OT. Lord Janner wrote me the rudest letter I've ever received.
Nonetheless making a man with advanced Alzheimers face a court when it's clear he has no idea what's going on is barbaric and those newspapers which demanded it and the court authorities who agreed to it should be ashamed.
It's not barbaric, what's going on in Iraq and Syria is barbaric.
Considering what he is accused of being involved in, the Courts are right to make Janner appear.
as for Corbyn's 10 point plan, I see nothing much objectionable in it. We'd all like a fully funded NHS, a decent lifelong education service etc etc. There's just the little matter of how to pay for it all.
Reminds me of the Greens. Lots of lovely sounding ideas. Not a clue about the real world.
The NHS already has huge sums of money spent on it. It will take teachers and parents who are motivated to improve education - not money. Everything about it all is bogus - just an excuse to spend spend spend. As is the preposterous people's investment back or whatever its name is. A real bank takes in deposits in order to then borrow, where would Corbyn's money come from? All totally bogus. And of course the biggest bit of bogosity of all is the anti-austerity rhetoric. Labour left an appalling legacy of financial mismanagement and an enormous deficit with a shrunken economy to pay it off. Simply slowly cutting spending to live within means is not 'austerity'.
Labour did not cause the global financial crash or the enormous deficit. The current Chancellor flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour and drove debt up to record levels.
That you can talk such utter bonkers nonsense shows what a deep hole you and Labour are in. Labour increased spending by 50% in real terms between 2000 and 2010. The other cause of the massive deficit was the fall off a cliff in revenues post 2008, both of which were Labour's responsibility. Much of the revenues from the banking industry were thought by Brown to be cyclical, they were in fact structural - that money from the casino banks disappeared forever. The recovery did not flatline and all Labour did was make temporary VAT cuts and car buying wheezes and bring forward spending to fake a recovery for electoral purposes.
From the absurdly high level inherited from Labour, Osborne plans to increase it by 10% over 10 years. Hardly austerity.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
as for Corbyn's 10 point plan, I see nothing much objectionable in it. We'd all like a fully funded NHS, a decent lifelong education service etc etc. There's just the little matter of how to pay for it all.
Reminds me of the Greens. Lots of lovely sounding ideas. Not a clue about the real world.
The NHS already has huge sums of money spent on it. It will take teachers and parents who are motivated to improve education - not money. Everything about it all is bogus - just an excuse to spend spend spend. As is the preposterous people's investment back or whatever its name is. A real bank takes in deposits in order to then borrow, where would Corbyn's money come from? All totally bogus. And of course the biggest bit of bogosity of all is the anti-austerity rhetoric. Labour left an appalling legacy of financial mismanagement and an enormous deficit with a shrunken economy to pay it off. Simply slowly cutting spending to live within means is not 'austerity'.
Labour did not cause the global financial crash or the enormous deficit. The current Chancellor flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour and drove debt up to record levels.
Labour took bank regulation away from the Bank of England and gave it to the ineffectual FSA, allowing banks to become the imprudent lenders that caused the crash.
"Before answering the Survation questions, the people surveyed were shown short videos of all the candidates being interviewed on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show."
Molly MEP @MollyMEP 1h1 hour ago Having dipped my toe into the Corbyn pool yesterday I have now jumped right in. Comments welcome http://fb.me/42mdjxL68
Ms. Apocalypse, the Romans probably thought the same thing when they kept getting rubbish emperors in the West.
Edited extra bit: Red Len = Alaric/Ricimer?
Yes but the important point is this? If Labour fails, who replaces it? As I don't believe the UK is a one-party state, and there is no alternative to Labour as an opposition, then at some point it'll rise from the ashes.
TSE Today's London Yougov was similar. Corbyn was on 46%, Burnham 21%, Cooper 20% and Kendall 12%. Corbyn led with Labour and UKIP voters, getting 52% with Labour voters and 63% with UKIP backers (perhaps helped bu his EUsceptic views), and he also led with LDs, albeit on a smaller total of 36%. Corbyn only trailed with Tory voters where he was tied with Kendall on 25%, behind Burnham on 28% http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/left-winger-jeremy-corbyn-is-first-choice-for-londoners-a2633546.html
Corbyn also did well with some young Scots interviewed after one of his rallies by C4 news tonight, some said they may even switch from SNP to Labour if Corbyn led the party!
we skipped over the last thread rather quickly, thus no-one appears to have noticed this:
Glasbury on Powys (Con defence) Result: Liberal Democrats 457 (44%, no candidate in 2012), Conservatives 415 (40% -15%), Independent 106 (10% -23%), Green Party 52 (5%, no candidate in 2012) Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative with a majority of 42 (4%) on a notional swing of 29.5% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat
Lib Dems not quite dead yet.
Isn´t that in the Brecon & Radnor constituency, Mrs B? Lib Dems seem to have had quite a good record recently of taking council seats in constituencies where people were panicked into going Tory back in May. I seem to remember Carshalton and Lewes. But surely there were others too?
as for Corbyn's 10 point plan, I see nothing much objectionable in it. We'd all like a fully funded NHS, a decent lifelong education service etc etc. There's just the little matter of how to pay for it all.
Reminds me of the Greens. Lots of lovely sounding ideas. Not a clue about the real world.
The NHS already has huge sums of money spent on it. It will take teachers and parents who are motivated to improve education - not money. Everything about it all is bogus - just an excuse to spend spend spend. As is the preposterous people's investment back or whatever its name is. A real bank takes in deposits in order to then borrow, where would Corbyn's money come from? All totally bogus. And of course the biggest bit of bogosity of all is the anti-austerity rhetoric. Labour left an appalling legacy of financial mismanagement and an enormous deficit with a shrunken economy to pay it off. Simply slowly cutting spending to live within means is not 'austerity'.
Labour did not cause the global financial crash or the enormous deficit. The current Chancellor flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour and drove debt up to record levels.
Interesting graph of post crash GDP growth across the G7 - would've been great if we'd followed the USA and Canada approach - the graph also compares UK GDP with and without the inclosing of drug dealing and prostitution etc in our GDP figures:
Does that chart really imply that drug dealing and prostitution weren't hit as badly as the rest of the economy?
No it shows that before the changes were made we did not calculate our GDP on the same basis as some of our competitors (although you may be right).
Our economy has continued to grow faster than Germany's since Q1 of 2014 so we are now ahead of them too. So despite having the largest per capita accumulated debt (public + private) in the western world in 2008 we are doing much better than anyone other than those countries smart enough to take advantage of new sources of oil and gas whilst we dither.
Germany's problem is the Greeks aren't buying so many Mercs and BMWs. Not sure why.
No. China not Greece buys up all the spare BMs and Mercs, but most of them are built locally. Plus VWs. Mercedes builds SUVs in the USA for the China market.
We on the other hand rely on China for the sales of our Rolls Royces and Bentleys. The fact that these companies are German owned hardly matters to the people they employ and the wealth they create for us.
Corbyn also did well with some young Scots interviewed after one of his rallies by C4 news tonight, some said they may even switch from SNP to Labour if Corbyn led the party!
