Current Affairs The Labour Party

[tsubaki]

Only because of the membership rules, which I've just said needs changing back.

If Corbyn loses the next election, its because he and Momentum only represent a fraction of British society with their hard left views. Two lost elections in a row, a testament of failure.

The leadership should be determined by having the PLP votes weighed heavily against the membership, because they are democratically elected and therefore more representative of the majority.

Christ.

 

[Tubey]

Christ.

Yeah I'm aware you don't see it, but imagine the Tories had the same system and a band of white nationalists joined en masse and anointed a Tommy Robinson as leader.

You'd see the problem then.

 

[dannyboy]

Only because of the membership rules, which I've just said needs changing back.

If Corbyn loses the next election, its because he and Momentum only represent a fraction of British society with their hard left views. Two lost elections in a row, a testament of failure.

The leadership should be determined by having the PLP votes weighed heavily against the membership, because they are democratically elected and therefore more representative of the majority.

You keep talking about Momentum and their hard left views but the majority of the PLP endorsed a candidate in a leadership challenge who said he agreed with Corbyn´s policies.

 

[tsubaki]

Yeah I'm aware you don't see it, but imagine the Tories had the same system and a band of white nationalists joined en masse and anointed a Tommy Robinson as leader.

You'd see the problem then.

Or, imagine that a bunch of existing Labour members voted for a Labour MP of nearly 30 years standing to lead the party.

 

[Tubey]

You keep talking about Momentum and their hard left views but the majority of the PLP endorsed a candidate in a leadership challenge who said he agreed with Corbyn´s policies.

Smith?

Policies in a leadership campaign perhaps, but ideologically a world apart from Corbyn.

Just like the private schools and free borders, random 'policy' like that never really comes to fruition - they are more often than not soundbytes that are indicative of the route they'll take if elected. They aren't manifestos. The reality is Smith had to lean left to have any chance of winning any votes from Corbyn - in the end of course he was soundly thrashed because, again, the membership has been infiltrated heavily by Momentum/the hard left.

 

[Tubey]

Or, imagine that a bunch of existing Labour members voted for a Labour MP of nearly 30 years standing to lead the party.

This is what happened. The Labour Party was infiltrated by the hard left due to the membership rule change. Less than 1% of the electorate dictated the direction of the official opposition to the government, and continue to do so to this day.

Let's not rewrite history.

 

[dannyboy]

Smith?

Policies in a leadership campaign perhaps, but ideologically a world apart from Corbyn.

Just like the private schools and free borders, random 'policy' like that never really comes to fruition - they are more often than not soundbytes that are indicative of the route they'll take if elected. They aren't manifestos. The reality is Smith had to lean left to have any chance of winning any votes from Corbyn - in the end of course he was soundly thrashed because, again, the membership has been infiltrated heavily by Momentum/the hard left.

A challenger for the Labour leadership leaning to the left, imagine...

I think your ideas about the party are well out of sync with reality. We are a socialist party, if you don´t like the policies then that´s not a problem but you´d be better off investing time and faith in the Lib Dems.

 

[tsubaki]

View attachment 69529

This is what happened. The Labour Party was infiltrated by the hard left due to the membership rule change. Less than 1% of the electorate dictated the direction of the official opposition to the government, and continue to do so to this day.

Let's not rewrite history.

Yes, lets not rewrite history. In 2015, Corbyn was elected by every group - the membership, the Trade Unions, and the "supporters", by a big margin in each category.

There was, and has not been, any "membership rule change" - as has been patiently explained to you in the past. All that has happened is that Miliband (under prompting from the right of the party) allowed registered supporters to vote in the leadership election and, as your graph shows, people have actually started to join the Labour Party again. That is it.

 

[Tubey]

A challenger for the Labour leadership leaning to the left, imagine...

I think your ideas about the party are well out of sync with reality. We are a socialist party, if you don´t like the policies then that´s not a problem but you´d be better off investing time and faith in the Lib Dems.

I'm all for Labour leaning to the left - I'm against Labour falling off completely and landing in the far left!

You haven't been in power as a socialist party for a very, very long time. If you're happy being a party of protest rather than one of power and enable to actually enact change rather than just ranting about it on the sidelines, then I'm happy for you.

But I just find it a shame for the country as a whole, as you are the greatest gift to the Tories that anyone could gift them in my view.

 

[Tubey]

There was, and has not been, any "membership rule change" - as has been patiently explained to you in the past.

Yes there was.

All that has happened is that Miliband (under prompting from the right of the party) allowed registered supporters to vote in the leadership election

This was the change.

and, as your graph shows, people have actually started to join the Labour Party again. That is it.

Because they could vote "one member, one vote", which meant the hard left could infiltrate. Extremes are always the most enthused about politics - a gaggle of 100,000+ left wingers and even some Tories taking the piss joined for £3 and changed Labour forever.

 

[dannyboy]

I'm all for Labour leaning to the left - I'm against Labour falling off completely and landing in the far left!

You haven't been in power as a socialist party for a very, very long time. If you're happy being a party of protest rather than one of power and enable to actually enact change rather than just ranting about it on the sidelines, then I'm happy for you.

But I just find it a shame for the country as a whole, as you are the greatest gift to the Tories that anyone could gift them in my view.

Under Miliband Labour did go for the ´common sense´ approach and got smashed at the polls. The biggest gift to the Tories right now is Brexit and the bounce they are getting from people being utterly fed up of it all. It doesn´t matter who the Labour leader is, they´d still face the same difficulties as Corbyn does today.

Of course it´s a shame for the country but honestly, could you hand on heart say someone like Yvette Cooper would win the next election on a pro remain platform?

 

[tsubaki]

Because they could vote "one member, one vote", which meant the hard left could infiltrate. Extremes are always the most enthused about politics - a gaggle of 100,000+ left wingers and even some Tories taking the piss joined for £3 and changed Labour forever.

No, they didn't. The £3 people did not join Labour, they signed up as "registered supporters". They were not members (though some did join afterwards, paying the relevant rate and becoming members of their local CLP).

Of the actual members, Corbyn got just shy of 50%. Of trade union votes, he got nearly 58%. He probably would have won even under the 2010 rules.

 

[Tubey]

Under Miliband Labour did go for the ´common sense´ approach and got smashed at the polls. The biggest gift to the Tories right now is Brexit and the bounce they are getting from people being utterly fed up of it all. It doesn´t matter who the Labour leader is, they´d still face the same difficulties as Corbyn does today.

Of course it´s a shame for the country but honestly, could you hand on heart say someone like Yvette Cooper would win the next election on a pro remain platform?

No, she couldn't win one - nobody could, it'd take years to reverse the damage in perception.

I think if Labour had been rebranded after 2017 with someone like Starmer, they'd be a shoe-in for an election in normal circumstances (this is a decade of some of the worst Tory governments and PMs in their entire history, alongside austerity), but yes, Brexit is the big difference maker.

That said, it's not an excuse for Corbyn at the one coming up. There's no reason whatsoever why he shouldn't be ahead of the Tories. If he loses, it's because he has no mainstream appeal.

There's a very obvious Momentum bubble where they think "oh, if people don't like Corbyn, why haven't they signed up to be members too and have a voice?" - but they miss the obvious; the 'normal' voter doesn't join political parties. They just vote at elections. And unless I'm very wrong, I think Corbynism has a very, very niche appeal - indeed, you could argue that Brexit has helped Corbyn, because there's 48% of people who may be tempted to hold their nose and vote for him for the greater good.

 

[Tubey]

No, they didn't. The £3 people did not join Labour, they signed up as "registered supporters". They were not members (though some did join afterwards, paying the relevant rate and becoming members of their local CLP).

Of the actual members, Corbyn got just shy of 50%. Of trade union votes, he got nearly 58%. He probably would have won even under the 2010 rules.

Exactly the same thing in terms of one member, one vote. Indeed, that's the exact problem.

 

[tsubaki]

Exactly the same thing in terms of one member, one vote. Indeed, that's the exact problem.

That the membership should not be able to vote for candidates?

You are not advertising centrism very well tonight.