Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[Pubey]

I was out in the car this morning and had 5live on. Some clueless no-mark was ranting about how Corbyn was going to be an absolute disaster for labour.

Don't get me wrong, The jury is out for me in terms of Corbyn being a good thing for labour (let alone this country), but I can't help but be slightly excited over the fact that labour might represent a genuine alternative to LD and the Tories.

The point being drilled home on 5live was that there was no way Corbyn was going to be able to take votes away from the Tories. That may be the case, but Corbyn has already shown that he absolutely can energise younger people with political views who have been switched off from the recent debates and elections. That to me is Corbyn's biggest strength - and in the medium to long run could be a huge positive for the labour party. People say that JC isn't electable in 2020, and I'd agree, however none of Burnham, Cooper or Kendall are either. The labour party is a complete mess but Corbyn has managed to bring grass-roots and young energetic labour party members into the main parliamentary party, which sets labour up nicely for the long-game.

People have said that in the past 20/30 years, the country has drifted to be very tory, but IMO our politics has just disenfranchised the left and the young. No one can claim to represent the country - the tories only received 24% of votes from the total population, or 37% of the total vote, but now have 100% of the power. Corbyn could offer a lifeline to people who feel that they don't have to put up with the status quo.

I can't remember who it was, but one of the resignees from yesterday referred to Labour in the 90s as the 'greatest electoral machine in history' - perhaps backed up by some of the stats in 97, but the Blair/Brown reign was a complete farce, and there's little point being a great electoral party who then can't govern. Corbyn seems smart enough to realise this, so it's an exciting moment in time.

 

[southendkid]

What confuses me is why everyone is focusing on what the Tories think. It didn't matter who won Labour leader, Tory voters weren't going to switch their vote for any of them. The people that matter are the ones that voted SNP, UKIP, Lib Dem and Green. Those are the votes that lost Labour the election, and those are the votes Labour needed to win back and no one is really asking them what they think.

I don't know if Corbyn will be a disaster but I know if Labour had another Milliband in charge then Scotland would still vote SNP and the Green and UKIP voters would still vote Green and UKIP. Labour was dead anyway, I don't think Corbyn has much of a chance of reviving it but at least he won't repeat the same campaign Milliband ran and then be shocked when voters still don't want them.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Ok fair enough.

TBH even that it's great that JC won the leadership, even I think some of his policies need watering down a bit before he gets my vote.

We don't know what the policies are going to be yet. He has to carry the party and the party will decide the policy. I don't expect the Labour party to adopt the Ban the Bomb approach anytime soon.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I was out in the car this morning and had 5live on. Some clueless no-mark was ranting about how Corbyn was going to be an absolute disaster for labour.

Don't get me wrong, The jury is out for me in terms of Corbyn being a good thing for labour (let alone this country), but I can't help but be slightly excited over the fact that labour might represent a genuine alternative to LD and the Tories.

The point being drilled home on 5live was that there was no way Corbyn was going to be able to take votes away from the Tories. That may be the case, but Corbyn has already shown that he absolutely can energise younger people with political views who have been switched off from the recent debates and elections. That to me is Corbyn's biggest strength - and in the medium to long run could be a huge positive for the labour party. People say that JC isn't electable in 2020, and I'd agree, however none of Burnham, Cooper or Kendall are either. The labour party is a complete mess but Corbyn has managed to bring grass-roots and young energetic labour party members into the main parliamentary party, which sets labour up nicely for the long-game.

People have said that in the past 20/30 years, the country has drifted to be very tory, but IMO our politics has just disenfranchised the left and the young. No one can claim to represent the country - the tories only received 24% of votes from the total population, or 37% of the total vote, but now have 100% of the power. Corbyn could offer a lifeline to people who feel that they don't have to put up with the status quo.

I can't remember who it was, but one of the resignees from yesterday referred to Labour in the 90s as the 'greatest electoral machine in history' - perhaps backed up by some of the stats in 97, but the Blair/Brown reign was a complete farce, and there's little point being a great electoral party who then can't govern. Corbyn seems smart enough to realise this, so it's an exciting moment in time.

