Jump to content

Recommended Posts

And imagine if you could get the ones that stopped voting interested, or young people to consider. I can't I magine what they'd make of it when they googled *Jeremy Corbin Labour Party*


It's not the sexiest story to make you want to go out and mark the box, with an X for Labour


Or am I missing something?

"We live in very different, surprising and uncertain times and what may have been true a few years ago cannot be used as evidence or a benchmark for what may occur in the future"


Do you have any evidence for that? It's quite a bold statement, and a big risk to take if you are the leadership of a major political party, deciding that its electoral strategy is going to be predicated on getting more voters out, as opposed to taking voters from the other side. JC's stance on immigration isn't going to be pulling many Labour voters back from UKIP.


I'm looking at this as an observer - I'm not voting Labour any time soon, if ever - but I'm a bit surprised that JC supporters seem so optimistic about his ability to win a GE. Sacrificing power for your principles I understand (whether it's a good idea or not is another matter) but there seems to be an inordinate amount of rose-tinted belief that 'everything has changed'. It's surely worth remembering that since the financial crisis the political left in Europe has failed to make any real headway. Obviously if you think the UK is like Greece, you may not agree.

Left wingers tend to favour hope/optimism over reality/facts - which is why so many times failed socialism still gets the the run out every so often to impoverishment of everyone :)


I'd like PR now - let there be a truly radical socialist party (and I think it's now Labour- which is bit scary given their 'brand strength) but give us something new in the middle so I can vote again ; Clarke (Tory) and Kendall (Labour) are my cup of tea

Kendall is too centrist for me (and for those Labour heartlands), but is a hard working MP all the same who has been unfairly attacked, just like any MP who dares to talk about the reality of winning a GE.


My problem with the new left within the party is not so much their idealism, or even their optimism over fact, but their tendancy to see things in a bubble. The centrist MPs they attack, are a reflection of the centist constituencies they represent. There seems to be no acknowledgement of the part the character of a candidate plays in getting elected, especially within marginals. They are calling for deselection of people whose CLPs would never deselect them. I have this argument with them all the time.

DaveR - it's pretty difficult to have evidence when we are venturing into new territory! Circumstances and conditions that create certain outcomes are fluid and constantly changing, especially now. Equally, do you have evidence that contradicts what I'm saying? But as an example, don't you find it different, uncertain and surprising that the UK will very likely be leaving the EU, unthinkable to many of us six months ago?


ETA. I remember all the experts saying, based on "evidence", that the effects of the crash that occurred in 2008 would be over in six months.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They are calling for deselection of people whose CLPs

> would never deselect them. I have this argument

> with them all the time.




I think you're right. Take Heidi Alexander. After the work she did for Lewisham Hospital, I would be absolutely gobsmacked if her CLP deselected her. But Momentum would like her gone without a doubt.

"DaveR - it's pretty difficult to have evidence when we are venturing into new territory! Circumstances and conditions that create certain outcomes are fluid and constantly changing, especially now. Equally, do you have evidence that contradicts what I'm saying? But as an example, don't you find it different, uncertain and surprising that the UK will very likely be leaving the EU, unthinkable to many of us six months ago?


ETA. I remember all the experts saying, based on "evidence", that the effects of the crash that occurred in 2008 would be over in six months"


It's a bit too easy to say "how can we have evidence that everything has changed, when everything has changed?"


I guess I would say that the best evidence as to the attitudes and behaviour of the British electorate is history, especially recent history. There was a general election in 2015 that returned a Conservative majority government, when polls predicted a better outcome for Labour and a worse one for the Tories. The polls currently predict a pretty catastrophic outcome for Labour in an immediate GE. Yet you find it easy to believe that there is a groundswell of opinion widespread and numerous enough to return a Corbyn-led Labour govt? Despite the fact that the Labour Party has been very publicly tearing itself apart for the last year.


And to be clear, I was shocked but not surprised by the referendum outcome - when you ask a binary question it's obvious that either answer is possible. And I don't recall any experts predicting that the effects of the 08 crash would be over in six months - apart from anything else, the 'crash' didn't really start until after Lehman in Sept 08. We may disagree on what constitutes an expert, however.

I agree ???? and there was a lot to like in what he said. I just wonder though if it was lacking in a bold headline making knd of way. Teresa May has a way of making you feel like she's a safe pair of hands even if the stuff coming out of her mouth is rubbish. Corbyn hasn't got that.

I've not seen it yet, but sounds as though it was a well delivered speech. Owen Jones, who has been very outspoken against his leadership recently, says he's relaunched his leadership with that.


Other journos say it was a good speech, but won't have really talked to anyone outside of Labour.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I agree ???? and there was a lot to like in what

> he said. I just wonder though if it was lacking in

> a bold headline making knd of way. Teresa May has

> a way of making you feel like she's a safe pair of

> hands even if the stuff coming out of her mouth is

> rubbish. Corbyn hasn't got that.


Didn't Corbyn say she may be able to talk the talk (referring to her speech

outside No10) but no way could she walk the walk as the Tories represent

the privileged few.


Thought that bit wasn't bad.

I watched Andrew Neal and others commenting on BBCnews24 whilst queuing in Barclays Bank yesterday - the comments were luke warm and when they tried to interview delegates someone who was more cautious was shouted down by another. This behaviour really worries me - let others have their say.
I wouldn't read too much into delegate interactions to be fair. I also don't expect Andrew Neil to be anything but lukewarm. He will be the same with the Tory conference speeches. Both parties are in the sh*t right now, albeit for different reasons. The Tories are going to fight over grammar schools as much as they are brexit.

Very good article by Philip Collins in the Times today about Momentum, pointing out that the characterisation of the whole group as hard left entryists is way off the mark, and that the party should be trying to harness the enthusiasm. To quote him:


"The only thing wrong with their slogan ?Jez We Can? is the first word."

I can't see him making a comeback into parliament. Which MP would step aside to give him a seat for example? He may come back as a special advisor etc. You also don't have to be an MP to hold some shadow parliamentary positions. I don't think the membership would have the appetite for it. I don't know where the electorate would stand on it though, given Corbyn's unpopularity.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blair saying he may make a comeback apparently

>

> He couldn't surely, not after what he's done.


Things like lead Labour to election victories? Corbyn's certainly turned away from those sort of Blairite ideals.

  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • If you're a fundraising intermediary, reporting promptly and accurately on how you've raised and spent funds seems quite important.
    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...