Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s “Brexit goes ahead if LAB won snap election” arouses

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s “Brexit goes ahead if LAB won snap election” arouses furious response from many witihn his party

Corbyn faces furious Labour backlash over backing Brexit https://t.co/BXrnYJbJnk

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • First! Like the Tories at GE2022*

    *T&C apply
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260

    First! Like the Tories at GE2022*

    *T&C apply

    I demand a full independent inquiry conducted by a lip-reader.
  • Wholly agree with Mike, I’m furious
  • Unexpectedly, people are actually underestimating the disruptive effect Brexit is going to have on British politics this coming year.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    The left, denied power and influence, have been able to cry betrayal from their sofas and marches. They have spent decades complaining about the world.

    Now in charge, they can’t quite do that.

    We are beginning to see the left having to make choices and alienate people. It turns out the choices never went away.

    No doubt they will twist and turn and claim that it’s someone else’s fault and they are the good guys, but reality is catching up with them.

    Corbyn is a red Tory now.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 2,163
    Thanks for posting. Good article.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 32,146
    edited December 2018
    ydoethur said:

    First! Like the Tories at GE2022*

    *T&C apply

    I demand a full independent inquiry conducted by a lip-reader.
    Preferably one dropped by the CPS.....



    It will be interesting to see if this has sufficient 'cut through' to affect polling.
  • I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


  • First! Like the Tories at GE2022*

    *T&C apply

    I have said for a while that the next general election is the last one that the Tories will win for a very long time.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    Corbyn and McDonnell voted and campaigned for remain.... McDonnell has even started talking positively about a people's vote...

    Some strange actions for those ideologically obsessed with Brexit in the same way as the ERG are. I realise it makes good centrist propaganda but in terms of predicting real world actions it has the flaw of being untrue....
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    edited December 2018
    Whys the fuss about the Labour members' reaction?

    The Labour faithful are now the metropolitan hipsters and middle-class. That's been the case for some years. They don't want associated with the smelly working class.

    Edit: Not a bad electoral move, it shores up the Northern seats while the London seats will carry on voting Labour. It's a fashion thing.
  • Difficult not to feel schadenfreude for both Corbyn and Labour after all the clueless posturing they have indulged in over Brexit. I don’t suppose the Tories will find the cohesion to exploit Labour’s difficulties but still - a temporary respite from their own troubles is not to be sniffed at.

    Doesn’t show Remainers in a good light either and rather highlights why they lost in the first place. That tolerant, urbane, outward looking image they like to project shattered for the myth it is on the fact that they actually lost and can’t live with that democratic verdict of the electorate.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    edited December 2018
    Jezza couldn’t give a stuff about Labour policy, Labour members or Labour voters. He ditches them when it suits him. It’s all a massive ego trip for a clique in silly hats.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 24,242
    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    edited December 2018
    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
  • Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Yes.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    edited December 2018
    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.
    An effective Labour leader that actually gave a shit would be ideal.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 2,163
    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    In this time of national crisis, I'd like politicians of all parties to adopt positions according to what is in the country's best interests, rather than their party's. I really don't think I'm alone in that.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Yes.
    Any tips on how?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Jonathan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.
    An effective Labour leader that actually gave a shit would be ideal.
    My word. We haven't had one that met both criteria for about a quarter of a century.

    If we remember John Smith was a slippery and duplicitous opportunist rather than the great statesman Blair's later critics made him out to be, it's even longer.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 24,242
    T

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    There’s a choice to be made. Labour can have a europhile leader, or a radical socialist leader, but not both.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    In this time of national crisis, I'd like politicians of all parties to adopt positions according to what is in the country's best interests, rather than their party's. I really don't think I'm alone in that.
    That’s what they think they are doing. They think they are right. It’s a sickness that troubles politicians and despots throughout history. Most tyrants would claim to be acting in the national interest, it’s their duty to see their vision through.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,654
    Corbyn's Brexit position is entirely sensible from a political perspective. Labour inclined Remainers have nowhere else to go. They aren't going to reward the tories for their ArmEUgeddon and the LibDems are deader than their erstwhile bootie leader.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    I don’t really agree with that. There are definitely some in the right of the party who want to do anything that will damage Corbyn, and if that comes at the cost of serious damage to the party as well, so be it, but I don’t think that level of bad faith is widespread. More commonly, people right across the party think that opposing Brexit is a moral imperative and are acting in good faith to try and make that happen.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 27,961
    edited December 2018
    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?

    I think we need to see beyond the narrow party prism here. Brexit policy should be about putting the country first. We've had two years of self-interested Tory positioning and look where it has brought us to.

    I also think that if we do Remain - and I see the chances of that as being vanishingly small - the Tories will end up competing with UKIP for pro-Brexit votes and that will see them move ever further to the right. This will cause them ongoing internal problems. On top of which, two Brexit parties in a FPTP system is not a great way to harvest seats.

