That's one of the reasons Labour are trying to change their leader right now - every piece of evidence the party has says it's going to be obliterated if an election were called right now. They need a fresh face to put up a fight against Johnson / May.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Corbyn sacks Hilary Benn, Half Shadow cabinet expected to resign today (Labour)
- Thread starter Tak3n
- Start date
- Status
That's one of the reasons Labour are trying to change their leader right now - every piece of evidence the party has says it's going to be obliterated if an election were called right now. They need a fresh face to put up a fight against Johnson / May.
JonathanEx
Member
Just read that Diane Abbott was asked on the Today programme this morning if Corbyn could win a general election, and she said the question was "Westminster centric"
IF YOU'RE NOT THINKING OF HOW TO WIN ELECTIONS THEN WHAT'S THE CHUFFING POINT
To be fair she did go on to say yes, but if you're considering the idea of elections as Westminster centric than what the fuck.
IF YOU'RE NOT THINKING OF HOW TO WIN ELECTIONS THEN WHAT'S THE CHUFFING POINT
To be fair she did go on to say yes, but if you're considering the idea of elections as Westminster centric than what the fuck.
Come on, you know that is a totally biased line of thinking. What do you expect Corbyn to do, lead his party to victory? That is very binary lime of thinking.
JonathanEx
Member
That is he true, he has his mandate from a totally non representative sample of the population, that proves he can win all over. It's not like his office has been shown to be incompetent and no idea how politics and the media works. That just puts you in the Westminster bubble.
30yearsofhurt
Member
Isn't there a vetting process for these clowns?
For the sake of British politics and the people it serves, he absolutely needs to go. We cannot allow the only Left opposition to the Tories to be turned into an unelectable fantasy party by the out of touch SWP and others. You have your own fucking party, now fuck off and take Corbyn with you else we are heading for an increasingly right wing political landscape.
Dave Loren ‏@Dave_Loren
they've been watching that episode of the Simpsons where the Stonecutters become the 'no homers' to keep him out.
nelsonroyale
Member
Your line of thinking is why the party is fucked and rightfully so. In my opinion, the party should have got behind Corbyn from the start, since it was the mandate of the member ship, shown unity and given it a real go, and if it failed they should get rid of him. By they, in complicity with the media, undermined him from the start, and now this open rebellion is making he party seem even more torn. Unity? It is not Corbyn per se who has a lot of support, though some people respect him since he seems more honest than the rest of the bunch, but it is what he represents, with more emphasis on social justice, sustainability, than the alternatives. I wouldn't be surprised if anyone who emerges following Corbyn as leader will be equally tainted in the eyes of the public and the media. And in this case, rightfully so.
No.
The reason they are moving is because party polling is showing an utter disaster if a general election were called in the next few months, and following the Remain campaign Labour MPs have been hearing time and time again on the doorstep that Corbyn will never be leader. Party supporters have turned against him, constituency parties have turned against him, and he's unable to form a shadow cabinet. A mandate of less than 500K counts for absolutely nothing when the millions of people who vote in general elections won't touch you with a barge pole.
He has been the worse opposition leader of the last 50 years - IDS has looked good by comparison. Stop trying to blame other people for the sheer fact that Jeremy Corbyn is a protest politician completely unable to lead a political party, and he doesn't even seem to want to try. Sabotaging the Remain campaign was the last straw for the party - he has to go. This isn't a plot by the centre left MPs - the left wing of the party is doing this as well. When people like Seema Malhotra, and the eagle sisters, are pushing you out it means the entire party is trying to get rid of you. It is done.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
It is incumbent upon him to command the confidence of the party. It is he who has lost it. The membership mandate did not hand him a dictatorship, nor are his supporters the clear voice of the membership. Things are turning against him.
Young Labour North refused to vote for a statement backing him yesterday. The ranks are closing and it'll end up being Corbyn and perhaps a small majority of the members against everyone else. If he doesn't resign he's going to destroy us.
Yea, no need for sour losers.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
This is the statement that Young Labour North rejected. Our representative said that it was demanded upon him to come to the facebook group for a poll on this, he had about an hour for the time limit to take the poll. It's a total mess.
CyclopsRock
Member
Tbh the actual *reason* for his failure is basically irrelevant (though useful to avoid it happening again). The fact he has lost the support of his colleagues is enough.
Edit: lol, "more Facebook likes"
Edit: lol, "more Facebook likes"
Bony Manifesto
Member
That was clearly bullshit. No matter how secretly pro-Brexit Corbyn might be, he's not going to actually cast his vote to leave, and if he did, he certainly wouldn't tell anyone about it.
