Corbyn’s Labour and the path to power

909 posts / 0 new
Last post
nicky

If it is just a smear why would a respected Labour MP like Berger resign over it and potentially give up her safe seat?

 

josh

Read the article and others.  It's just a pretext.  She receives anonymous hate, quite possible from the far right, and goes out of her way to blame it on her party.  Once again, had Corbyn agreed not to take a pro-Palestinian stance, all these charges would have disappeared overnight.

nicky

Do you think Berger is an innocent dupe of this right wing conspiracy or do you think she is in on it?

josh

Berger is a former director of that staunchly pro-Israel lobby group, and Ryan is its current chair, a position the group says she will hold onto, despite no longer being a Labour MP.

So extreme are the LFI’s views on Israel that it sought to exonerate Israel of a massacre last year, in which its snipers shot dead many dozens of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza in a single day. Faced with a social media backlash, it quietly took down the posts.

The eight MPs’ voting records – except for Gavin Shuker, for whom the picture is mixed – show them holding consistently hawkish foreign policy positions that are deeply antithetical to Corbyn’s approach to international relations.

They either “almost always” or “generally” backed “combat operations overseas”; those who were MPs at the time supported the 2003 Iraq war; and they all opposed subsequent investigations into the Iraq war.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

An inevitable division: the politics and consequences of the Labour split

quote:

The politics of the Labour Right

It’s interesting to try to parse the precise political affiliates and character of the eight. The collection of MPs who have left might seem to come from notionally different strands of the Labour Right. Although he has flirted with a Blue Labour, anti-immigration position (as he has with many others), Chuka Umunna has had most success at convincing Blairite true believers that he is their natural leader: cosmopolitan, pro-business and rich. Mike Gapes, by contrast, belongs to that strand of the traditional, Gaitskellite Labour right that has never really got over its disappointment at the end of the cold war, and tries to compensate by hating pro-Palestinian campaigners and millennial Corbynites as much as they once hated the USSR. But they both nominated Blairite candidate Liz Kendall for the leadership: as did all of the eight apart from Luciana Berger and Chris Leslie.

In fact what seems apparent is that the notional difference between an ‘old right’ tradition represented by the Labour First organisation and the Blairite faction represented by Progress has now almost entirely broken down. Since the moment of Corbyn’s leadership election the two networks have been acting entirely in concert in their efforts to prevent Momentum from gaining influence in constituency parties and to undermine Corbyn and his supporters at every available opportunity. There is no longer any clear or stable ideological difference between them, and it seems evident that the clearest way of understanding their position is in basic Marxist terms. They are the section of the party that is ultimately allied to the interests of capital. Some may advocate for social reform and for some measure of redistribution, some may dislike the nationalism and endemic snobbery of the Tories more than others; but they will all ruthlessly oppose any attempt to limit or oppose the power of capital and those who hold it.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..more from #406

quote:

The crisis of the political class

In wider British society, the immediate political base for the centrist MPs is obviously wider than City millionaires; though not much wider. It is in fact very narrowly rooted in the managerial class: very senior managers in the public and voluntary sectors, a larger section of affluent, property-owning salaried employees in the private sector. Any anthropological investigation of a local Labour Party branch is likely to confirm this claim: it is precisely the people from this narrow demographic who are still the most enthusiastic about Blair, or Umunna, and the most vitriolic in their detestation of Corbynism. Of course there are many exceptions to this characterisation (there always are), but the general tendency is clear and unsurprising. The narrow professional political elite of journalists, lobbyists and politicians is, in a certain sense, the leading cadre of this wider managerial class; so it is natural that the latter look up to the former.

Again: there’s nothing wrong or morally reprehensible about this. There’s nothing wrong with being a senior manager, with a vague commitment to an ideal of social mobility and a dislike of the Tories’ explicitly reactionary politics, who really admires Chuka Umunna. There’s nothing wrong with being that, and with violently disliking the people to your left, who probably wouldn’t do that much to limit your own wealth and immediate institutional power if they got into office, but who wouldn’t let you or people like you or the people you most admire run the country to quite the extent that you are used to.