    But the biggest danger for Labour is that Brexit is 99.9% likely to occur and the party under the current management will never be forgiven by a lot of its usual voters if it has not done all it possibly can to oppose it.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    Jonathan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.
    An effective Labour leader that actually gave a shit would be ideal.
    We have one, if we didn't we would have a Tory majority and no say what goes on.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    Sean_F said:

    T

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    There’s a choice to be made. Labour can have a europhile leader, or a radical socialist leader, but not both.
    Quite right. The Labour left are getting used to power, all those betrayals they have whinged about are merely choices, choices they themselves now are responsible for.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Don't worry, comrades. Under the Supreme Leader's wise guidance, everyone will enjoy above average wages as the socialist paradise is ushered in.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.
    And you don't think that might just have become a little more important in the last six months? Or that it might become progressively more important in the next three?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    I don’t really agree with that. There are definitely some in the right of the party who want to do anything that will damage Corbyn, and if that comes at the cost of serious damage to the party as well, so be it, but I don’t think that level of bad faith is widespread. More commonly, people right across the party think that opposing Brexit is a moral imperative and are acting in good faith to try and make that happen.
    I wasn't really referring to those in the party so much (although maybe one or two) as those who clearly don't support the party trying to pressure the party into doing it. I feel Anna Soubry for example does not have our best interests at heart...

    Corbyn is playing a sensible role on Brexit, if the government come to the conclusion that they have to have a referendum I would then expect Corbyn to support it even if it isn't policy to do so before looking for a GE.

    Although some people have suggested an election could happen soon. Either way I don't think the leadership can give away the you betrayed Brexit line to the Conservatives.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678
    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    I don’t really agree with that. There are definitely some in the right of the party who want to do anything that will damage Corbyn, and if that comes at the cost of serious damage to the party as well, so be it, but I don’t think that level of bad faith is widespread. More commonly, people right across the party think that opposing Brexit is a moral imperative and are acting in good faith to try and make that happen.
    Ok thanks - that makes sense in most cases where Brexit doesn’t happen. But what if there’s an intermediate GE with A50 paused etc where Labour say they will oppose that Brexit? At that point the debates all become ‘are you for or against the will of the people?’ rather than ‘how will you negotiate Brexit better than this current shitshow?’ - because broadcast interviews are no longer about the position of the party vs reality, but simply the contrast of two reality-free positioning statements. At that point the Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie and are easily re-elected to carry on with the Brexit they haven’t had to define.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    Jonathan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.
    An effective Labour leader that actually gave a shit would be ideal.
    We have one, if we didn't we would have a Tory majority and no say what goes on.
    Jez was an effective strump campaigner in 2017. I’ll give you that. But that is it, but it highlights how he soft pedals on Labours Brexit policy.

    My most generous interpretation is that he really does not give a shit.

    In reality I suspect his outriders are looking forward to a little bit of Tory induced chaos to see him into no10 with a radical mandate. And he goes along with it, because he doesn’t give a shit.
  • ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.

    Alternatively:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40630242

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Polruan said:

    The Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie

    Now there is a mental image I could well have done without...
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    I can't see a big downside for Labour. A massive sigh of relief from the Northern MPs, and where will the hysterical Metropolitans go? I've always quite liked the LDs despite the ludicrous 'Democrats' in their title. I suppose in London circles, it can be described as post-modernist irony or something.

    But they're a one-trick pony. Perhaps a boost for the Greens? Oh well, there goes air travel until they realise it may affect their ski trips.

    Only joking really (sort of).
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    ydoethur said:

    Polruan said:

    The Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie

    Now there is a mental image I could well have done without...
    Where is the horn?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.
    And you don't think that might just have become a little more important in the last six months? Or that it might become progressively more important in the next three?
    It wasn't then, it might in future but even with greater levels of interest the Labour vote is less interested in Brexit to begin with.

    When it comes to the next election those who supported Labour will probably still see those issues they chose Labour for as relevant and if given a choice between Labour, Tory or putting their vote to a third candidate that can't win will choose Labour. Brexit will affect some Labour voters, maybe put off those who are only just about happy enough to vote Labour if Labour do wrong. Generally though the government will be blamed for policies passed even if Labour receive some anger for say, not opposing hard enough or supporting people's vote.

    My guess is Clive Lewis worry is more Labour winning the next election, where even small margins could make the difference rather than retaining his seat which I could see happening in almost any Labour Brexit policy circumstances.

    I realise the people's vote poll had some interesting things happening to Labour and Lib Dem vote shares in certain conditions but I'd believe it when I saw it..
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378
    FPT @TheJezziah @AlastairMeeks




    Considering Owen Jones has met her it seems pretty legitimate, I suppose he could be in on some kind of conspiracy that the right wingers on Twitter allege but it seems a bit far fetched.

    You've gone off into accusing the hard left of generalising...

    Before we ignore the obvious problem with accusing any large group of generalising you do realise I was disagreeing with someone who generalised the left to begin with, which is the post your responded to.