Corbyn has gained the support of Green MEP's too, which consider they are elected in another political party, that is a magnitude higher. Corbyn hasn't yet been elected and the Green party wants an electoral alliance with a Corbyn led Labour.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and a base - they survived 1983, after all - the LDs have literally lost practically all their heartlands, and are struggling even to be heard, let alone replacing the Labour party. Hey - the LDs have their own brand issues, that are as deep, and as problematic as Labour's. They also have the issue of finding a purpose for their existience, too. I don't see a resurgent SDP force happening, there's the historical failure of the SDP for one, but also that unlike the gang of 4 who had already established political careers and nothing to lose, it's the exact opposite for the Umunnas and the Hunts of this world.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
Labour had a lot of advantages in those years that they do not have now. They had a vibrant Union movement that was not just a public sector phenomenon. They had a much larger base of activists. They had more councillors. They had strong roots in places like Scotland. They had an intellectual heft that has now gone.
Just because a completely different Labour party survived before does not mean that this pale shadow of today has the same resilience. They are damned lucky that buffoon decided to stay on as leader of UKIP instead of someone more palatable to social conservatives of a leftist disposition. Since the election pretty much nothing else has gone their way.
Arguably, Labour will have a very large base of activists after this election. Regarding intellectual heft - a lot of that is cyclical as well. The generation of Blair and Brown, and their team grew from the ashes of 1983, after all. Again, the point about councillors is also cyclical.
Scotland is a problem, but at some point the SNP won't be polling 62%. While I don't think Labour will ever get back Scotland completely, I don't think some inroads are impossible.
Labour has some resilience today, because there is no alternative to it as the official opposition. In 1983, the biggest chance to usurp Labour was stopped, because of how difficult it is under FPTP to displace the main two. Currently, UKIP and the LDs, are the ones who are a pale shadow to the SDP as to how much of a threat they were to the Labour party's survival.
Worst pollster of them all, apart from LordA who was so bad he was in a category of his own, though the only ones that got the Labour share of the vote right.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and a base - they survived 1983, after all - the LDs have literally lost practically all their heartlands, and are struggling even to be heard, let alone replacing the Labour party. Hey - the LDs have their own brand issues, that are as deep, and as problematic as Labour's. They also have the issue of finding a purpose for their existience, too. I don't see a resurgent SDP force happening, there's the historical failure of the SDP for one, but also that unlike the gang of 4 who had already established political careers and nothing to lose, it's the exact opposite for the Umunnas and the Hunts of this world.
You're only looking at British history, however. Major parties have collapsed in vote share all over the democratic world. FPTP means those vote share changes are not reflected in seat totals much, and then suddenly a tipping point is reached and the changes happen all at once. Depending on just how terrible Corbyn is, and how much his leadership changes the party to the left, it's possible they could get down to around 20%. I don't think surpassing that is impossible for either UKIP or the Lib Dems or a new SDP in a volatile electorate with modern social media over 10 years.
as for Corbyn's 10 point plan, I see nothing much objectionable in it. We'd all like a fully funded NHS, a decent lifelong education service etc etc. There's just the little matter of how to pay for it all.
Reminds me of the Greens. Lots of lovely sounding ideas. Not a clue about the real world.
The NHS already has huge sums of money spent on it. It will take teachers and parents who are motivated to improve education - not money. Everything about it all is bogus - just an excuse to spend spend spend. As is the preposterous people's investment back or whatever its name is. A real bank takes in deposits in order to then borrow, where would Corbyn's money come from? All totally bogus. And of course the biggest bit of bogosity of all is the anti-austerity rhetoric. Labour left an appalling legacy of financial mismanagement and an enormous deficit with a shrunken economy to pay it off. Simply slowly cutting spending to live within means is not 'austerity'.
Labour did not cause the global financial crash or the enormous deficit. The current Chancellor flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour and drove debt up to record levels.
Labour took bank regulation away from the Bank of England and gave it to the ineffectual FSA, allowing banks to become the imprudent lenders that caused the crash.
Completely right.
And the change produced more irrelevant paperwork and far fewer wise eyes on what was going on. Gordon Brown didn't cause the financial crisis, but you could (just about) make a plausible argument that it wouldn't have happened without him.
The previous poster's idea that Labour somehow had an economic miracle going on and nobody noticed is simply nonsense. Darling was probably saved from having an IMF chat by the prospect of a Tory government. It's abundantly clear that even those closest to the goings on thought that the train was totally off the rails. Mr Byrne for example.
"If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces."
Snap. I was just thinking that recently. (Some of) the tabloids are now nosing around for material of varying accuracy and biding their time. Should Corbyn be elected he can expect a fusillade or slow defamation.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and a base - they survived 1983, after all - the LDs have literally lost practically all their heartlands, and are struggling even to be heard, let alone replacing the Labour party. Hey - the LDs have their own brand issues, that are as deep, and as problematic as Labour's. They also have the issue of finding a purpose for their existience, too. I don't see a resurgent SDP force happening, there's the historical failure of the SDP for one, but also that unlike the gang of 4 who had already established political careers and nothing to lose, it's the exact opposite for the Umunnas and the Hunts of this world.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Corbyn also did well with some young Scots interviewed after one of his rallies by C4 news tonight, some said they may even switch from SNP to Labour if Corbyn led the party!
Corbyn has gained the support of Green MEP's too, which consider they are elected in another political party, that is a magnitude higher. Corbyn hasn't yet been elected and the Green party wants an electoral alliance with a Corbyn led Labour.
Indeed, I actually now think if they don't elect Burnham, Corbyn is Labour's best bet. While Burnham tends to poll best overall nationwide, and with Tories, Corbyn seems to do very well in Scotland and in London and would reunite the left under his banner, leaving the LDs and Greens and maybe even the SNP squeezed. He may even win back some UKIP voters on a more EUsceptic platform. Cooper, it is now abundantly clear, would be the worst of the lot, she has polled last or near last in almost every poll of the public so far, has the charisma and passion of an anoerexic amoeba and stands for nothing except winning on preferences, she polls poorly with both Tories and Scots and really has very little to offer. Cooper has the brains for a big ministerial role but clearly no connection with the electorate whatsoever!
You're only looking at British history, however. Major parties have collapsed in vote share all over the democratic world. FPTP means those vote share changes are not reflected in seat totals much, and then suddenly a tipping point is reached and the changes happen all at once. Depending on just how terrible Corbyn is, and how much his leadership changes the party to the left, it's possible they could get down to around 20%. I don't think surpassing that is impossible for either UKIP or the Lib Dems or a new SDP in a volatile electorate with modern social media over 10 years.
Yes, but those collapses - I'm thinking of Greece here really - have occurred under extreme circumstances of economic depression. I'm looking at British history, because it probably a more reliable meter than completely different countries, with different circumstances. I could easily say other countries have voiced popular support for radical parties, so Corbyn will do well - but Britain is very much different, so this won't happen.
I don't see why there would be a sudden tipping point under FPTP. Under alternative electoral systems, there is more of a chance of them displacing the official opposition because people increasingly believe it can happen due to increased prominence such electoral systems give minor parties. Under FPTP, any attempts to displace the official opposition have always been knocked back because vote share does not reflect seat totals, which mean that many voters are likely to to opt for the least worst opposition.
I don't see Labour going down to 20%. That didn't even happen at the height of Thatcerism, when the Tories had a much larger majority, let alone now. Cameron, and his Tory party are not that popular.
I think UKIP and the LDs surpassing Labour is pretty much impossible, for the reasons I already elaborated. I don't see why social media would change that: much of it does not favour the right anyway, and much of the demographic UKIP want to appeal to - WWC - are unlikely to be on Twitter or Facebook. The LDs in particular, have a huge image and trust issue with young voters - the key demographic using social media.