The problem is that in British public life (well, English public life in particular), there is a strong prohibition on ever acknowledging that there are such things as class differences and class interests. And no social group dislikes thinking in such terms more intensely than the professional and managerial classes (and this includes most journalists and political pundits). It is absolutely central to their specific view of the world that such vulgar realities never be acknowledged or discussed, and to assume that only Communists or violent right-wing populists could possibly want to break this liberal taboo.

NDPP

BREXIT Still Likely As MPs Exit Parties (and vid)

https://twitter.com/disruptivesigna/status/1098480076138500096

"More UK MPs quit both the Labour and Conservative parties and it looks like an ANTI-BREXIT PARTY' is developing says George Galloway..."

'What we're beginning to see is the cohesion of the anti-BREXIT party, which has the benefit of having the support of the richest and most powerful people in Britain - and in Europe and in United States for that matter. You may know that some of the biggest US banks backed the anti-BREXIT campaign with millions of dollars. And European, American and British capital is very desperate indeed with a 1,000 hours to go before BREXIT..."

josh

Isn't the Lib Dems an anti-Brexit party?

nicky

So is Labour, Josh.

Unfortunately its leader is pro - Brexit and is ignoring the democratic will of its members. Hence his current mess...

josh

Labour is not an anti-Brexit party.  It has members, and MPs, on both sides of the issue.

JKR

Very few Labour supporters support a “hard-Brexit.”

nicky

Josh, you are ignoring what happened at Labour's last conference in September.

As well as polls that consistently show that 80% of Labour's members are against Brexit.

But then of course Corbyn is ignoring these things too, which, again, is why he is in this mess.

josh

30% of Labour votes and 60% of Labour constituencies voted to leave. While the latter has less meaning in a FPTP system, it's still something to take into consideration.  The point is that 30% of a party is not insignificant.  Which is why Corbyn has had to walk a tightrope on the issue.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Exactly...and THAT is why the Labour Right has kept demanding that Corbyn not follow Labour policy on the issue-which he has, to the letter-but push instead for a second referendum, even though there's no chance of getting the Tories to allow one and thus no reason to push for one.  The Labour Right is pushing for this(btw, we can't assume that the 80% of Labour supporters who state they wish to remain in the EU can actually be assumed to WANT Corbyn to push for a second referendum-they are simpy stating that that is what the wish was happening.  The vast majority of that 80% accept that Corbyn has to handle the issue exactly as he has)solely because they know it would cost Labour 3 1/2 million votes at the next general election, and they want that because they care more about deposing Corbyn as leader than they do about getting the Tories out of power.  They don't care that, if Labour loses the next election, future elections most likely won't even matter, because the demolition of the welfare state and the NHS will be completed if the Tories win another majority.  They simply want Corbyn smashed so they can conclude their project of moving Labour so far to the right that it would no longer have any reason to exist as a separate party, and could simply merge into the Tories and give them permanent power as part of what would then be the Permanent Domination Party(PDP).

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Josh, you are ignoring what happened at Labour's last conference in September.

As well as polls that consistently show that 80% of Labour's members are against Brexit.

But then of course Corbyn is ignoring these things too, which, again, is why he is in this mess.

Labour's conference adopted a policy on Brexit that included support for a referendum as part of several options in a Labour unity strategy on the issue.  The conference did NOT vote to commit the party to putting an unwinnable fight to get the Tories to allow a second referendum while they are still in power ahead of ALL other objectives.  The conference did not say "The Brexit issue matters more than anything else".

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And with your introduction of what you know are the false accusations that Labour has a massive problem with antisemitism-an accusation which has been discredited over and over again, with the exception of antisemitic canard among Blairites that Jewish anti-Zionists are "self-hating Jews"-you have outed yourself, nicky, as a person who would be obsessed with trying to get Jeremy Corbyn removed as leader-and getting him replaced with a "Labour moderate", i.e., a Tory-no matter what.

nicky

No Ken, I don't believe that Labour moderates are Tories.

I think it is evident that Corbyn is leading Labour into the abyss. His diapproval / approval rating has fallen calamatously as a result of his Bexit policy, and , yes, his stance on anti-semitism. It stands now at 72% to 17% and falling.

If Labour wants to win, or even survive as a viable paty, yes, I believe it should replace him.