    The simplest explanation is the most likely, James was being an offensive and got called out on it.

    I don’t believe you can’t read so I have to conclude you are being deliberately dishonest.

    James O’Brien is suggesting that “Rachael Swindon” is a fraud. He’s not looking down on her because she’s poor, he’s suggesting that she is duping others into subsidising her lifestyle. It takes some pretty hard work to affect to misunderstand what he was saying but, credit to the hard left, you've put the shift in.

    Meanwhile, you still haven’t explained why “liberal” is an all-purpose insult.
    Same reason why left is. Although like I pointed out, as with people it can be added without implying a hatred for that group.

    Or for another example calling someone a stupid idiot doesn't sound quite as good as calling someone a stupid little idiot, the little is just in there for effect rather than implying a hatred of little people. I've strung an insult together about somebody with little in there who was taller than me.

    He's mocking her for asking for money, scrounging as he so affectionately puts it and accuses her of being a fraud with very little proof apart from his own conspiracies. I don't usually mind James O'Brien despite his anti Corbyn angle but he is being a really nasty piece of work there.


    I suppose it is easier to dismiss your opponents and those who vote for them as bad people, stupid and tricked than face up to your own sides intellectual deficit and complete lack of appeal.
    It’s an interesting philosophical question though. (My knowledge is limited to having skim read a buzzfeed article about her).

    Rachael Swindon posts lots of tweets (40 a day) having spent time in the morning reviewing source material (the Independent, sqwarkbox, canary etc). She spends time in private chat rooms where memes and attack lines are shared (with input from Labour Party representatives).

    This output attracts a large number of followers from whom she regularly solicits donations to support her lifestyle. At the same time she claims benefits.

    There’s a very fine line between what she is doing and paid work imho. (I’ve no idea about the legality just looking at the fact pattern)
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.
    And you don't think that might just have become a little more important in the last six months? Or that it might become progressively more important in the next three?
    It wasn't then, it might in future but even with greater levels of interest the Labour vote is less interested in Brexit to begin with.

    When it comes to the next election those who supported Labour will probably still see those issues they chose Labour for as relevant and if given a choice between Labour, Tory or putting their vote to a third candidate that can't win will choose Labour. Brexit will affect some Labour voters, maybe put off those who are only just about happy enough to vote Labour if Labour do wrong. Generally though the government will be blamed for policies passed even if Labour receive some anger for say, not opposing hard enough or supporting people's vote.

    My guess is Clive Lewis worry is more Labour winning the next election, where even small margins could make the difference rather than retaining his seat which I could see happening in almost any Labour Brexit policy circumstances.

    I realise the people's vote poll had some interesting things happening to Labour and Lib Dem vote shares in certain conditions but I'd believe it when I saw it..
    If Jez wants to win, he’ll need both Labour’s right wing AND Remainer to vote for him. He’s just made his job harder.
  • Difficult not to feel schadenfreude for both Corbyn and Labour after all the clueless posturing they have indulged in over Brexit. I don’t suppose the Tories will find the cohesion to exploit Labour’s difficulties but still - a temporary respite from their own troubles is not to be sniffed at.

    Doesn’t show Remainers in a good light either and rather highlights why they lost in the first place. That tolerant, urbane, outward looking image they like to project shattered for the myth it is on the fact that they actually lost and can’t live with that democratic verdict of the electorate.

    Leavers have not attempted to include Remain supporters in their post-referendum vision of Brexit. Admittedly it was always a huge challenge after having campaigned by pandering to xenophobia but if Leavers want to know why the decision to leave the EU has not been embedded in consensus they need to look in a mirror.
  • Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.

    Edit: Said for a bit Corbyn was waiting for others to call the referendum. May has been trying the line for a while you just want to stop Brexit.

    It would also give the centrists the perfect excuse to take Labour back to New Labour days after the wipeout they would declare it 1983 all over again, being left wing can't get elected etc.

    We would have to wait decades for another opportunity.
    I don’t happen.
    Ok thanks - that makes sense in most cases where Brexit doesn’t happen. But what if there’s an intermediate GE with A50 paused etc where Labour say they will oppose that Brexit? At that point the debates all become ‘are you for or against the will of the people?’ rather than ‘how will you negotiate Brexit better than this current shitshow?’ - because broadcast interviews are no longer about the position of the party vs reality, but simply the contrast of two reality-free positioning statements. At that point the Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie and are easily re-elected to carry on with the Brexit they haven’t had to define.

    I am guessing that this is in reply to me. Yes, I agree that is a danger. But you still have the split pro-Brexit vote and you still have a split Conservative party. You also then have Brexit itself and what it will deliver. One of those things will be deep and lasting dislike of the government that presides over it.

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,425
    Jonathan said:

    The left, denied power and influence, have been able to cry betrayal from their sofas and marches. They have spent decades complaining about the world.

    Now in charge, they can’t quite do that.

    We are beginning to see the left having to make choices and alienate people. It turns out the choices never went away.