Politics is missing an electable and charismatic figure, which neither UKIP nor the LDs offer.
And I don't see this breakaway new SDP happening, either.
"Kids Company was pledged £20m by government last summer, founder says Camila Batmanghelidjh claims Oliver Letwin, head of Cabinet Office, made verbal promise in July 2014 after being told charity faced funding crisis"
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and a base - they survived 1983, after all - the LDs have literally lost practically all their heartlands, and are struggling even to be heard, let alone replacing the Labour party. Hey - the LDs have their own brand issues, that are as deep, and as problematic as Labour's. They also have the issue of finding a purpose for their existience, too. I don't see a resurgent SDP force happening, there's the historical failure of the SDP for one, but also that unlike the gang of 4 who had already established political careers and nothing to lose, it's the exact opposite for the Umunnas and the Hunts of this world.
The SNP is surely another example.
The SNP displaced Labour in Scotland after having proved themselves in government with electable, and credible figures leading them, along with providing what is essentially a non-divisive ideology (in Scotland). UKIP and the LDs have none of these things. UKIP control 1 council, and are yet to prove themselves as competent local governors, and build a strong local government base. The LDs' problem is that they've actually lost out as a result of being in government, have little remains of a local government base, and face much of the same issues that Labour do in regard to being out of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
"Kids Company was pledged £20m by government last summer, founder says Camila Batmanghelidjh claims Oliver Letwin, head of Cabinet Office, made verbal promise in July 2014 after being told charity faced funding crisis"
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
snip
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Labour in its chaotic incompetent way has stumbled across pure political magic in Corbyn.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Are you really falling for your own spin or are you just putting as good a gloss on the situation as you can?
This sort of populism could lead to a mild boost in the mid-term polls as Miliband's Labour got but without being credible it is never going to be election winning.
Miss Apocalypse, I strongly disagree that Labour needs Corbyn as leader.
The underlying premise is that the Labour party will survive this. I do not think this is something we can be confident of.
Under a Corbyn leadership those shiny new Labour MPs will be (a) very few in number and (b) probably to the left of Corbyn as the hard left take over what is left of the party.
Whilst I agree the alternatives have been a long way from inspirational of the 4 Corbyn's ideas on immigration (for example) are probably furthest from the public's centre of gravity.
Another election without a credible economic policy from Labour and far too many will conclude that they are simply not capable of being serious about the single most important issue.
When claiming this was a battle for the Labour party's soul Cooper was not guilty of hyperbole, quite the reverse. I think this is a battle for its very existence.
I agree with @kle4. Labour survived 1983, Foot and the hard left as well as a generation being out of power. They can survive a nutter like Corbyn being leader. Far too many have already written off Labour now, in fact for four GEs in a row, many wrote off Labour - but they still came back. Why? Because politics is cyclical. At some point the government becomes the worst option.
@MarkHopkins Labour was recovering before Blair became leader - they led in the polls with John Smith. Most likely, had he not died Smith would have been elected PM in 1997.
Labour had a lot of advantages in those years that they do not
Farage and Corbyn will have been getting to know each other pretty well I would have thought at their weekly 'Friends of Vladimir Putin' meetings.
To be fair to Farage, he did criticize Putin for locking up journalists. Has Corbyn ever said anything bad about the man?
To be fair on Corbyn, it is not his style to say anything bad about foreign leaders, he tries to be civil about pretty much the lot of them.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Are you really falling for your own spin or are you just putting as good a gloss on the situation as you can?
This sort of populism could lead to a mild boost in the mid-term polls as Miliband's Labour got but without being credible it is never going to be election winning.
Corbyn is likely to do better in Scotland though and remember even Foot and IDS got a few poll leads
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
plainly wrong. See the Jewish Chronicle today. For every Gerald Kaufman there will be five or six like Ivan Lewis.
Something like 70% of Jews voted Conservative in May.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
You're only looking at British history, however. Major parties have collapsed in vote share all over the democratic world. FPTP means those vote share changes are not reflected in seat totals much, and then suddenly a tipping point is reached and the changes happen all at once. Depending on just how terrible Corbyn is, and how much his leadership changes the party to the left, it's possible they could get down to around 20%. I don't think surpassing that is impossible for either UKIP or the Lib Dems or a new SDP in a volatile electorate with modern social media over 10 years.
Yes, but those collapses - I'm thinking of Greece here really - have occurred under extreme circumstances of economic depression. I'm looking at British history, because it probably a more reliable meter than completely different countries, with different circumstances. I could easily say other countries have voiced popular support for radical parties, so Corbyn will do well - but Britain is very much different, so this won't happen.
I don't see why there would be a sudden tipping point under FPTP. Under alternative electoral systems, there is more of a chance of them displacing the official opposition because people increasingly believe it can happen due to increased prominence such electoral systems give minor parties. Under FPTP, any attempts to displace the official opposition have always been knocked back because vote share does not reflect seat totals, which mean that many voters are likely to to opt for the least worst opposition.
I don't see Labour going down to 20%. That didn't even happen at the height of Thatcerism, when the Tories had a much larger majority, let alone now. Cameron, and his Tory party are not that popular.
I think UKIP and the LDs surpassing Labour is pretty much impossible, for the reasons I already elaborated. I don't see why social media would change that: much of it does not favour the right anyway, and much of the demographic UKIP want to appeal to - WWC - are unlikely to be on Twitter or Facebook. The LDs in particular, have a huge image and trust issue with young voters - the key demographic using social media.
Politics is missing an electable and charismatic figure, which neither UKIP nor the LDs offer.
And I don't see this breakaway new SDP happening, either.
The Standard is reporting the Yougov poll wrongly. Only 22% of London UKIP voters put Corbyn first. 66% thought none of the candidates were any good or don't know. Ditto 63% of Conservatives and 48% of voters overall. I imagine some of those 22% were making mischief, in any case.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and .
The SNP is surely another example.
The SNP displaced Labour in Scotland after having proved themselves in government with electable, and credible figures leading them, along with providing what is essentially a non-divisive ideology (in Scotland). UKIP and the LDs have none of these things. UKIP control 1 council, and are yet to prove themselves as competent local governors, and build a strong local government base. The LDs' problem is that they've actually lost out as a result of being in government, have little remains of a local government base, and face much of the same issues that Labour do in regard to being out of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
The LDs have long had their roots in local government. In part this is because talented PPE wannabe SPADs find richer pickings in the two main parties with their think tanks and safe seats. Most of the LD MPs came through the local council route. The fightback will start there as Farron has said. He built his majority on being an effective councillor in a place that was considered a safe Tory seat before.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
As Corbyn is now the clear favourite it will be interesting to see how electable he is, initial indications from today's polls looking pretty good for him. I think as long as he stays on message with his ten big policies he should do pretty well in the polls. The right wing commentators are already celebrating which is probably a further good sign for Corbyn:
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
plainly wrong. See the Jewish Chronicle today. For every Gerald Kaufman there will be five or six like Ivan Lewis.
Something like 70% of Jews voted Conservative in May.
But isn't that a social class rather than religious trend? As indeed are other ethnic groups. When adjusted for SE class the ethnic differences in voting patterns are much less marked.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
On PB in relation to political prognostication I regret to advise you that any post posited on the phrase "FWIW I think Roger is right" slips into a black hole of massive chortles and gargantuan guffaws.