Starmer, Cooper, Watson, Benn,Thornberry,  Eagle or any number of others would be infinitely better. It is hard to think of anyone who would be worse.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

it would cost Labour 3 1/2 million votes

..i have seen this number tossed about more than once. can someone please provide a link to where this comes from?

eta: is it the number that voted leave?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

epaulo13 wrote:

it would cost Labour 3 1/2 million votes

..i have seen this number tossed about more than once. can someone please provide a link to where this comes from?

eta: is it the number that voted leave?

There was a link posted in this thread that featured that number.  I believe it's based on the vote Leave pulled in the North and Northeast of England.  Corbyn regained most of that vote for Labour in 2017(in 2015, on the position nicky pushes for now, those were mainly UKIP votes).  I'm still looking upthread for it but have not re-located it as yet.  

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..ok txs ken.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

No Ken, I don't believe that Labour moderates are Tories.

I think it is evident that Corbyn is leading Labour into the abyss. His diapproval / approval rating has fallen calamatously as a result of his Bexit policy, and , yes, his stance on anti-semitism. It stands now at 72% to 17% and falling.

If Labour wants to win, or even survive as a viable paty, yes, I believe it should replace him.

Starmer, Cooper, Watson, Benn,Thornberry,  Eagle or any number of others would be infinitely better. It is hard to think of anyone who would be worse.

Here's the thing with that...Corbyn, being an incredibly self-effacing person-he's probably the most modest figure to lead a UK political party since Attlee-would likely have stood down as leader during the 2016-2017 eras, IF those who wanted him to do so had agreed to the following:  1) An agreement that a left-wing candidate would be guaranteed a place on the leadership ballot to replace him-you'd have to concede that it wouldn't be legitimate to have a ballot where only candidates to the right of Corbyn and John McDonnell were offered as choices. 2) A further agreement that Corbyn supporters would not be suspended or expelled from the party.

Would you now agree, nicky, that, given that the vast majority of Labour supporters and members don't basically support Corbyn's policies, and given that no leader elected to erase those policies could offer any program that could ever connect with most Labour supporters or members, that it was indefensibly wrong for the anti-Corbynites to refuse to offer anything like that, to insist, instead, on offering nothing beyond the creation of a meaningless, powerless and irrelevant position for Corbyn as "party president" under what would be in effect a Blairite restoration?

Would you agree that the anti-Corbynites should have been willing to offer something, ANYTHING, other than humiliation and repudiation to not only Jeremy, but all those who supported him?  That they should have accepted that most of the party didn't want what THEY, the Blairites wanted, and that they should feel an obligation to respect what most of the party wanted?

Can you now see that the arrogant, inflexible hostility the anti-Corbynites have shown to the Corbynite majority within Labour has done nothing but harm?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

BTW. Tom Watson hasn't completely ruled out crossing over to the IG(or the "Imperialist Group", as we should call it).  And Hilary Benn thinks you can still claim to be a socialist while supporting the bombing of Syria.  He disrespected everything his own father, the great Tony Benn, ever stood for by calling himself "a Benn, not a Bennite".  And he has supported the false accusation that it's anti-Semitic to support Palestinian self-determination.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Labour's alternative Brexit plan could break the deadlock, command the support of parliament and bring our country together. After meetings today in Brussels, it’s clear that our alternative is credible and could be negotiated with the EU.

Keir Starmer and Michel Barnier

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Momentum launches major push to oust MPs who quit Labour to join Independent Group

The left-wing campaign group said they would be holding “mass canvassing events” in the constituencies of Chuka Umunna, Ann Coffey and Angela Smith to raise awareness among voters of their actions.

Eight Labour MPs have so far quit the party in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's record on Brexit and tackling anti-semitism, and have been joined by Conservatives. Anna Soubry, Heidi Allen and Sarah Wollaston.

They have ruled out triggering by-elections in their constituencies despite calls from their former local parties to step down.

Laura Parker, Momentum’s national co-ordinator, said: “Their constituents voted for a Labour MP standing on a Labour manifesto. Now they’ve left the party and joined a Blarite-Tory coalition standing on a completely different platform.

“This is not what their constituents voted for. The only fair and decent thing to do is give their constituents a choice and call a by-election."

The pro-Jeremy Corbyn campaign group claim they raised over £15,000 for their fighting fund in the hours following the launch of the breakaway faction.