    No doubt they will twist and turn and claim that it’s someone else’s fault and they are the good guys, but reality is catching up with them.

    Corbyn is a red Tory now.

    This is the central issue: Corbyn's entire career has been all about sticking it to the man. Now he is the man, and he doesn't like it one bit.

    He won't change position on Brexit, and not just because he's a Leaver by inclination. The unicorn renegotiation strategy is expressly designed to prevent him from having to come down off the fence, and either back May's Deal or work against it (whether that means going for Revocation or backing the People's Vote lot.) Pretending that he can effect a cakeist solution that both fulfils all the wishes of the Brexit vote and leaves our economic access to the EU single market essentially unaltered is obviously a fantasy, but it represents his desperate attempt to avoid becoming unpopular with a meaningful minority of his own supporters, and more especially of Labour voters out in the country at large.

    Having spent a lifetime accusing other people of betrayal and immoral action, typically in the most pious and outraged tone possible, it can't exactly be easy to face up to having the brickbats hurled in your direction at long last. That's where Corbyn finds himself, and he's obviously trying to put off the rain of missiles for as long as possible.

    In the end, of course, it won't work.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 787

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    Not me. I voted Leave in June 2016 (and in 1975), and backed Labour in 2017 as they supported Brexit. It is the Remoaners (like Luciana Berger) who are not following Labour party policy, not JC.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    edited December 2018
    Mr Meeks,

    "Leavers have not attempted to include Remain supporters in their post-referendum vision of Brexit."

    It's probably because your self-importance always grates. You lost but it's still important to include your view in the final decision. If Corbyn wins the next GE, will he think … "I must consider the Conservative or the LD or the SNP views before I do anything?

    Now, lets see … a lot of people wanted to Remain, so we'll remain or only pretend to leave. Is that better?

    PS Not aimed at you personally, because you've always been clear the result should be honoured, much as you dislike it.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 236
    I'm surprised that people are surprised.

    Jeremy Corbyn like is ideological mentor Tony Benn was always against the EU, he should have campaigned openly for leave in 2016, he might have lost some new Labour urbanites but he would have kept more of the traditional working class Labour supporters.

    He'd have been closer in the polls and the 2017 General Election might not have happened, giving him a much better chance in 2020 than he will have in 2022.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Polruan said:

    The Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie

    Now there is a mental image I could well have done without...
    Where is the horn?
    In this case, on the head, where it belongs.

    In my case, it's on the full swell, waiting to be pulled out for a climax which may involve a super coupler.
  • Chortle.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378

    Good morning, everyone.

    Don't worry, comrades. Under the Supreme Leader's wise guidance, everyone will enjoy above average wages as the socialist paradise is ushered in.

    That would be possible if the Supreme Leader wasn’t paid

    (But had a generous expense account)
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them
    I don’t happen.
    Ok thanks - that makes sense in most cases where Brexit doesn’t happen. But what if there’s an intermediate GE with A50 paused etc where Labour say they will oppose that Brexit? At that point the debates all become ‘are you for or against the will of the people?’ rather than ‘how will you negotiate Brexit better than this current shitshow?’ - because broadcast interviews are no longer about the position of the party vs reality, but simply the contrast of two reality-free positioning statements. At that point the Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie and are easily re-elected to carry on with the Brexit they haven’t had to define.

    I am guessing that this is in reply to me. Yes, I agree that is a danger. But you still have the split pro-Brexit vote and you still have a split Conservative party. You also then have Brexit itself and what it will deliver. One of those things will be deep and lasting dislike of the government that presides over it.

    Yes, sorry, I screwed up the quote.

    Isn’t there a big difference between saying Brexit will go ahead (when in opposition) and actually presiding over it (when unexpectedly in government)? There may be more chance of stopping it by not promising too early to try and stop it.
  • CD13 said:

    Mr Meeks,

    "Leavers have not attempted to include Remain supporters in their post-referendum vision of Brexit."

    It's probably because your self-importance always grates. You lost but it's still important to include your view in the final decision. If Corbyn wins the next GE, will he think … "I must consider the Conservative or the LD or the SNP views before I do anything?

    Now, lets see … a lot of people wanted to Remain, so we'll remain or only pretend to leave. Is that better?

    PS Not aimed at you personally, because you're always been clear the result should be honoured, much as you dislike it.

    It’s supposedly a long term decision. If Leavers want it to stick, having won narrowly, they need to bring the doubtful on board. They haven’t tried, which is why at present the main question is whether Britain will not leave or whether it will leave and in due course rejoin. Leavers have only themselves to blame for that state of affairs.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 978
    edited December 2018
    DeClare said:

    I'm surprised that people are surprised.

    Jeremy Corbyn like is ideological mentor Tony Benn was always against the EU, he should have campaigned openly for leave in 2016, he might have lost some new Labour urbanites but he would have kept more of the traditional working class Labour supporters.

    He'd have been closer in the polls and the 2017 General Election might not have happened, giving him a much better chance in 2020 than he will have in 2022.