The issue Labour have is that they've elected someone to unite their opposition rather than unite the Opposition party. Corbyn doesn't just energise sections of the Labour party; he'll energise all potential Tory voters and many floating voters to cast their ballot to keep him out. We saw how the Tories were able to capitalise on the threat of the SNP to mobilise support at the last general election. It's going to be even easier to do this next time if they've got Labour led by someone who hasn't moved on from the winter of discontent and who isn't going to be carrying his party - yes he got 60% of the vote but he'll be looking over his shoulder at all those former shadow cabinet members declining to serve under him, particularly having been such a rebellious backbencher himself. Meanwhile Corbyn is energising a section of the electorate that are notably flaky at actually turning out to vote. What are the chances of them still being energised in 5 years' time?

The chances are that Corbyn's legacy is pushing the Conservatives to the right (expect austerity, expect curtailments of civil liberties in the name of national security, expect nuclear weapons and nuclear power) in an attempt to contrast the differences and the experience of defeat will merely push Labour further to the right in reaction to Corbyn's failures.

 

[RHB]

The issue Labour have is that they've elected someone to unite their opposition rather than unite the Opposition party. Corbyn doesn't just energise sections of the Labour party; he'll energise all potential Tory voters and many floating voters to cast their ballot to keep him out. We saw how the Tories were able to capitalise on the threat of the SNP to mobilise support at the last general election. It's going to be even easier to do this next time if they've got Labour led by someone who hasn't moved on from the winter of discontent and who isn't going to be carrying his party - yes he got 60% of the vote but he'll be looking over his shoulder at all those former shadow cabinet members declining to serve under him, particularly having been such a rebellious backbencher himself. Meanwhile Corbyn is energising a section of the electorate that are notably flaky at actually turning out to vote. What are the chances of them still being energised in 5 years' time?

The chances are that Corbyn's legacy is pushing the Conservatives to the right (expect austerity, expect curtailments of civil liberties in the name of national security, expect nuclear weapons and nuclear power) in an attempt to contrast the differences and the experience of defeat will merely push Labour further to the right in reaction to Corbyn's failures.

An interesting take on it all YB, and I think you may be right on a fair chunk of what you say. The bit that is missing is how the nation feels about the Tories by the time we get to the end of this current Parliament. If they meddle enough with the NHS, to point when it is effectively privatised, it could put an entirely different spin on what the nation thinks of them. Whatever, it's going to be an interesting few years ahead.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

An interesting take on it all YB, and I think you may be right on a fair chunk of what you say. The bit that is missing is how the nation feels about the Tories by the time we get to the end of this current Parliament. If they meddle enough with the NHS, to point when it is effectively privatised, it could put an entirely different spin on what the nation thinks of them. Whatever, it's going to be an interesting few years ahead.

No-one really cares whether the NHS is privatised. They care about whether it's free and whether it's any good. And whether it's the latter tends to be based entirely on anecdotal evidence anyway.

I suspect the Tories will control the news cycle - they hold the levers of power and Corbyn has no real experience of being a frontbench player and dealing with the mainstream media - and get the next election fought on issues that favour them. Hence national security instead of the NHS (and how many more times can Labour go on saying that we've only got X days to save the NHS? It's still there despite numerous warnings to the contrary), law and order etc

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

The issue Labour have is that they've elected someone to unite their opposition rather than unite the Opposition party. Corbyn doesn't just energise sections of the Labour party; he'll energise all potential Tory voters and many floating voters to cast their ballot to keep him out. We saw how the Tories were able to capitalise on the threat of the SNP to mobilise support at the last general election. It's going to be even easier to do this next time if they've got Labour led by someone who hasn't moved on from the winter of discontent and who isn't going to be carrying his party - yes he got 60% of the vote but he'll be looking over his shoulder at all those former shadow cabinet members declining to serve under him, particularly having been such a rebellious backbencher himself. Meanwhile Corbyn is energising a section of the electorate that are notably flaky at actually turning out to vote. What are the chances of them still being energised in 5 years' time?

The chances are that Corbyn's legacy is pushing the Conservatives to the right (expect austerity, expect curtailments of civil liberties in the name of national security, expect nuclear weapons and nuclear power) in an attempt to contrast the differences and the experience of defeat will merely push Labour further to the right in reaction to Corbyn's failures.