Neoliberal: Useful catch-all epithet for any policy, idea, opinion or action not endorsed by Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters. “You pour the milk in first, rather the hot water? That’s so neoliberal.”
Corbyn being popular in London doesn't help Labour much. There aren't many marginals in the capital these days. And Hendon and Finchley are unlikely to go to Labour with Corbyn in charge.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces. But it won't just be him, it will be the entire party, tainted by its leader. Every Jewish journalist, pundit, MP will be particularly ferocious, as they try to bring him down.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism
Not only were Ken's wins before the rise of ISIS (who are arguably less of an issue because they're quite clearly an apocalyptic death cult rather than your common or garden Islamist nutter), they were both before 7/7, and his first was before 9/11 when such matters genuinely weren't on anyone's radar whatsoever. IIRC correctly his dubious associations played some part in him being ousted in 2008 when Livingstone started a decent favourite against Boris when everyone thought he was an ill disciplined pratt who was taking on Ken because no other Tory was daft enough. A combination of Labour tanking nationally and Ken being seen as too close to some fairly unpleasant sorts swung it.
as for Corbyn's 10 point plan, I see nothing much objectionable in it. We'd all like a fully funded NHS, a decent lifelong education service etc etc. There's just the little matter of how to pay for it all.
Reminds me of the Greens. Lots of lovely sounding ideas. Not a clue about the real world.
The NHS already has huge sums of money spent on it. It will take teachers and parents who are motivated to improve education - not money. Everything about it all is bogus - just an excuse to spend spend spend. As is the preposterous people's investment back or whatever its name is. A real bank takes in deposits in order to then borrow, where would Corbyn's money come from? All totally bogus. And of course the biggest bit of bogosity of all is the anti-austerity rhetoric. Labour left an appalling legacy of financial mismanagement and an enormous deficit with a shrunken economy to pay it off. Simply slowly cutting spending to live within means is not 'austerity'.
Labour did not cause the global financial crash or the enormous deficit. The current Chancellor flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour and drove debt up to record levels.
Labour took bank regulation away from the Bank of England and gave it to the ineffectual FSA, allowing banks to become the imprudent lenders that caused the crash.
The crash was not caused by imprudent lending, nor anything else in this country.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
On PB in relation to political prognostication I regret to advise you that any post posited on the phrase "FWIW I think Roger is right" slips into a black hole of massive chortles and gargantuan guffaws.
Rogerdamus is well established as an effective pundit. The secret is to bet on the opposite, something that even roger acknowledges occasionally. He is a sort of PB Eddie Izzard.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
The Standard is reporting the Yougov poll wrongly. Only 22% of London UKIP voters put Corbyn first. 66% thought none of the candidates were any good or don't know. Ditto 63% of Conservatives and 48% of voters overall. I imagine some of those 22% were making mischief, in any case.
The poll seems to chime in with other polls though, Burnham and Corbyn seem to poll best with the public and Cooper polls relatively poorly. We know that none of the candidates is exactly a game change, indeed yougov a few weeks ago had both Alan Johnson and David Miliband doing better than all 4
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
FWIW there is a 5% chance of Roger being right. it is not inconceivable that Corbyn could surf an unlikely wave, past a post- EU ref divided Tory party, and head into power.
But it's also highly improbable. 5%, likesay.
The chances of the Tories and the media tearing Corbyn apart and pitching Labour, led by Corbyn, into years of civil war, are 60%+.
The third option is that Corbyn is voter-neutral. He wins a few Scottish and London seats, and loses a few English seats, and Labour suffer another defeat, albeit not a massacre. 30%.
I think the third option is the likeliest at the moment. Barring any major economic crisis, Corbyn and Cameron are very capable of maintaining the current status.
There are simply not many Labour marginals in areas were Corbyn is weak and not many Tory or SNP marginals in areas were he is strong. Corbyn at the moment seems like a low risk low return candidate.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
No one has accused Kaufman of being an anti-semite for holding the same or even more extreme positions as Corbyn.
Perhaps he appreciates that 2015 is nothing like 1983, despite the preponderance of lazy pundits who insist on keeping comparing the two.
In 1983, less than 7 years ago there'd been the Winter of Discontent and rates of inflation exceeding 20%.
In 2015, 7 years ago there was a Financial Crisis that resulted from out-of-control speculation and deregulation of the banking sector, inflation is zero and the power of the unions is at a low ebb.
You're only looking at British history, however. Major parties have collapsed in vote share all over the democratic world. FPTP means those vote share changes are not reflected in seat totals much, and then suddenly a tipping point is reached and the changes happen all at once. Depending on just how terrible Corbyn is, and how much his leadership changes the party to the left, it's possible they could get down to around 20%. I don't think surpassing that is impossible for either UKIP or the Lib Dems or a new SDP in a volatile electorate with modern social media over 10 years.
Yes, but those collapses - I'm thinking of Greece here really - have occurred under extreme circumstances of economic depression. I'm looking at British history, because it probably a more reliable meter than completely different countries, with different circumstances. I could easily say other countries have voiced popular support for radical parties, so Corbyn will do well - but Britain is very much different, so this won't happen.
I don't see why there would be a sudden tipping point under FPTP. Under alternative electoral systems, there is more of a chance of them displacing the official opposition because people increasingly believe it can happen due to increased prominence such electoral systems give minor parties. Under FPTP, any attempts to displace the official opposition have always been knocked back because vote share does not reflect seat totals, which mean that many voters are likely to to opt for the least worst opposition.
I don't see Labour going down to 20%. That didn't even happen at the height of Thatcerism, when the Tories had a much larger majority, let alone now. Cameron, and his Tory party are not that popular.
I think UKIP and the LDs surpassing Labour is pretty much impossible, for the reasons I already elaborated. I don't see why social media would change that: much of it does not favour the right anyway, and much of the demographic UKIP want to appeal to - WWC - are unlikely to be on Twitter or Facebook. The LDs in particular, have a huge image and trust issue with young voters - the key demographic using social media.
Politics is missing an electable and charismatic figure, which neither UKIP nor the LDs offer.
And I don't see this breakaway new SDP happening, either.
Labour bottomed out under Brown at 18%.
I didn't know that, but in any case looks like some rogue poll more than anything, especially with the 20-point leads the Tories used to have - that never materialised in a GE.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
On PB in relation to political prognostication I regret to advise you that any post posited on the phrase "FWIW I think Roger is right" slips into a black hole of massive chortles and gargantuan guffaws.
Rogerdamus is well established as an effective pundit. The secret is to bet on the opposite, something that even roger acknowledges occasionally. He is a sort of PB Eddie Izzard.
Quite so.
Dear old Roger is a much valued PB institution that in the fullness of time I feel should be cleaved in half, placed in formaldehyde and displayed at "Dirty Dicks" for future generations of PBers to admire.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Are you really falling for your own spin or are you just putting as good a gloss on the situation as you can?
This sort of populism could lead to a mild boost in the mid-term polls as Miliband's Labour got but without being credible it is never going to be election winning.
Corbyn is likely to do better in Scotland though and remember even Foot and IDS got a few poll leads
Corbyn is never going to do better in Scotland as there's no reason to vote against the SNP and for Corbyn. Labour have lost Scotland and its not coming back.
And midterm poll leads are utterly meaningless, which was my point you responded to. One of the worst things that can happen to an opposition party is to get meaningless poll leads giving a sense of complacency leading to electoral disaster.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and .
