliband (and others) should get for the decision to set up this stupid leadership voting system. When I was a member last time, back in the 80s/90s, you couldn't vote unless you had at least a year's continuous, paid-up full membership to your credit. I know that because I was unable to vote in one election in the 80s because my membership had lapsed for a couple of months when I moved to a different area. If there had been no £3 "registered supporters" last year and the only members voting had been signed up for at least a year, it's highly unlikely that Corbyn would ever have been leader. Same applies to the idiot MPs who signed Corbyn's original nomination papers even though they didn't support him - just to make sure "the voice of the far left was heard" (including Margaret Beckett!). Without them, he wouldn't have had enough nominations to be on last year's ballot paper....and I say that as someone who would have reluctantly voted for him last year. Things might not have been brilliant under Burnham, Cooper or whoever, but they'd be a damn sight better than this.

 

No Alf, £3 was good value but £25 is too much! Asking for a friend who has signed up to keep Corbyn (another one who voted Green last time out btw and has no desire to vote Labour next time even under Corbyn as he intends to stand for the former). Although if the rumours are true Owen Smith is going to campaign on a second referendum EU I would have signed up to vote for Corbyn, I do hope they are rumours though.

 

It's beyond belief what Miliband did really, what was he thinking? Looking at a poll in the Times today it's very possible now Owen Smith will actually win the vote among the Labour membership, but Corbyn will comfortably win overall due to the 200k odd "registered supporters" who have signed up, how on earth can any party get in the position where the leader the members elect can be beaten because of random sign ups?

[IrememberBobHazell]

I think there would be a fair few within the Labour party who look at the way the Tories do their elections and wonder if they have a better system. By this I mean the MP's whittle it down to 2 (thereby weeding out any candidates who cannot be worked with) and then present it to the membership. Well, if it isn't sorted out by then.

 The trouble is the totally open nature of the competition and then the ones who are effectively given a vote from the bottom of a cornflake packet. I know true blue Tory members who joined up to get Mr Corbyn the job last year. I wouldn't do that, I can't recall a more sinister force in British politics.