“Polls show the vast majority of Labour voters back the party and the policies, not individual candidates,” Ms Parker added. “These splinter group MPs ran in 2017 on a manifesto of public ownership, scrapping tuition fees and ending austerity....

nicky

Ken, the party addressed Corbyn’s concerns by lowering the nomination requirement from 15 to 10% of MPs, surely low enough for a so called left wing candidate to stand.

Yet the “self-effacing “ Corbyn clings to the leadership.

i don’t think it is fair to say that moderate MPs wan5 to humiliate him. If he wants to avoid humiliation he should step aside and avoid what will happen to him in the next election.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Ken, the party addressed Corbyn’s concerns by lowering the nomination requirement from 15 to 10% of MPs, surely low enough for a so called left wing candidate to stand.

Yet the “self-effacing “ Corbyn clings to the leadership.

i don’t think it is fair to say that moderate MPs wan5 to humiliate him. If he wants to avoid humiliation he should step aside and avoid what will happen to him in the next election.

The MPs shouldn't be allowed to decide who gets to stand for the leadership at all-especially since most of them were imposed as Labour candidates years ago, against the will of their own constituency parties, have been given mandatory re-selection as candidates at each subsuquent election, leaving their constituency parties with no say in who they are going to try to elect even though many of those constituency parties do not want them to be the Labour candidate anymore, and have treated the party as if it belongs to them and no one else, as if they and they ALONE were Labour.  It's the anti-Corbynites who have the "cult of the leader"-they are the ones who think that any Labour leader must follow Blair's policies exactly-unless they deviate from them to the right.  And THEY are the ones who were fine when Harriet Harman, as acting leader, decided in 2015 the PLP shouldn't even vote against Tory cuts in benefits anymore-a choice that, had it stood, would have erased the last remaining differences between Labour and the Tories at that time. I reference that because that was the decision that essentially caused the Corbyn phenomenon-it becames choice of supporting Corbyn for leader or giving up on keeping Labour a separate party from the Tories in anything but name.

Can you not see the arrogance in all of that?

Can you not see the responsibility of the Labour Right in putting the party into a situation in which voting for Corbyn was the ONLY way to keep Labour Labour at all?

Also, would you agree that there should have been a guarantee that Corbyn supporters would not be expelled from the party once he stood down from the leadership, that no possible good could come of another mass purge of socialists from what is supposed to be the socialist party?

It was never reasonable to expect Corbyn to leave his supporters unprotected. 

nicky

Can you give me a link to any prominent Labour moderate who has advocated the wholesale expulsion of Corbyn backers?

Many of his “backers” were in fact Conservatives who signed up in order to cripple Labour by electing him as leader. Do you oppose them being expelled?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i don't think anyone in the uk believes they can go back to a pre referendum situation. not the leavers, not the remainers and not those who aren't sure. the choice is a deal or no deal brexit with either the tories or labour. labour's position is a deal be struck and would never allow a no deal brexit. this is not, as some would like to portray, in contradiction with labour remainers or leavers. the key is in how the relationship with the eu is changed.

..a tory deal will bring further integration with the eu neoliberals in spite of the pretense that the want to break away from the eu dominance. while labour wants some of the good parts and protections of the eu while forging ahead with it's agenda. including a willingness to take on the neoliberals within the eu. it should be noted that some of the worst aspects of eu neoliberalism are derived from the uk tories.

..so now the choices are becoming more and more clear it's a matter for labour to win the hearts and minds and trying to prevent a no deal brexit until an election or vote is called.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Can you give me a link to any prominent Labour moderate who has advocated the wholesale expulsion of Corbyn backers?

Many of his “backers” were in fact Conservatives who signed up in order to cripple Labour by electing him as leader. Do you oppose them being expelled?

That's been discredited.  Corbyn won fair and square, and won solely on the votes of those who identify WITH Labour.  There wasn't anybody else in the race in 2015 who was even close to him on the ballot.  Corbyn's election as leader was is not in question.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The other 2015 candidates, Yvette Cooper, Andy Burnham, and Liz Kendall, had no personal popularity and nothing more to offer than Jeremy did.   And in 2016, Owen Smith, the challenger to Corbyn, literally drew no crowds to any of his rallies.  If nobody showed up to hear him speak then, how was he ever going to win the voters over later?  Furthermore, the man had been a lobbyist for Pfizer, which by itself proved he couldn't be trusted to defend the NHS from further privatization.