    The party membership would have rolled him if he'd tried.

    The obvious problem Labour has here is the membership and bulk of MPs are misaligned with a chunk of very important voters. It's all very well having 500,000 members, but if they don't represent your core vote, it's going to end in trouble.
  • Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,869
    edited December 2018
    Has anyone counted how many rallies Corbyn attended during the referendum campaign? Was it more or less than Theresa May? It is remarkable that on the defining issue of the day, both party leaders' positions are somewhat murky, and their parties irreparably split.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more, the FBPE crowd have always been very anti Corbyn.

    Yep, it's also significant that Lewis retweeted it in the first place. He is nothing if not a loyalist. I did a thread on this whole issue and why the leadership's stance poses such a risk for Labour. The one thing you just cannot get around is that the large majority of Labour voters are Remain ...


    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them.
    An effective Labour leader that actually gave a shit would be ideal.
    We have one, if we didn't we would have a Tory majority and no say what goes on.
    Jez was an effective strump campaigner in 2017. I’ll give you that. But that is it, but it highlights how he soft pedals on Labours Brexit policy.

    My most generous interpretation is that he really does not give a shit.

    In reality I suspect his outriders are looking forward to a little bit of Tory induced chaos to see him into no10 with a radical mandate. And he goes along with it, because he doesn’t give a shit.
    He very much gives a shit for reasons similar to Tony Benn but far more cynical.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,704
    edited December 2018
    Corbyn's position to me just demonstrates yet another hurdle that remainers have to overcome. The fact is that the current crop of Labour MPs were elected in 2017 on a Manifesto committed to implementing Brexit. Corbyn seems to have meant it. The majority of Labour MPs simply thought it was a clever way of taking Brexit out of the election which worked better than they could have dreamed when it became apparent that May's thinking on everything else was not particularly coherent and far from convincing.

    So we have Corbyn standing up for what proved to be a very successful Manifesto and the majority of Labour MPs wanting to ditch it. That majority now want to overturn both the basis on which they were elected and the 2016 vote. Its consistency of a sort I suppose.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.

    Alternatively:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40630242

    Yes it was the top issue for Conservative voters. That doesn't really come into a conversation about Labour losing voters for their Brexit policy though...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,654
    If we've got to have a Brexit a Corbyn/McDonnell administered one would be far preferable to a tory Jedem das seine Brexit.
  • ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.

    Alternatively:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40630242

    Yes it was the top issue for Conservative voters. That doesn't really come into a conversation about Labour losing voters for their Brexit policy though...

    Despite uncertainty over its position on the single market, Labour was seen as the best bet by those wanting to keep closer ties with Europe.
    Not only did it win over a large number of Remainers from the Conservatives, but also from the pro-EU Greens and Lib Dems.
    Overall, nearly two-thirds of 2015 Greens went to Labour, as well as about a quarter of Liberal Democrats.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    Mr Meeks,

    When did any Pro-EU Prime Minister ever think … "I must be careful to keep my anti-EU voters on board."

    Tony Blair, for example?
  • ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.

    Alternatively:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40630242

    Yes it was the top issue for Conservative voters. That doesn't really come into a conversation about Labour losing voters for their Brexit policy though...
    If, by the end of March, remain is commanding comfortable 60 per cent plus poll scores, Corbyn's position is pretty short sighted in terms of capitalising on this dynamic.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    edited December 2018
    Dura_Ace said:

    If we've got to have a Brexit a Corbyn/McDonnell administered one would be far preferable to a tory Jedem das seine Brexit.

    That's a sentence even more lurid and improbable than your one about the Polish madam and the Yorkshire terrier.

    Edit - by the way, just for you. Look at the second photo...
    Gavin Williamson: UK ship in Ukraine 'sends message to Russia'
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46657470
  • Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them
    I don’t happen.
    Ok thanks - tthey haven’t had to define.

    I am guessing that this is in reply to me. Yes, I agree that is a danger. But you still have the split pro-Brexit vote and you still have a split Conservative party. You also then have Brexit itself and what it will deliver. One of those things will be deep and lasting dislike of the government that presides over it.

    Yes, sorry, I screwed up the quote.

    Isn’t there a big difference between saying Brexit will go ahead (when in opposition) and actually presiding over it (when unexpectedly in government)? There may be more chance of stopping it by not promising too early to try and stop it.

    The leadership's positioning would make sense if there was to be a general election before 29th March. But there isn't going to be one - and there was never a prospect of there being one.

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    edited December 2018

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    Couldn't win more than a small percentage of the Labour vote in the leadership election but the failed 2015 candidates were campaigning superstars able to switch hundreds of thousands of votes with their wit, charm and personality.

    Denied their moment in the sun by a cruel twist of fate...

    Edit: The above sounds a little mean, I don't dislike the 3 but they wouldn't have made done a jot more than Corbyn to that result.
  • CD13 said:

    Mr Meeks,

    When did any Pro-EU Prime Minister ever think … "I must be careful to keep my anti-EU voters on board."

    Tony Blair, for example?

    I identify the problem. You can bleat as much as you like that it’s unfair that Leavers can’t be unhinged xenophobes to their hearts’ content without risking Brexit, but there you have it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,704
    O/t isn't it weird how this seems to happen so often near Christmas? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46663158
  • Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
    With a Labour leader elected in 2015 like Yvette Cooper, for example, we'd have seen stronger official campaigning from the Labour party for Remain.

    That wouldn't have blown all Labour leavers out the water - far from it - but would probably have been enough to tip the referendum result the other way.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    Jonathan said:

    The left, denied power and influence, have been able to cry betrayal from their sofas and marches. They have spent decades complaining about the world.

    Now in charge, they can’t quite do that.

    We are beginning to see the left having to make choices and alienate people. It turns out the choices never went away.

    No doubt they will twist and turn and claim that it’s someone else’s fault and they are the good guys, but reality is catching up with them.

    Corbyn is a red Tory now.

    This is the central issue: Corbyn's entire career has been all about sticking it to the man. Now he is the man, and he doesn't like it one bit.

    He won't change position on Brexit, and not just because he's a Leaver by inclination. The unicorn renegotiation strategy is expressly designed to prevent him from having to come down off the fence, and either back May's Deal or work against it (whether that means going for Revocation or backing the People's Vote lot.) Pretending that he can effect a cakeist solution that both fulfils all the wishes of the Brexit vote and leaves our economic access to the EU single market essentially unaltered is obviously a fantasy, but it represents his desperate attempt to avoid becoming unpopular with a meaningful minority of his own supporters, and more especially of Labour voters out in the country at large.

    Having spent a lifetime accusing other people of betrayal and immoral action, typically in the most pious and outraged tone possible, it can't exactly be easy to face up to having the brickbats hurled in your direction at long last. That's where Corbyn finds himself, and he's obviously trying to put off the rain of missiles for as long as possible.

    In the end, of course, it won't work.
    Unicornism/cakeism is just standard opposition politics though. There are no prizes for saying ‘we will force the electorate to face up to hard choices the government pretends don’t exist’. The crisis in British politics isn’t an opposition offering impossible stuff - that always happens - it’s a government refusing to engage in reality-based governing, but still squatting in office unable to act in any way.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:
    You might as well ask a scorpion to stop stinging.

    Edit - in many ways, Clive Lewis encapsulates the electoral problem for Labour. When he won Norwich South (amazingly, just three and a half years ago) he took it off the back of a Liberal Democrat collapse, where even allowing for churn around 50% of their vote seems to have migrated to Labour. In 2010 it was a genuine three-way marginal. In 2015 I'm guessing tuition fees were just a bit of an issue.

    Now let's say 40% of his vote last year was solidly Remain (probably an underestimate) and this migrates back to the yellows. Suddenly, even though he has a huge majority, he seat looks vulnerable again to either of his challengers.

    So I'm not surprised he's a bit nervous.
    Well more than 40% of them were remain I'd imagine but as their top reason for voting?

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/07/11/why-people-voted-labour-or-conservative-2017-gener

    Brexit didn't even get a category, probably in other.
    And you don't think that might just have become a little more important in the last six months? Or that it might become progressively more important in the next three?
    It wasn't then, it might in future but even with greater levels of interest the Labour vote is less interested in Brexit to begin with.

    When it comes to the next election those who supported Labour will probably still see those issues they chose Labour for as relevant and if given a choice between Labour, Tory or putting their vote to a third candidate that can't win will choose Labour. Brexit will affect some Labour voters, maybe put off those who are only just about happy enough to vote Labour if Labour do wrong. Generally though the government will be blamed for policies passed even if Labour receive some anger for say, not opposing hard enough or supporting people's vote.

    My guess is Clive Lewis worry is more Labour winning the next election, where even small margins could make the difference rather than retaining his seat which I could see happening in almost any Labour Brexit policy circumstances.

    I realise the people's vote poll had some interesting things happening to Labour and Lib Dem vote shares in certain conditions but I'd believe it when I saw it..
    If Jez wants to win, he’ll need both Labour’s right wing AND Remainer to vote for him. He’s just made his job harder.
    That is why I said Clive Lewis worry is more about the next election, although the remainer vote will heavily fall to Labour.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
    With a Labour leader elected in 2015 like Yvette Cooper, for example, we'd have seen stronger official campaigning from the Labour party for Remain.

    That wouldn't have blown all Labour leavers out the water - far from it - but would probably have been enough to tip the referendum result the other way.
    Corbyn -> Brexit -> Corbyn PM.
  • ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Polruan said:

    The Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie

    Now there is a mental image I could well have done without...
    Where is the horn?
    In this case, on the head, where it belongs.