You're right, but it doesn't matter what he actually voted. It's a problem that it's very believable he would vote leave.
Sensationalist
Neo Member
I apologize in advance but WTF is this history revisionist BS?
Socialism does not work? You mean things like the New Deal, Universal Healthcare and Free tuition fee? I hope you have at least learned about these because they are the heights of most developed nations in the world and nothing comes close. Did I just left GAF and go to a mental gym somewhere?
Thank you and since I do not know this, thank you again.
(I have no idea of the specific context, but Sky overheard Corbyn's mic.)
The whole thing was a farce. He let the cameras in to film and then panicked and tried to get them to leave. When they came back later he'd moved everyone around so Tom Watson wasn't sat next to him anymore. Legitimately like something from the thick of it.
30yearsofhurt
Member
darkace is an ignorant and uneducated undergrad with a economics 101 textbook.
He loves talking shite and I encourage people to call him out on his ideologically driven bullshit.
Here he is claiming he loves Medicare in Australia:
Obviously oblivious to the fact that it was a scheme for universal health care started in 1983 by ...
<gasp>
<horror>
that dastardly socialist Bob Hawke.
Medicare started as Medibank in 1975 by ...
<gasp>
<horror>
that dastardly socialist Gough Whitlam. Gough Whitlam is notorious for making access to tertiary education equitable and cheap for all Australians, withdrawing troops from Vietnam and being one of the first western leaders to open up relations with those damn communists in China!! Arrrrgh!
The conservatives were so mad they had him sacked scrapped medibank, changed the anthem to that lovely Franco German tune God Save the Queen and drove our country to recession.
Then Bob Hawke came along and gave us Medicare, reformed the labor market, got inflation under control, reformed the financial markets and held the yardglass drinking record at Oxford for a very long time.
Bu hey, someone has a textbook that says they're all shit eh?
Goddamn socialists. What have they ever done for us.
CyclopsRock
Member
HAHAHAHAHA that's so amazing.
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/747778554709024768
That's the real link btw.
These aren't socialism. Maybe you should google the word. Socialism is if the government provides the care, not just the funding. The NHS in its original form is socialised healthcare, single-payer universal healthcare isn't. The New Deal and free university aren't socialism. Also bad policy, but not socialism.
Damn dude. Why are you so salty lmao. Is this because I schooled you multiple times?
Stop letting your ideological wants blind you to reality.
Why on earth are Labour choosing now as the time to get a new leader.
Surely the issue of the moment is the whole Brexit nightmare. It doesn't matter who leads them.
Can't there even be should be some sort of cross-party get-together to try and sort out a way to get out of this mess? There must be enough remain MP's to get a majority consensus for something.
You might sort out getting new leaders for both parties and it will be of 0 use because they wasted the time they should be using to sort out the mess.
Surely the issue of the moment is the whole Brexit nightmare. It doesn't matter who leads them.
Can't there even be should be some sort of cross-party get-together to try and sort out a way to get out of this mess? There must be enough remain MP's to get a majority consensus for something.
You might sort out getting new leaders for both parties and it will be of 0 use because they wasted the time they should be using to sort out the mess.
Woops!
Who the heck do you think pushed for those policies in Europe? It were the socialists (then called social-democrats or Democratic socialists). If you mean socialism as in Soviet socialism then I don't even understand why you brought it up here when we're talking about Corbyn who is a social Democrat, not a Bolshevik.
Even then Bolshevik socialism did improve lives of many workers.
If you like revisionism then you have the Chinese socialism with markets which is successful in industrialising China right now. Why not take China as an example of how socialism works? Oh no now China is capitalist because they are doing well at the moment. Next time their economy crashes it is because of socialism. It's only socialist when it's doing badly.
Then some come and mention fucking Venezuela like it's anything more than a country with a social Democratic system. Also ignoring how those policies there did improve the life's of working class people there. It's only that the government is incompetent in dealing with the current troubles, that it's a prime example of 'socialism failing' for rabbit neoliberals.
I think the notion that socialism does not help working people is a grave insult to all those activists that have been locked up, killed and shamed just for standing up for their class. Those that struggled to get the 8 hour workday, decent pay and all the other privileges we enjoy today and are now again stripped from us by neoliberals like you. Absolutely disgusting.
travisbickle
Member
You can shrug them off but those are the issues for the working classes. People who can't pay electricity bills, or families who are on waiting lists voted for Blair in '97, but subsequent elections he received less of the working class vote ... I think it dropped by 25%? and he won later elections based on the middle class vote. And those working-class just stopped voting.