That's a very pessimistic outlook and is the kind of outlook that the 15,000 people that have joined the Labour Party membership in the last 24 hours are rejecting. Who was genuinely enthusiastic about the last election? SNP voters and not a lot of other people. Something has to change. Don't be down on it before it's been tied.

 

[southendkid]

Whilst I think Corbyn's ideas are probably a good thing for the Labour Party, appointing John McDonnell as Shadow Chancellor is an awful decision, no doubt his comments about the IRA will be on the front pages in a couple of days.

 

[mrsblue]

Oh dear !


Jezza has a tiff with the media,refusing to say anything apart from "your bothering me".

Must admit Jezza from a side view Defo resemembled Adolf,marching along refusing to answer the question which was,why no women in his top jobs.

Burnham has a top job,this bloke has zero morals,whilst dear old Lord F is back in business.

This will be delightful fun watching this rabble stumble along.

 

[Bielzibubz]

And apparently he's been told to appoint more females into top jobs withing the shadow cabinet. Let's forget about who maybe best and most qualified for the job eh. Let's appease those that would make a sexist song and dance about a predominantly all male cabinet. And yes, before anyone points it out I know all parties have been doing it for years, just though JC might have more balls and stand up to the righteous pressure groups within the LP

 

[Pubey]

And apparently he's been told to appoint more females into top jobs withing the shadow cabinet. Let's forget about who maybe best and most qualified for the job eh. Let's appease those that would make a sexist song and dance about a predominantly all male cabinet. And yes, before anyone points it out I know all parties have been doing it for years, just though JC might have more balls and stand up to the righteous pressure groups within the LP

Sorry, what are you criticising him for?

So far there's a fairly sausage shadow cabinet that he's put together. To me it seems like he's 'standing up'.

 

[superblue24]

All very well with this "inter-party unity", but people who voted Corbyn have failed to recognise the bigger picture, this being that labour now have no chance of winning the next election if he is at the helm and anyone who thinks otherwise is either delusional or is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

....why? Off the top of my head:

1) some of his policies will alienate a fair amount of lefties, but you might get some green votes...
2) he is playing a very dangerous game with the press, and refusing to comment or be seen on breakfast shows will damage his perception by the public. Would the voting public want a PM who can't be seen?
3) The guy is 66 years old, he'll be 71 at the next GE and whilst age is an outdated concept, the majority of the public simply won't want a dinosaur leading th country. I think it was obvious in the GE just gone that popularity of the leader is a BIG factor when voting a party.
4) he has lost too many key figures within his party. Losing Chuks is a big blow, and there are 11 more key figures behind him who will be a massive loss.
5) the most obvious factor is the floating voters who won't want to go anywhere near his far left policies. His manifesto will most likely appeal to the poor, but the middle classes will (generally) go flocking to the Tories.
6) I think we've already seen that the opinion of most UK people is that we feel bad for those who are genuinely struggling in life and will happily give "a few quid", by their own home and family takes priority. i.e. People want to decide what they will give to charitable causes rather than have the government decide for them and take it in taxes.

if Corbyn is in power next GE, and his opponent is one of Boris or George, then I predict a landslide victory for the right....and yes, happy to put my money where my mouth is on that one!

 

[Pubey]

All very well with this "inter-party unity", but people who voted Corbyn have failed to recognise the bigger picture, this being that labour now have no chance of winning the next election if he is at the helm and anyone who thinks otherwise is either delusional or is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

....why? Off the top of my head:

1) some of his policies will alienate a fair amount of lefties, but you might get some green votes...
2) he is playing a very dangerous game with the press, and refusing to comment or be seen on breakfast shows will damage his perception by the public. Would the voting public want a PM who can't be seen?
3) The guy is 66 years old, he'll be 71 at the next GE and whilst age is an outdated concept, the majority of the public simply won't want a dinosaur leading th country. I think it was obvious in the GE just gone that popularity of the leader is a BIG factor when voting a party.
4) he has lost too many key figures within his party. Losing Chuks is a big blow, and there are 11 more key figures behind him who will be a massive loss.
5) the most obvious factor is the floating voters who won't want to go anywhere near his far left policies. His manifesto will most likely appeal to the poor, but the middle classes will (generally) go flocking to the Tories.
6) I think we've already seen that the opinion of most UK people is that we feel bad for those who are genuinely struggling in life and will happily give "a few quid", by their own home and family takes priority. i.e. People want to decide what they will give to charitable causes rather than have the government decide for them and take it in taxes.

if Corbyn is in power next GE, and his opponent is one of Boris or George, then I predict a landslide victory for the right....and yes, happy to put my money where my mouth is on that one!

or maybe they recognised that labour had little chance with any of the candidates? Instead Corbyn represents the chance for labour to go back to basics, and try to drag the tories over a bit while they look to develop a viable candidate post 2020.