The SNP is surely another example.
ut of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
The LDs have long had their roots in local government. In part this is because talented PPE wannabe SPADs find richer pickings in the two main parties with their think tanks and safe seats. Most of the LD MPs came through the local council route. The fightback will start there as Farron has said. He built his majority on being an effective councillor in a place that was considered a safe Tory seat before.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
Of course the LDs biggest chance of recovery is Corbyn. If he is elected, as now seems very likely, suddenly there will be a huge hole on the sensible europhile centre left, just waiting to be filled. Farron is perfect for the task (though he needs to tack right on Trident).
You may be back with some vim long before anyone imagined.
I would disagree. Similar circumstances in the eighties built up votes but very few seats. The LDs instead gained seats in the nineties when Labour gained seats. Indeed since the days of Jeremy Thorpe the LDs have gained seats in every election* where Labour have gained seats and lost seats in every election where Labour have lost them too.
*2005 was the exception due to the first Gulf war.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a mayoral candidate endures. As Chuka Umuna knows. 2. That was before the rise of ISIS, which has made for much greater hostility to anything tainted with Islamism 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
.
The SNP is surely another example.
The SNP displaced Labour in Scotland after having proved themselves in government with electable, and credible figures leading them, along with providing what is essentially a non-divisive ideology (in Scotland). UKIP and the LDs have none of these things. UKIP control 1 council, and are yet to prove themselves as competent local governors, and build a strong local government base. The LDs' problem is that they've actually lost out as a result of being in government, have little remains of a local government base, and face much of the same issues that Labour do in regard to being out of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
The LDs have long had their roots in local government. In part this is because talented PPE wannabe SPADs find richer pickings in the two main parties with their think tanks and safe seats. Most of the LD MPs came through the local council route. The fightback will start there as Farron has said. He built his majority on being an effective councillor in a place that was considered a safe Tory seat before.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
The Scottish Lib Dems probably have the best party machine of the Holyrood opposition parties. Unfortunately they will face tough elections in both 2016 and 2017. In Holyrood 2016 they'll likely lose most of their 5 seats. In terms of the 2017 Council elections they were reduced to around 70 councillors out of 1200 and only control 1 council - I fear they will lose many of there councillors and might end up with more House of lords members than councillors. It will be very hard for them to rebuild by 2020.
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and .
The SNP is surely another example.
The SNP displaced Labour in Scotland after having proved themselves in government with electable, and credible figures leading them, along with providing what is essentially a non-divisive ideology (in Scotland). UKIP and the LDs have none of these things. UKIP control 1 council, and are yet to prove themselves as competent local governors, and build a strong local government base. The LDs' problem is that they've actually lost out as a result of being in government, have little remains of a local government base, and face much of the same issues that Labour do in regard to being out of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
The LDs have long had their roots in local government. In part this is because talented PPE wannabe SPADs find richer pickings in the two main parties with their think tanks and safe seats. Most of the LD MPs came through the local council route. The fightback will start there as Farron has said. He built his majority on being an effective councillor in a place that was considered a safe Tory seat before.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
I am aware of the LD history in local government. My point is, is that their local government base has been damaged signifcantly in the last 5 years. It'll take them a long time to even get back to where they were in 2010, let alone displace Labour.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Disastrous poll for Labour. They're even more likely to elect him, now.
Chortle!
It's just occurred to me, exactly how calamitous Corbyn might be. He has close and uncomfortable links with Islamists, FFS. He has a history of eerie association with anti-Semites (and the IRA).
It's therefore an almost suicidal act. Making him leader. Yet they prepare to do it.
Ken Livingstone had some interesting views and friends, never stopped him being an electoral success.
1. Red Ken wasn't trying to be PM - a job where the scrutiny is a trillion times more intense than anything a 3. The Juwes are the men wot will do for im.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
plainly wrong. See the Jewish Chronicle today. For every Gerald Kaufman there will be five or six like Ivan Lewis.
Something like 70% of Jews voted Conservative in May.
But isn't that a social class rather than religious trend? As indeed are other ethnic groups. When adjusted for SE class the ethnic differences in voting patterns are much less marked.
Both. Jews are now more likely to vote Conservative than the London middle classes generally.
Simon Danczuk @SimonDanczuk 7m7 minutes ago Why is @Corbyn4Leader texting me to vote for him? Has he not heard anything I've said over the last two days?
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
No one has accused Kaufman of being an anti-semite for holding the same or even more extreme positions as Corbyn.
The best and strongest critics of Israel and fanatical Judaism generally have always been fellow (ex-) Jews.
I think it's because they can afford it, since no one can accuse a Jew of anti-semitism.
Always the best critics are the ones whom you assume to be on the same team, like blacks being racist, or whites fighting for civil rights, or Tories knifing Thatcher, or Brown knifing Blair, Gays against gay marriage ect.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Bravo Roger .... a steadfast stab in the silk purse sows ear show that Corbyn represents and he'll provide endless threads and much amusement on PB but Labour realists know the lemmings are about to project the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
Remind me again what chance most posters on here gave Corbyn of winning the leadership back when he first declared? On 15 June when he made it onto the ballot?
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
FWIW there is a 5% chance of Roger being right. it is not inconceivable that Corbyn could surf an unlikely wave, past a post- EU ref divided Tory party, and head into power.
But it's also highly improbable. 5%, likesay.
The chances of the Tories and the media tearing Corbyn apart and pitching Labour, led by Corbyn, into years of civil war, are 60%+.
The third option is that Corbyn is voter-neutral. He wins a few Scottish and London seats, and loses a few English seats, and Labour suffer another defeat, albeit not a massacre. 30%.
I've been saying throughout this mess that I'm not so sure that the Conservatives should be treating Corbyn's threat so lightly. In 2020 we'll have had ten years of Cameroonism, which came after thirteen years of Blairism, and eighteen years of Thatcherism.
In total that's 41 years of Thatcherite, or (from the left's perspective) Thatcheite-lite government. If there is another financial shock, or major political scandal, many of the GBP might quite like 'fresh' thinking, even if it seems far from fresh to many of us.
That is, if Corbyn gets as far as 2020. As I wrote in a post this morning, these are perilous waters for Labour. If Labour fractures he won't stand a chance.
Corbyn is consistent and, unlike the hapless Ed, seems to have a policy platform. All he needs to do it sell it to the same gullible, idiotic public that pays through the nose for Apple products.
Simon Danczuk @SimonDanczuk 7m7 minutes ago Why is @Corbyn4Leader texting me to vote for him? Has he not heard anything I've said over the last two days?
He thinks Jeremy Corbyn personally texted him? Cute.
Possibly so, but adjusting for social class and income does greatly reduce the effect, as indeed it does for other groups like Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims.
I expect the road back for the LDs to be a slow one, even Farron said at the East Mids Hustings that his target was to double the number of MPs in 2020. I think more than that is possible, but it is a reasonable goal.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
No one has accused Kaufman of being an anti-semite for holding the same or even more extreme positions as Corbyn.
The best and strongest critics of Israel and fanatical Judaism generally have always been fellow (ex-) Jews.
I think it's because they can afford it, since no one can accuse a Jew of anti-semitism.
Always the best critics are the ones whom you assume to be on the same team, like blacks being racist, or whites fighting for civil rights, or Tories knifing Thatcher, or Brown knifing Blair.