    In my case, it's on the full swell, waiting to be pulled out for a climax which may involve a super coupler.
    As an ex-cathedral lay clerk, I must say I do always enjoy your Sunday morning double entendres!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,257
    I'm with Antonia. Being the last hope of stopping the catastrophy that is Brexit is the only thing keeping Jeremy afloat.
  • I know she got burned last time she did it but TMay really needs to call a snap general election. Labour activists aren't going out in the cold to knock on doors for a marginally unicornier version of Theresa May's Brexit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    DavidL said:

    O/t isn't it weird how this seems to happen so often near Christmas? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46663158

    It happened several times in the summer, in case you've forgotten. In the same area, which if I were the Indonesian government I'd be getting just a bit uneasy wondering what Krakatoa is up to.

    But near Christmas there is less news so it's more noticeable.

    OK, 2004 was a dazzling exception that would have been news at any time, like Haiti.
  • DavidL said:

    O/t isn't it weird how this seems to happen so often near Christmas? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46663158

    It’s partly about it being a quieter news period. There was a much bigger tsunami in Indonesia in September.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,974

    I know she got burned last time she did it but TMay really needs to call a snap general election. Labour activists aren't going out in the cold to knock on doors for a marginally unicornier version of Theresa May's Brexit.

    Absurd; it would be the most irresponsible thing right now (marginally improved if an agreed A50 extension came with it) and I cant see May doing that.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,678

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them
    I don’t happen.
    Ok thanks - tthey haven’t had to define.

    I am guessing that this is in reply to me. Yes, I agree that is a danger. But you still have the split pro-Brexit vote and you still have a split Conservative party. You also then have Brexit itself and what it will deliver. One of those things will be deep and lasting dislike of the government that presides over it.

    Yes, sorry, I screwed up the quote.

    Isn’t there a big difference between saying Brexit will go ahead (when in opposition) and actually presiding over it (when unexpectedly in government)? There may be more chance of stopping it by not promising too early to try and stop it.

    The leadership's positioning would make sense if there was to be a general election before 29th March. But there isn't going to be one - and there was never a prospect of there being one.

    If I understand correctly (it’s still early, I might not) the positioning that is causing the controversy was in response to a question on Labour’s position if there’s a pre-Brexit election.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Augustine said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Polruan said:

    The Tories wrap themselves in the flag-covered unicorn onesie

    Now there is a mental image I could well have done without...
    Where is the horn?
    In this case, on the head, where it belongs.

    In my case, it's on the full swell, waiting to be pulled out for a climax which may involve a super coupler.
    As an ex-cathedral lay clerk, I must say I do always enjoy your Sunday morning double entendres!
    It's becoming harder to find new ones. :smile:
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,974
    Roger said:

    I'm with Antonia. Being the last hope of stopping the catastrophy that is Brexit is the only thing keeping Jeremy afloat.

    The strategy was to be just a tad less Brexit than the Tories, which worked fine when only words were needed, but is a big problem as decisions approach.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,257
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
    With a Labour leader elected in 2015 like Yvette Cooper, for example, we'd have seen stronger official campaigning from the Labour party for Remain.

    That wouldn't have blown all Labour leavers out the water - far from it - but would probably have been enough to tip the referendum result the other way.
    Corbyn -> Brexit -> Corbyn PM.
    ???
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267



    That is why I said Clive Lewis worry is more about the next election, although the remainer vote will heavily fall to Labour.

    Don't take it for granted. He doesn't offer anything

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260

    I know she got burned last time she did it but TMay really needs to call a snap general election. Labour activists aren't going out in the cold to knock on doors for a marginally unicornier version of Theresa May's Brexit.

    Quick, get him lads...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    Roger said:

    I'm with Antonia. Being the last hope of stopping the catastrophy that is Brexit is the only thing keeping Jeremy afloat.

    Reminds me of Darth Vader, they feel the good in him.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    I'm with Antonia. Being the last hope of stopping the catastrophy that is Brexit is the only thing keeping Jeremy afloat.

    Reminds me of Darth Vader, they feel the good in him.
    Well, Vader did eventually kill the Emperor, although he was killed himself in doing it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,704

    DavidL said:

    O/t isn't it weird how this seems to happen so often near Christmas? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46663158

    It’s partly about it being a quieter news period. There was a much bigger tsunami in Indonesia in September.
    I think you and @ydoethur are probably right. The focus of our news coverage on relative trivia affecting ourselves is regrettable.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
    With a Labour leader elected in 2015 like Yvette Cooper, for example, we'd have seen stronger official campaigning from the Labour party for Remain.

    That wouldn't have blown all Labour leavers out the water - far from it - but would probably have been enough to tip the referendum result the other way.
    A similar percentage of Labour voters voted for Brexit as SNP supporters.

    Not far off the level of Lib Dem voters. Add into this consideration where Labour voters live.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted

    Party Remain Leave

    Lab 65% 35%
    Lib D 68% 32%
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260

    Jonathan said:

    Sean_F said:

    Another case of wishful thinking. If they didn’t want a eurosceptic leading the Labour Party, then they should not have voted for a eurosceptic.