 

[Uncle Leo]

or maybe they recognised that labour had little chance with any of the candidates? Instead Corbyn represents the chance for labour to go back to basics, and try to drag the tories over a bit while they look to develop a viable candidate post 2020.

This is important. I don't think Labour have any chance at all of winning a GE with Corbyn in charge. But, if they are bringing a more radical left-wing agenda to the table, that may help shape the Conservative agenda in a positive way. Being less ****** to the most vulnerable in society for example.

 

[MK Shrimper]

There is plenty of people, disenfranchised with politics whom the Tories & Blairite Labour didn't speak to them, especially the young whose futures are destroyed by zero hour contracts and house prices that are unaffordable. As long as JC listens, soften downs some of his policies, there is no reason why he can't be PM in 2020. The Tories may shoot themselves in the foot if the elect Bojo as their leader.

As for his age - it's irrelevant. Bush Snr was 65 when he was US President.

 

[Pubey]

There is plenty of people, disenfranchised with politics whom the Tories & Blairite Labour didn't speak to them, especially the young whose futures are destroyed by zero hour contracts and house prices that are unaffordable. As long as JC listens, soften downs some of his policies, there is no reason why he can't be PM in 2020. The Tories may shoot themselves in the foot if the elect Bojo as their leader.

As for his age - it's irrelevant. Bush Snr was 65 when he was US President.

to be honest, JC will be 71 if he gets elected, and I don't think it's unreasonable to have slight concerns about his age and ability to lead. In his 60's = no issue - but you'd be expecting him to be PM at 76 which is starting to push the boundary in terms of what's feasible, given the intensity of the role.

 

[Benfleet A1]

or maybe they recognised that labour had little chance with any of the candidates? Instead Corbyn represents the chance for labour to go back to basics, and try to drag the tories over a bit while they look to develop a viable candidate post 2020.

Surely that's counterproductive though isn't it. I can appreciate that the membership has spoken and that many see Corbyn as a breath of fresh air , policy speaking, but surely he should be reaching out to the voters, not just the left leaning side of the party. Every party must surely approach a election with the aim of winning it which confuses me when Labour have chosen someone who will only have limited appeal. It makes little sense to me.

 

[mrsblue]

There is plenty of people, disenfranchised with politics whom the Tories & Blairite Labour didn't speak to them, especially the young whose futures are destroyed by zero hour contracts and house prices that are unaffordable. As long as JC listens, soften downs some of his policies, there is no reason why he can't be PM in 2020. The Tories may shoot themselves in the foot if the elect Bojo as their leader.

As for his age - it's irrelevant. Bush Snr was 65 when he was US President.

Labour allowed the incredible and stupid house price increase which put millions out of ever buying their own home.

Zero hour contracts whilst not being the done deal still allow for the majority to virtually pick and choose what shifts they want.

You are deluded if you think Corbyn will ever be PM.

 

[MK Shrimper]

to be honest, JC will be 71 if he gets elected, and I don't think it's unreasonable to have slight concerns about his age and ability to lead. In his 60's = no issue - but you'd be expecting him to be PM at 76 which is starting to push the boundary in terms of what's feasible, given the intensity of the role.

I suppose so. Let's hope there's a suitor waiting in the wings.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Labour allowed the incredible and stupid house price increase which put millions out of ever buying their own home.

Zero hour contracts whilst not being the done deal still allow for the majority to virtually pick and choose what shifts they want.

You are deluded if you think Corbyn will ever be PM.

NEW Labour, who were simply Tories in red ties. Zero hour contracts should be made illegal despite your flowery words - they penalise the poor.