Those candidates had supported Harriet Harman's insistence that Labour should stop voting against Tory benefit cuts, too.  You can't NOT vote against benefit cuts and still be different than the Tories on anything that matters.

The Britain of 2019 is not the Britain of 1997, and Labour in 2019 does not need to be vindictively anti-Left to win an election-assuming it had to be that way then, which is still questionable.

josh
nicky

After I wrote:

Many of his “backers” were in fact Conservatives who signed up in order to cripple Labour by electing him as leader. 

Ken replied without providing any source:

“That's been discredited. “

In fact there is substantial evidence that many Conservatives joined Labour to vote for Corbyn in order to sabotage Labour. Recent events show that they succeeded.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11680098/Why-are-so-many-Tories-joining-Labour-after-Jeremy-Corbyns-leadership-announcement.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11680016/Why-Tories-should-join-Labour-and-back-Jeremy-Corbyn.html

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/16/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-conservatives-twitter

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-contest-can-jeremy-corbyn-win-without-his-legion-of-3-supporters-a7134371.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34126758

 

 

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Corbyn had just barely 50% of the vote in the first round of 2016.  That, by itself, proves no other candidate was cheated of victory.  His closest opponent, Andy Burnham, was over 20% behind him even then.  The only way he could have lost would have been if virtually every voter in the contest who didn't back Jeremy on first ballot would have united behind a single candidate instead of him.  That clearly wasn't going to happen.  It's not as though everyone who voted for Kendall, Cooper and Burnham saw Jeremy as an intolerable person to have in the leadership.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

After I wrote:

Many of his “backers” were in fact Conservatives who signed up in order to cripple Labour by electing him as leader. 

Ken replied without providing any source:

“That's been discredited. “

In fact there is substantial evidence that many Conservatives joined Labour to vote for Corbyn in order to sabotage Labour. Recent events show that they succeeded.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11680098/Why-are-so-many-Tories-joining-Labour-after-Jeremy-Corbyns-leadership-announcement.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11680016/Why-Tories-should-join-Labour-and-back-Jeremy-Corbyn.html

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/16/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-conservatives-twitter

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leadership-contest-can-jeremy-corbyn-win-without-his-legion-of-3-supporters-a7134371.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34126758

 

 

 

The links supporting this part of the Wikipedia article provide sourcing:                                                      

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

In June 2015, the Conservative-identifying political commentator Toby Young wrote in the Telegraph encouraging Conservatives to join Labour to vote for Jeremy Corbyn,[74] his reason being "to consign Labour to electoral oblivion". This trended on Twitter as #ToriesforCorbyn and the attempt, as well as Labour's response, were subject to criticism.[75] Two days later the Communist Party of Great Britain (Provisional Central Committee) wrote also in support of Corbyn.[76] Following this, Labour MP John Mann called for the election to be halted.[77] Acting leader of the party Harriet Harman responded by calling on constituency parties to check new members, but stated that Labour has "a robust system to prevent fraudulent or malicious applications." Labour MP Fabian Hamilton stated there was "no evidence" that groups were trying to infiltrate the election.[78] Leadership candidates Andy Burnham and Liz Kendall also responded by saying there was no evidence of infiltration, and while not dismissing the claims, Corbyn stated he only wanted "genuine Labour supporters" to vote for him.[79][80]

In addition to the links posted there, you've got two of the OTHER leadership candidates themselves rejecting the idea that the contest had been infiltrated, including Liz Kendall, the most conservative candidate in the contest. 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And seriously, nicky...if you're claiming that Corbyn's election to the leadership wasn't legitimate, you've well and truly outed yourself as someone who's simply going to fling any anti-Corbyn guano you can grab at your laptop screen and hope that some of it sticks.  

There simply wasn't anybody else who was even close to winning the leadership once Corbyn got in.  All the other candidates were on the side of war and austerity against their own supposed party and its core supporters.

nicky

No Ken. I did not say that Consevative entryists tipped the balance in Corbyn’s favour. So dont’t misrepresent what I said.