His policies in education are well documented as failures to help the working class, like most policies only helping lower middle class. You actually believe the true working class financed a university education after fees were bought in? Oh right, capitalism always the saviour of the working classes. The representation of "common" people in high positions is low now, just give it 10-15 years and I don't think they'll be any one from a state school in a notable position of power (private or public).
Jeremy Corbyn has the charisma of a wet rag but at least he's travelling to working class heartlands and speaking to people who are affected by the issues I mentioned.
Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy
So... not a socialist? Gotcha.
Yea, sure. Nowhere near as well as the West did, but the glorious revolution just needed more time comrade.
China did as well as the USSR did in the early stages. It ran into problems once all the easy productivity gains are over (like mobilising the female workforce, increasing literature rates, universal K-12, tertiary education access), just like the USSR did. This is where the wonders of the capitalist economy come into play through refining inputs and increasing productivity through investment.
This is why China is opening its economy. Because command can't get them any further. They're outcome-based, not ideologues.
Yea Venezuela is openly socialist. It nationalised the economy. If you don't think it's socialist then you don't know what socialism means. It's the dictionary definition of socialism.
I guess if not being able to afford toilet paper is improving lives, then yea it worked wonders.
It kinda failed because of its socialist policies. You know, as literally any sort of reasonable commentator would tell you.
Anybody who sees us as locked in a class struggle has no idea what they're talking about.
Yea these things came about because the productivity of workers improved to the point where it became viable to offer them, not because of worker power or any such nonsense. The greatest gains in the working standards of labour came prior to unions even existing.
Even leaving aside the above, you still haven't answered whether or not Corbyn should stand down for a Blairite if it allows Labour to gain power again. Are you for outcomes, or are you for ideological posturing?
Do you believe free uni is better for the working class, given I've shown multiple peer-reviewed studies stating the opposite?
Who cares. That doesn't achieve anything. Get people in power who can legislate for them. I don't give a shit if somebody listens to my struggles if they don't and can't do anything about them. It's the ultimate example of moral signalling rather than actually trying to achieve anything.
Improvements for workers came automagically after productivity increased and not because of mass struggle.
Yeah that historic revisionism is so heavily revisionist that it's no use talking to you. Ignore list it is.
And to answer your question I do not a Blairite is enough for Labour to gain back power, I think they need something new. Radical but recognizable and respectable.
Yeah that historic revisionism is so heavily revisionist that it's no use talking to you. Ignore list it is.
And to answer your question I do not a Blairite is enough for Labour to gain back power, I think they need something new. Radical but recognizable and respectable.
JonathanEx
Member
172 to 40.
Ouuuch.
Ouuuch.
uncleniccius
Member
Holy shit. He has to go.
WhateverItTakes
Banned
Not official yet I don't think, but 172-40 was the vote of no confidence against Corbyn. Party is super against him.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Is he going to leave then? It's actually annoying me, how stubborn he's being. Surely he can't seriously think he's electable. Most of his cabinet has resigned, thousands are saying he's unelectable, Labour is losing support left and right and yet he continues to bury his head in the sand.
Jezbollah
Member
So, the motion is non-binding - but Corbyn's only hope is that he manages to get enough votes to get onto the ballot for a leadership challenge and to allow the Labour members (those same members who voted him in) to win the challenge for him.
Corbyn's major issue after this though is filling up the shadow cabinet. He simply cannot do that with the amount of support (19% of Labour MPs) he currently has.
CyclopsRock
Member
Well the SNP have a set of policies one can disagree or agree with, like any party.
JonathanEx
Member
So Watson and Angela Eagle meeting to decide which runs.
Any preferences? I like Tom Watson, but think he might have a bit much baggage to last. Dunno.
Any preferences? I like Tom Watson, but think he might have a bit much baggage to last. Dunno.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
Spiral Insanity
Banned
Looks like Corbyn has been sabotaging the party for a while now. What is the precedent for this? Seems like nobody is on his side anymore.
JonathanEx
Member
He hasn't really pushed himself forwards. HOWEVER - he is canvassing for support.
But basically - one candidate is needed with the 50ish MP backing to trigger the contest. So everyone backs say, Eagle, as it likely. She'll then run, and potentially, others might too.
Anything to keep the bubble intact comrade. I too ignore what I can't argue against.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
You need 35 iirc.
FreedomFighter
Member
ModBot
Not a mod, just a bot.
Gonna move discussion here to the confidence vote thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1240083
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked