Current Affairs How old were you when you grew up and stopped voting Labour?

[tsubaki]

So what's changed? We've had 9 months since the election, and had they continued that trajectory they'd be comfortably ahead in the polls, yet they're not. It's hard to believe people are more convinced about May's talents now than before.

True, though a lot of the things that were specific to that election - legal guarantees of fair coverage (actual coverage, not reporters summarizing what his position on a topic is), the PLP being silent, things actually being at stake - are not present now. Labour have remained at around 40% though, which is a good sign.

I'd also point out that the reality of what May's government have done / are doing hasn't yet filtered through to people in any real way. If we have the Brexit we all expect, and two or three winters in the NHS like we have just had, the impact on everyday folk is going to be considerable.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

He motivated especially those at college and universities to get out and vote - a group written off by the clever pollsters.

Also a busted flush really for many of them, as in having a stake in capitalism, owning home good pension, secure job, huge debt before leaving education etc. The promise of honest hard work and good life is all disappearing, the cornerstone of the working Tory. The Tories don’t offer that anymore, it’s only for exceptionally talented and hard working and most people are not exceptionally talented, just hard working!

 

[davek]

He seems a reasonable man, so that puts him above the shower of dullards in the cabinet, but that's a pretty low bar to be prime minister of the UK. He's largely been the invisible man over Brexit for instance, which given it's the only real issue of note in this period, and quite probably the next term as well tbh, that's a worry. I don't think anyone is ever in any doubt that he can say all the right things at Grenfell and events like that but for a party whose manifesto was so stuffed full of things to do if they were elected, he's been very quiet on actual policy stuff.

His silence on Brexit is especially troubling as it creates the distinct impression that he knows full well how divided the Labour electorate are on the matter, and so he's tried to avoid the topic at all costs for fear of annoying one group or the other. That's hard to square with his image as a man of principle willing to face any brickbats to do what's right.

But you've answered your own question on his Brexit silence: why put a stick in that hornets nest and say the wrong thing; and why not just let the Tory fratricide carry on unhindered?

The loosely held view that a Customs Union of some sort should be the way forward works in that it's a reasonable if politically dull solution being proffered.

If there was an issue since the election he's done badly on, Brexit wouldn't be it, imo.

His real failure has been to go for quietism in the LP instead of using his authority to give constituency parties the right to recall their MPOs and deselect them. That would have been smart politics and also doing what he advocates: given the party back to the membership and having greater democracy. He hasn't done that and he allows himself to be constantly dictated to, as with the present "anti-semite" guff.

 

[davek]

Also a busted flush really for many of them, as in having a stake in capitalism, owning home good pension, secure job, huge debt before leaving education etc. The promise of honest hard work and good life is all disappearing, the cornerstone of the working Tory. The Tories don’t offer that anymore, it’s only for exceptionally talented and hard working and most people are not exceptionally talented, just hard working!

Yes, all true. The trick for Labour will be to keep their motivation levels constant and not let younger voters slip back to not voting again.

 

[tsubaki]

His silence on Brexit is especially troubling as it creates the distinct impression that he knows full well how divided the Labour electorate are on the matter, and so he's tried to avoid the topic at all costs for fear of annoying one group or the other. That's hard to square with his image as a man of principle willing to face any brickbats to do what's right.

I think its more a realisation that the Tories have to own Brexit, all of it - the referendum, the negotiations, the result.

Giving them any way out - ie: what the second referendum / staying in the single market crowd want - does nothing for Labour, or for the country for that matter since it will just allow Boris / Pob / that Williamson to come along and say "well, I'd have done it differently and it would have worked but for Corbyn", and people would think that referendums were still a good idea.

 

[roydo]

His real failure has been to go for quietism in the LP instead of using his authority to give constituency parties the right to recall their MPOs and deselect them. That would have been smart politics and also doing what he advocates: given the party back to the membership and having greater democracy.

I dont get that though. How is greater democracy imposing his will on loads in the LP who dont actually agree with him? Always thought the LP was a pretty broad church, not one mans plaything.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Yes, all true. The trick for Labour will be to keep their motivation levels constant and not let younger voters slip back to not voting again.

University fees will channel those young minds, then for the not so younger minds, then house buyers, policy around housing, not just building more homes, also stop them being used as places to house just wealth. Watch more of the North West mirror more of the south east in the rising house price.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

But you've answered your own question on his Brexit silence: why put a stick in that hornets nest and say the wrong thing; and why not just let the Tory fratricide carry on unhindered?

The loosely held view that a Customs Union of some sort should be the way forward works in that it's a reasonable if politically dull solution being proffered.

If there was an issue since the election he's done badly on, Brexit wouldn't be it, imo.