Whenever a newspaper wants to commission an article that might be perceived as critical of oppressed minority X (*women*, blacks, Jews, criminals, gays, Muslims, white men, Smurfs) they are generally keen to get a writer FROM that background. So Jews can vilify Jews, blacks can call for more Stop and Search, and so on.
Check the archives. Since about 1990 almost all articles, in this vein, obey that rule.
So the way Corbyn can defend himself on middle east policy is having a lefty anti-Israel Jew as shadow foreign secretary.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
Given the Left's obsession with racism and homophobia And All That, it is plainly astonishing that they are about to elect a leader who can be reasonably accused of consorting with anti-Semites, solacing homophobes, and so forth. Just madness.
You can imagine the fun the Right will have with this. The slow death of Corbyn will be like a smug fat cat languidly killing a crippled sparrow.
I think there is a division between right wing jews and left wing jews about Corbyn but that is all not different from their political ideology not their religion. Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
Politics is cyclical to the extent that parties rotate in and out of power, but there's no guarantee that the party the Conservatives are replaced with will be the Labour Party. A new SDP, a resurgent Liberal Democrat party or even a left-moving UKIP could possibly do it. It's a very rare thing for one of the big two parties to collapse, a once in a century thing, but when it happens it's after this sort of event.
I don't think they could.
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and .
The SNP is surely another example.
ut of touch, incompetent, seen as purposeless, untrustworthy and so on. They also lack - as a result of their own oblivion - a generation of talented political figures.
e.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
Of course the LDs biggest chance of recovery is Corbyn. If he is elected, as now seems very likely, suddenly there will be a huge hole on the sensible europhile centre left, just waiting to be filled. Farron is perfect for the task (though he needs to tack right on Trident).
You may be back with some vim long before anyone imagined.
I would disagree. Similar circumstances in the eighties built up votes but very few seats. The LDs instead gained seats in the nineties when Labour gained seats. Indeed since the days of Jeremy Thorpe the LDs have gained seats in every election* where Labour have gained seats and lost seats in every election where Labour have lost them too.
*2005 was the exception due to the first Gulf war.
FFS if you can't exploit a political catastrophe (for your main opponent), like Jeremy Corbyn, then you DESERVE to die as a party. And good riddance.
Sean, often when you're this vehemently against something, you'll be for it in a few weeks or months. Will we be seeing you say: "Corbyn is brilliant for Labour, my God, the Conservatives are f****d," albeit in far better prose?
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
The Corbyn effect is rather quite intriguing. Burnham pulled him into the contest because he considered him inconsequential, and most probably looked down upon him- a beardy, socialist, cheque shirted, allotment growing, simple, old, unreconstructed lefty. Heh- what threat could old man Jezzer be?
It's a bit like inviting your sad old relative to a friend's wedding. A pity invite for a misfit old uncle who usually spends his lonely nights channel hopping from his armchair. But then comes the wedding, and the old man is charming, a wonderful dancer, everyone loves him. He outshines the bride too.
Corbyn is doing well because when the spotlight has shone on him he has excelled. Unflappable, charming, principled, smooth, poised, a breath of fresh air in politics, and he has proved himself to be by far the best candidate against the listless Burnham, the nervous Cooper and the lightweight Kendell.
The fact that he was so underestimated by Burnham speaks volumes. Maybe old man Corbyn has a few more moves to show yet, and on this note the right wingers and Tory press should take warning.
I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
The Corbyn effect is rather quite intriguing. Burnham pulled him into the contest because he considered him inconsequential, and most probably looked down upon him- a beardy, socialist, cheque shirted, allotment growing, simple, old, unreconstructed lefty. Heh- what threat could old man Jezzer be?
It's a bit like inviting your sad old relative to a friend's wedding. A pity invite for a misfit old uncle who usually spends his lonely nights channel hopping from his armchair. But then comes the wedding, and the old man is charming, a wonderful dancer, everyone loves him. He outshines the bride too.
Corbyn is doing well because when the spotlight has shone on him he has excelled. Unflappable, charming, principled, smooth, poised, a breath of fresh air in politics, and he has proved himself to be by far the best candidate against the listless Burnham, the nervous Cooper and the lightweight Kendell.
The fact that he was so underestimated by Burnham speaks volumes. Maybe old man Corbyn has a few more moves to show yet, and on this note the right wingers and Tory press should take warning.
I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot.
"I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot."
So voting Corbyn is a Hail Mary pass?
Problem is that the ball has been replaced with a bomb, and if you don't catch it exactly right, you won't just lose the match...
Kezia no doubt kissed Corbyn's ring after she attended his Edinburgh rally earlier today - it'll no doubt be Ken's turn tonight. I wonder if the McMurphy boys will turn up to heckle Corbyn in person rather than on Twitter and through the MSM.
I cannot see any outcome for Labour, post Corbyn winning the leadership, which doesn't involve civil war within the party, and nasty convulsions which turn off voters. There are just too many Labour MPs who personally loathe Jezza's stance and his politics. and see him as serially narcissistic and disloyal, and they will feel no obligation to be loyal in return. Especially as they will perceive him as a massive loser.
Corbyn needs to gain huge poll leads within weeks of his election, otherwise I see him being deposed by about 2017. Labour will not suffer another Ed Miliband with added Islamism.
That's very possible, and is in fact the most probable option as things stand. But we're talking about the Labour party here, who crowned the disloyal Brown as leader and PM, failed to depose him, and followed this up with adulation of the hapless Miliband.
Basically, the Labour party can be a bit insane when it comes to choosing, and sticking with, leaders. Corbyn will have to be really bad for him to be deposed.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
The Corbyn effect is rather quite intriguing. Burnham pulled him into the contest because he considered him inconsequential, and most probably looked down upon him- a beardy, socialist, cheque shirted, allotment growing, simple, old, unreconstructed lefty. Heh- what threat could old man Jezzer be?
It's a bit like inviting your sad old relative to a friend's wedding. A pity invite for a misfit old uncle who usually spends his lonely nights channel hopping from his armchair. But then comes the wedding, and the old man is charming, a wonderful dancer, everyone loves him. He outshines the bride too.
Corbyn is doing well because when the spotlight has shone on him he has excelled. Unflappable, charming, principled, smooth, poised, a breath of fresh air in politics, and he has proved himself to be by far the best candidate against the listless Burnham, the nervous Cooper and the lightweight Kendell.
The fact that he was so underestimated by Burnham speaks volumes. Maybe old man Corbyn has a few more moves to show yet, and on this note the right wingers and Tory press should take warning.
I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot.
Well done Tyson I'm sure Southam Observer will come around with time.
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
Are you really falling for your own spin or are you just putting as good a gloss on the situation as you can?
This sort of populism could lead to a mild boost in the mid-term polls as Miliband's Labour got but without being credible it is never going to be election winning.
Corbyn is likely to do better in Scotland though and remember even Foot and IDS got a few poll leads
Corbyn is never going to do better in Scotland as there's no reason to vote against the SNP and for Corbyn. Labour have lost Scotland and its not coming back.
And midterm poll leads are utterly meaningless, which was my point you responded to. One of the worst things that can happen to an opposition party is to get meaningless poll leads giving a sense of complacency leading to electoral disaster.
Corbyn is left of Sturgeon and indeed on C4 news tonight several young Scots said they would switch from SNP to Labour having heard Corbyn speak if he became Labour leader
what none of us know is how guileful Corbyn can be. His basic policies are likely to be an instant hit with the public. Even nationalizing the railways is popular and loudly protesting Osborne's cruelty to the poor while reducing IHT for the rich and looking authentic when doing it is sure to make him a hit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
oject the party over the cliff .... Ooppps there goes another furry fellow over the edge ....
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
FWIWnd London seats, and loses a few English seats, and Labour suffer another defeat, albeit not a massacre. 30%.
I've been saying throughout this mess that I'm not so sure that the Conservatives should be treating Corbyn's threat so lightly. In 2020 we'll have had ten years of Cameroonism, which came after thirteen years of Blairism, and eighteen years of Thatcherism.
In total that's 41 years of Thatcherite, or (from the left's perspective) Thatcheite-lite government. If there is another financial shock, or major political scandal, many of the GBP might quite like 'fresh' thinking, even if it seems far from fresh to many of us.
That is, if Corbyn gets as far as 2020. As I wrote in a post this morning, these are perilous waters for Labour. If Labour fractures he won't stand a chance.
Corbyn is consistent and, unlike the hapless Ed, seems to have a policy platform. All he needs to do it sell it to the same gullible, idiotic public that pays through the nose for Apple products.
I cannot see any outcome for Labour, post Corbyn winning the leadership, which doesn't involve civil war within the party, and nasty convulsions which turn off voters. There are just too many Labour MPs who personally loathe Jezza's stance and his politics. and see him as serially narcissistic and disloyal, and they will feel no obligation to be loyal in return. Especially as they will perceive him as a massive loser.
Corbyn needs to gain huge poll leads within weeks of his election, otherwise I see him being deposed by about 2017. Labour will not suffer another Ed Miliband with added Islamism.
If Corbyn is not doing relatively well by 2018 I could see him being replaced by Alan Johnson, much like Michael Howard he is the only figure in the party who could replace him and be acceptable enough to MPs and the party membership
I think Gloria Del Piero had a point regarding her tweet - Labour's sheer unelectability in the 1980s meant that to floating voters the Tories were the only option. It's still true now; the public isn't enamoured by this government in the slightest - if we believe the recent YG internals, it could even be said that the government is unpopular. But Labour, by electing Corbyn, and by not having viable candidates with ideas, has no chance of taking advantage of that, and even addressing their own issues. Cruddas, probably the most brightest thinker in Labour today, will most likely be marginalised under a Corbyn leadership - my gut tells me Corbyn isn't as open and tolerant to all ideas as he says he is. However I also think Labour needs this - it needs Corbyn as their leader.
Why? Firstly, Cooper, Burnham and Kendall wouldn't do anything for Labour anyway, even if they were elected. They are dull, middle of the road characters who make being a moderate sound unprincipled and without any strong political beliefs. When Blair - someone who once upon a time, was a genuine moderate - managed to inspire, and excite many people with his vision. Their completely and utterly poor leadership campaigns, tells me that if they cannot inspire Labour members, or activists then there's not a hope in hell they can do the same in the wider electorate. Yes, Labour members and the wider public are two different groups - but Labour members were still the people who, in the leadership contests in the last twenty years - three overall - two out of those three times voted for those on the Right of the party (D Miliband and Blair).
Labour look like they have no solutions to the issues of immigration, or indeed an alternative programme of welfare reform, and ideas on the role of the state in the 21st century. If they have no solutions to immigration and welfare, then they haven't a hope of regaining voters trust back and making inroads into the currently negative way they are seen my large swathes of the electorate. Ed Miliband, already tried 'tough' rhetoric on immigration and welfare, as Burnham, Kendall and Cooper to a lesser extent have rolled out in this leadership campaign, and it didn't work. The sheer lack of authenticity on the issue, combined with no coherent policy
Really, Labour needs the sheer disaster of a Corbyn leadership to hit them. To perhaps kill off the hard-left like never before, but also to let a new generation of MPs, and others involved within Labour rise who can genuinely give Labour a purpose for existing. Because right now, many don't know the purpose of the Labour party. In fact, it's a problem for the Left in general - the only centre-Left party who doesn't face this issue is the SNP, and their purpose is less ideological and more about nationality.
Perhaps the worst is best.
But, Corbyn could be the man to take the party over a cliff.
Comments
you will know if I have been on the sauce , it will not be polite banter.
Roger has a knack of calling it wrong.
The recovery did not flatline and all Labour did was make temporary VAT cuts and car buying wheezes and bring forward spending to fake a recovery for electoral purposes.
From the absurdly high level inherited from Labour, Osborne plans to increase it by 10% over 10 years. Hardly austerity.
Jeremy Corbyn is more popular than the other Labour leadership candidates with the wider electorate and fares particularly well with Ukip supporters as well as those from his own party, a Survation poll suggests.
The survey of 1,000 people found that Corbyn scored the highest when they were asked about his personal qualities and which candidate would be the best at holding the government to account as the leader of the opposition.
Among Ukip voters, 39% of them liked him the most, higher than the 38% of Labour voters who said so. But just 22% of Conservatives liked Corbyn, compared with 25% who preferred Andy Burnham.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Burnham was narrowly ahead with 25%, against 24% for Corbyn, and the two men were tied on 26% on who would be the most likely to win the next general election as Labour leader.
The two female candidates, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, were trailing the others on the majority of questions asked.
http://bit.ly/1KlUoUU
From The Guardian.
Molly MEP @MollyMEP 1h1 hour ago
The Greens would welcome a coalition with Jeremy #Corbyn: who is ready for a Red-Green alliance?
http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/08/14/comment-the-greens-would-welcome-a-coalition-with-jeremy-cor … via @politics_co_uk
Molly MEP @MollyMEP 1h1 hour ago
Having dipped my toe into the Corbyn pool yesterday I have now jumped right in. Comments welcome http://fb.me/42mdjxL68
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/left-winger-jeremy-corbyn-is-first-choice-for-londoners-a2633546.html
China not Greece buys up all the spare BMs and Mercs, but most of them are built locally. Plus VWs. Mercedes builds SUVs in the USA for the China market.
We on the other hand rely on China for the sales of our Rolls Royces and Bentleys. The fact that these companies are German owned hardly matters to the people they employ and the wealth they create for us.
OK straight to the bin.
Corbyn hasn't yet been elected and the Green party wants an electoral alliance with a Corbyn led Labour.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11802131/Matthew-Hancock-Any-Labour-leader-will-cost-British-families-dear.html
The last time it happened was in the early 1900s with the liberal party, and that had as much to do with the widening of the franchise to most men, as well as most of the working classes supporting the Labour party. Today there is no such phenomenon associated with a new party: UKIP have 1 MP, and single solidarity council - and that's with 4 million votes, showing how hard it is to gain ground in a FPTP system. The LDs are coming from an even worst point than Labour are. While Labour, even after a Corbyn leadership are still likely to have key heartlands, and a base - they survived 1983, after all - the LDs have literally lost practically all their heartlands, and are struggling even to be heard, let alone replacing the Labour party. Hey - the LDs have their own brand issues, that are as deep, and as problematic as Labour's. They also have the issue of finding a purpose for their existience, too. I don't see a resurgent SDP force happening, there's the historical failure of the SDP for one, but also that unlike the gang of 4 who had already established political careers and nothing to lose, it's the exact opposite for the Umunnas and the Hunts of this world.