I did say ( and documented) that many Conservatives joined Labour temporarily to vote for someone whom they perceived, rightly as it has turned out, would be a disaster as leader.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

If they didn't tip the balance-and what I posted there proves they didn't-that it doesn't delegitimize Corbyn, and it doesn't prove that any of the others would have been better.

nicky

It’s pretty clear from Corbyn’s current downward spiralling numbers, that none of the other leadership candidates could have done worse.

more proof of this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/labour-mp-ian-austin-quits-the-party

josh

Ian Austin.  The man who told Corbyn to sit down and shut up while Corbyn was apologizing for Labour's role in the Iraq war.

https://twitter.com/ScouseGirlMedia/status/1098893096480317441

And I can well recall your doom and gloom before the 2017 election.  After which, you vanished.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Jonathan Pie's latest, with which I generally agree, is relevant to this discussion.

NDPP

George Galloway, MOATS, Friday, Feb 22, 2019 (podcast)

https://talkradio.co.uk/radio/listen-again/1550862000

@5:00  Labour split or splinter by Blairites , Euromaniacs, BREXIT, Venezuela and much more!

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Momentum's leaked manifesto for Brighton and Hove

A BAN on cars in the city centre, a new seafront railway and a homeless bill of rights are all part of Momentum’s plan for Brighton and Hove.

The hard-left activist group, which holds great influence within the local Labour party, has revealed its vision in an unpublished manifesto seen by The Argus.

The 210-page document remains unfinished with some areas of policy only containing rough notes.

The vision includes a railway from Brighton Marina to the King Alfred in Hove, an introduction of a “homeless bill of rights” and bringing nearly all services and social housing into council control.

Bailiffs would be abolished and travel would be free for under 25s.

The document indicates the plans would be paid for with a greater tax on the city’s highest earners, a tax increase on empty homes, and a potential “tourism tax”.

It also suggests that those who cannot afford to pay council tax would not have to under a “can’t pay needn’t pay” scheme.

The draft manifesto, called the “Many-festo”, has been distributed to Labour group members and prospective candidates ahead of the May local elections.....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Broxtowe Labour supporters out to campaign with Jeremy Corbyn

contrarianna

nicky wrote:

It’s pretty clear from Corbyn’s current downward spiralling numbers, that none of the other leadership candidates could have done worse.

more proof of this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/22/labour-mp-ian-austin-quits-the-party

What, your endless polls again like the last election?  Much easier than having your ideas challenged I suppose. 

Hard to say why "Labour supporter" Nicky disappeared after the huge Labour gains in the last election, but as a reminder:

nicky wrote:
Permit me to make a prediction about the next British election if the new 500 seat map is implemented and if Labour continues to be cursed by Corbyn's "leadership":

Con 350 seats

Labour 100 seats

Others   50 seats

This bleak outcome is pretty much what current polling indicates.

At least the Labour party will be able to console itself in its purity.

http://rabble.ca/comment/5144786#comment-5144786

Actual vote:

Conservative Seats 317 48.8%

Labour Party  Seats 262  42.4%

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

He's clearly being paid by somebody on the right to say all of this, and to do so while barely ever engaging the actual conversation in this thread.  His verbal/thought patterns are those of the Blairites, the essentially Thatcherite sect that stole the party in the Nineties, won elections Labour would have won without abandoning socialism or peace, and have then spent the post-2008 period doing nothing but slowly destroying the party.  If any of the people nicky wanted as leader had been in the job, they would have just KEPT the party voting to abstain on Tory cuts-which is the same thing as endorsing the cuts-and policies like that would have destroyed any reason for Labour to continue to exist.  The Blairites don't get it that the Nineties is over and that history didn't end after all.

JKR

Who could have predicted Elizabeth May would run such a horrible election campaign? Many are now saying that she will be replaced as PM before the summer.

nicky

I was wondering what that cheque was for. Thanks for clearing up the mystery for me Ken.

nicky
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Who could have predicted Elizabeth May would run such a horrible election campaign?

I make the same mistake in my head from time to time.  I think you meant Theresa.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Leading with the unwinnable fight for a second referendum could only make things worse.  Nothing could be gained by replacing Corbyn by a bland centrist who couldn't be capable of caring about poverty and the exploitation of worker.

Pages