    It's pure cognitive dissonance.

    The writing has been on the wall for years. In fact, without Corbyn as Labour leader, Brexit wouldn't have happened.
    You make strange bedfellows.
    With a Labour leader elected in 2015 like Yvette Cooper, for example, we'd have seen stronger official campaigning from the Labour party for Remain.

    That wouldn't have blown all Labour leavers out the water - far from it - but would probably have been enough to tip the referendum result the other way.
    A similar percentage of Labour voters voted for Brexit as SNP supporters.

    Not far off the level of Lib Dem voters. Add into this consideration where Labour voters live.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted

    Party Remain Leave

    Lab 65% 35%
    Lib D 68% 32%
    That stat is surprising. In fact, I'll go so far as to say it's barely credible.

    It shows the Lib Dems had fifty voters in 2016.
  • IanB2 said:

    I know she got burned last time she did it but TMay really needs to call a snap general election. Labour activists aren't going out in the cold to knock on doors for a marginally unicornier version of Theresa May's Brexit.

    Absurd; it would be the most irresponsible thing right now (marginally improved if an agreed A50 extension came with it) and I cant see May doing that.
    Well, we all know her deal isn't likely to pass, and nobody has a plan for what happens when it doesn't. The knot would be less tangly on almost any Commons arithmetic except the current one; A small Con majority would allow things to happen without the DUP, and a few less Con seats would make other combinations practical. She's already planning to stall most of the way through January...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    O/t isn't it weird how this seems to happen so often near Christmas? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46663158

    It’s partly about it being a quieter news period. There was a much bigger tsunami in Indonesia in September.
    I think you and @ydoethur are probably right. The focus of our news coverage on relative trivia affecting ourselves is regrettable.
    I think it's naive to expect a deadly Volcano Tsumani not to top the news.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    It wasn't Brexit that caused Labour's vote to rise. People on the left are delighted to have an option again.

    People didn't elect Corbyn as leader of Labour to fight Brexit, there weren't two surges in membership, to elect him and then re elect him to fight Brexit. People elected him because they want a left wing Labour leader. Brexit isn't going to take away from any of those people's desire.

    There are people whose vote it will affect and Labour's Brexit policy could heavily influence the next election but the affection felt for him and the reason he has such strong support is not because of Brexit.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,815
    I was a remain voter but one of the problems I've always felt we've had is that leavers like Britain whereas remainers don't really like the EU. Do they like Europe? Possibly but anymore than the rest of the world? Isn't internationalism the real creed? So I'm surprised to see Curtice's polling that shows there are now more 'very strong remainers' than the equivalent leavers. My fear is that very strong remainers = very hostile to leavers. But perhaps the reality of leaving the EU is bringing out a latent European identity in people. Who knows?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    edited December 2018
    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    Polruan said:

    I always thought once we lost the FBPE crowd we were done for...

    The one Clive Lewis retweeted means a lot more

    I read that thread when you posted it a few days(?) ago and entirely agree with you on the risks to Labour of sticking with the current stance even if they have the option to pivot. What I’m less sure about is whether the other option is actually worse. The Tory dream is for Brexit to not happen, and it to be Labour who stopped it - it’s the indyref strategy of making Labour act as the responsible adults who stop the zealots from getting their unicorns. As happened in 2015 north of the border, there’s a huge risk that a Labour Party that adopts an anti-Brexit stance is wiped out in 2022.

    It can oppose Brexit in order to retain its pro-EU base without losing too many floating anti-EU votes only if Brexit goes ahead despite that opposition - the anti-EU voters won’t care too much once it’s over.

    What do you think - can Labour oppose Brexit *and* get more than 30% at the next GE if Brexit doesn’t happen?
    Why do you think Centrists are trying to pressure Corbyn into calling for it first.

    No Brexit and Corbyn wiped out is the ideal for them
    I don’t happen.
    Ok thanks - tthey haven’t had to define.

    I am guessing that this is in reply to me. Yes, I agree that is a danger. But you still have the split pro-Brexit vote and you still have a split Conservative party. You also then have Brexit itself and what it will deliver. One of those things will be deep and lasting dislike of the government that presides over it.

    Yes, sorry, I screwed up the quote.

    Isn’t there a big difference between saying Brexit will go ahead (when in opposition) and actually presiding over it (when unexpectedly in government)? There may be more chance of stopping it by not promising too early to try and stop it.

    The leadership's positioning would make sense if there was to be a general election before 29th March. But there isn't going to be one - and there was never a prospect of there being one.

    If I understand correctly (it’s still early, I might not) the positioning that is causing the controversy was in response to a question on Labour’s position if there’s a pre-Brexit election.
    My understanding was the question was based around a snap election.

    Edit: And this is why politicians often refuse to answer hypotheticals...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,260
    Anyway, I have to be off, so as we were talking about different horns I'll leave you with this video.

    Try not to snigger too much at the intro...
This discussion has been closed.