Scotland is a problem, but at some point the SNP won't be polling 62%. While I don't think Labour will ever get back Scotland completely, I don't think some inroads are impossible.
Labour has some resilience today, because there is no alternative to it as the official opposition. In 1983, the biggest chance to usurp Labour was stopped, because of how difficult it is under FPTP to displace the main two. Currently, UKIP and the LDs, are the ones who are a pale shadow to the SDP as to how much of a threat they were to the Labour party's survival.
And the change produced more irrelevant paperwork and far fewer wise eyes on what was going on. Gordon Brown didn't cause the financial crisis, but you could (just about) make a plausible argument that it wouldn't have happened without him.
The previous poster's idea that Labour somehow had an economic miracle going on and nobody noticed is simply nonsense. Darling was probably saved from having an IMF chat by the prospect of a Tory government. It's abundantly clear that even those closest to the goings on thought that the train was totally off the rails. Mr Byrne for example.
I too can claim that I had an accurate prediction made after the fact.
"If he becomes leader, all these skeletons will be dragged out of the closet and rattled in the voters' faces, time and again, and it doesn't matter how affable his beard is, how avuncular his vest, he will be torn to pieces."
Snap. I was just thinking that recently. (Some of) the tabloids are now nosing around for material of varying accuracy and biding their time. Should Corbyn be elected he can expect a fusillade or slow defamation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8
I wouldn't be surprised to see Labour getting quite a boost in the polls. His problems might come down the line. If he's able to temper some of his wilder excesses and even appoint one or two right wingers to important positions (Cooper to the treasury?) then he might surprise us all.
I don't see why there would be a sudden tipping point under FPTP. Under alternative electoral systems, there is more of a chance of them displacing the official opposition because people increasingly believe it can happen due to increased prominence such electoral systems give minor parties. Under FPTP, any attempts to displace the official opposition have always been knocked back because vote share does not reflect seat totals, which mean that many voters are likely to to opt for the least worst opposition.
I don't see Labour going down to 20%. That didn't even happen at the height of Thatcerism, when the Tories had a much larger majority, let alone now. Cameron, and his Tory party are not that popular.
I think UKIP and the LDs surpassing Labour is pretty much impossible, for the reasons I already elaborated. I don't see why social media would change that: much of it does not favour the right anyway, and much of the demographic UKIP want to appeal to - WWC - are unlikely to be on Twitter or Facebook. The LDs in particular, have a huge image and trust issue with young voters - the key demographic using social media.
Politics is missing an electable and charismatic figure, which neither UKIP nor the LDs offer.
And I don't see this breakaway new SDP happening, either.
Camila Batmanghelidjh claims Oliver Letwin, head of Cabinet Office, made verbal promise in July 2014 after being told charity faced funding crisis"
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/14/kids-company-pledged-20m-government-camila-batmanghelidjh-oliver-letwin
Right wing Jews can accuse Corbyn of antisemitism and defend the Israeli government because they are right wing, and left wing jews can defend Corbyn and attack the Israeli government because they are left wing.
Or to put is simply, for every Ivan Lewis there is a Gerald Kaufman.
Mr Kaufmann coined the term 'longest suicide note in history' back in 1983.
This sort of populism could lead to a mild boost in the mid-term polls as Miliband's Labour got but without being credible it is never going to be election winning.
Could it be that the power of his movement is being underestimated now, just like his potential to win this vote was underestimated two months ago?
FWIW I think Roger is right. Let's come back to this if he wins and we can set up some bets.
It will be a slow route back, with the way marked by council gains in by elections and local councils on local issues about good governance. National issues will take a backseat for a while.
https://twitter.com/IsabelHardman/status/632134416702251008
Since the main complaint tonight is Corby's support for palestinians will make jews his sworn enemy, on foreign policy I see there is little difference:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/sir-gerald-kaufman/gaza-israel-palestine_b_2164599.html
No one has accused Kaufman of being an anti-semite for holding the same or even more extreme positions as Corbyn.
Barring any major economic crisis, Corbyn and Cameron are very capable of maintaining the current status.
There are simply not many Labour marginals in areas were Corbyn is weak and not many Tory or SNP marginals in areas were he is strong.
Corbyn at the moment seems like a low risk low return candidate.
In 1983, less than 7 years ago there'd been the Winter of Discontent and rates of inflation exceeding 20%.
In 2015, 7 years ago there was a Financial Crisis that resulted from out-of-control speculation and deregulation of the banking sector, inflation is zero and the power of the unions is at a low ebb.
Dear old Roger is a much valued PB institution that in the fullness of time I feel should be cleaved in half, placed in formaldehyde and displayed at "Dirty Dicks" for future generations of PBers to admire.
And midterm poll leads are utterly meaningless, which was my point you responded to. One of the worst things that can happen to an opposition party is to get meaningless poll leads giving a sense of complacency leading to electoral disaster.
*2005 was the exception due to the first Gulf war.
Why is @Corbyn4Leader texting me to vote for him? Has he not heard anything I've said over the last two days?
Always the best critics are the ones whom you assume to be on the same team, like blacks being racist, or whites fighting for civil rights, or Tories knifing Thatcher, or Brown knifing Blair, Gays against gay marriage ect.
In total that's 41 years of Thatcherite, or (from the left's perspective) Thatcheite-lite government. If there is another financial shock, or major political scandal, many of the GBP might quite like 'fresh' thinking, even if it seems far from fresh to many of us.
That is, if Corbyn gets as far as 2020. As I wrote in a post this morning, these are perilous waters for Labour. If Labour fractures he won't stand a chance.
Corbyn is consistent and, unlike the hapless Ed, seems to have a policy platform. All he needs to do it sell it to the same gullible, idiotic public that pays through the nose for Apple products.
Possibly so, but adjusting for social class and income does greatly reduce the effect, as indeed it does for other groups like Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims.
I expect the road back for the LDs to be a slow one, even Farron said at the East Mids Hustings that his target was to double the number of MPs in 2020. I think more than that is possible, but it is a reasonable goal.
“@K1rst3y: @SimonDanczuk Its a automated text” Really? You mean he's not really interested in me at all?
The word is overused so much, it's meaningless anyway...
It's a bit like inviting your sad old relative to a friend's wedding. A pity invite for a misfit old uncle who usually spends his lonely nights channel hopping from his armchair. But then comes the wedding, and the old man is charming, a wonderful dancer, everyone loves him. He outshines the bride too.
Corbyn is doing well because when the spotlight has shone on him he has excelled. Unflappable, charming, principled, smooth, poised, a breath of fresh air in politics, and he has proved himself to be by far the best candidate against the listless Burnham, the nervous Cooper and the lightweight Kendell.
The fact that he was so underestimated by Burnham speaks volumes. Maybe old man Corbyn has a few more moves to show yet, and on this note the right wingers and Tory press should take warning.
I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot.
"I'm voting Corbyn- and I think potentially the old boy could change the political landscape in this country. Maybe not, but hell, worth a shot."
So voting Corbyn is a Hail Mary pass?
Problem is that the ball has been replaced with a bomb, and if you don't catch it exactly right, you won't just lose the match...
Basically, the Labour party can be a bit insane when it comes to choosing, and sticking with, leaders. Corbyn will have to be really bad for him to be deposed.
The party splitting, on the other hand ...
I'm sure Southam Observer will come around with time.
But, Corbyn could be the man to take the party over a cliff.