His real failure has been to go for quietism in the LP instead of using his authority to give constituency parties the right to recall their MPOs and deselect them. That would have been smart politics and also doing what he advocates: given the party back to the membership and having greater democracy. He hasn't done that and he allows himself to be constantly dictated to, as with the present "anti-semite" guff.

I think its more a realisation that the Tories have to own Brexit, all of it - the referendum, the negotiations, the result.

Giving them any way out - ie: what the second referendum / staying in the single market crowd want - does nothing for Labour, or for the country for that matter since it will just allow Boris / Pob / that Williamson to come along and say "well, I'd have done it differently and it would have worked but for Corbyn", and people would think that referendums were still a good idea.

With respect though, that strategy is undoubtedly what's right for Jeremy Corbyn, but it's surely not what's right for the country? We desperately need somebody to be holding this government to account on the single biggest issue of our generation, and he's playing politics to further his own career. That's what I mean by it being counter to his image as a man of principle.

 

[davek]

I dont get that though. How is greater democracy imposing his will on loads in the LP who dont actually agree with him? Always thought the LP was a pretty broad church, not one mans plaything.

It has been a broach church, but one that traditionally has had no truck with caving completely to the philosophy of market economics.

All that's being advocated by me is that an organisation is answerable to its membership. The hundred or so MPs in revolt have attempted to ignore half a million members who voted for him and tried to unseat Corbyn twice. How is THAT democracy at work?

 

[davek]

With respect though, that strategy is undoubtedly what's right for Jeremy Corbyn, but it's surely not what's right for the country? We desperately need somebody to be holding this government to account on the single biggest issue of our generation, and he's playing politics to further his own career. That's what I mean by it being counter to his image as a man of principle.

The horse has bolted, there's no use promising anyone they can get it back and close the stable door.

The Tory Party's folly is hardly a fair stick to beat Corbyn with is it?

 

[roydo]

It has been a broach church, but one that traditionally has had no truck with caving completely to the philosophy of market economics.

All that's being advocated by me is that an organisation is answerable to its membership. The hundred or so MPs in revolt have attempted to ignore half a million members who voted for him and tried to unseat Corbyn twice. How is THAT democracy at work?

Well, the MPs are answerable to their local voters first and foremost.

The LP can frame their policy via voting that through at conference, then local CLP choose their candidate to represent that line.

Or does all LP policy get voted by the membership, and anyone who disagrees is deselected?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The horse has bolted, there's no use promising anyone they can get it back and close the stable door.

The Tory Party's folly is hardly a fair stick to beat Corbyn with is it?

So he's only principled when it suits him and his career? Fair enough. I would have thought he could at least have been pushing the government to 'do' Brexit in a way that would benefit Labour voters, many of whom voted to leave to presumably change things. Unfortunately he's done none of that and stayed quiet on the main issue of this parliament.

The likes of Starmer and Benn have done more on Brexit than he has, which is pretty damning.

 

[davek]

Well, the MPs are answerable to their local voters first and foremost.

The LP can frame their policy via voting that through at conference, then local CLP choose their candidate to represent that line.

Or does all LP policy get voted by the membership, and anyone who disagrees is deselected?

Policy is put forward by the NEC and voted on at conference by TUs, Co-OP movement membership and PLP. Up until recently it had an inbuilt Blairite majority.

The party MPs are there IMO to be delegates from the constituency party. Obviously many of them dont see it that way, so it;s a matter of how you believe an organisation should be run - representatively or by an MP who believe himself to be the personal delivery system of the constituency electorate.

 

[davek]

So he's only principled when it suits him and his career? Fair enough. I would have thought he could at least have been pushing the government to 'do' Brexit in a way that would benefit Labour voters, many of whom voted to leave to presumably change things. Unfortunately he's done none of that and stayed quiet on the main issue of this parliament.

The likes of Starmer and Benn have done more on Brexit than he has, which is pretty damning.

His principles on the EU has always been to leave it or to reform it as a body in conjunction with other left parties in the Euro parliament.

He's been talking about a Brexit that protects jobs and services since day one of the unfolding catastrophe triggered by the Tories.

As said, I really dont think you can make headway against Corbyn on this issue.

 

[electricblue]

Massive Tory lead
Labour Party riven with splits
The whole of the MSM against Corbyn and his allies

...comes within a whisker of forming a minority government....and you think that was poor. The political commentariat disagree with you. They thought rightly that it was a massive achievement from a party leader who led his apparently dead and buried organisation to gains and holds with majorities that were thumping ones that will take some beating.

But to you and others "it was nothing".

Ok.

You forgot to mention his 72 point lead in the polls..