Labour resignations

[bodsier]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----vv

>

>

>

> If we've learnt anything over the past few weeks,

> it's that there is no one in the two main parties

> that can be described as such (and yes, I most

> definitely include Corbyn in that - he has proved

> over the past few weeks to be as dishonest,

> deceitful and manipulative as the rest of them).

>

>

>

>

> How so?

I really dont get the idea that he wont win an election, he represents the majority.......those living on ?25,000 a year or less which is the majority I believe. Those trying to get him out realise that, they just don't want politics to change in the way it would if he gets in.

What do you mean by the centrist popular vote?

Do you mean this?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/kailash-chand/moment-of-honesty-is-required-new-labour-began-dismantling-of-our-nhs

[JoeLeg]

>

> I really dont get the idea that he wont win an

> election, he represents the majority.......those

> living on ?25,000 a year or less which is the

> majority I believe.

Do you honestly, really, truly believe that everyone on less than ?25,000 a year is automatically a supporter of Corbyn? From where do you get that? The Tories, LibDems and indeed UKIP would beg to differ.

He really doesn't represent the majority, but good luck to you if you believe it, and you're going to get a nasty shock at the next GE.

Those trying to get him out

> realise that, they just don't want politics to

> change in the way it would if he gets in.

Those trying to block him want the Labour Party to be electable. Now we can argue all day about what Labour should be and why policies it should follow, but frankly it's naive to think they're scared of him.

Momentum has hijacked the left wing of the party, and I'm old enough to remember the damage done to Labour in the 80's by the Militant wing of Labour. Meanwhile the Tories ran amok as the left tried to put itself back together.

I see frightening parallels now, and telling yourself that somehow Corbyn has the guaranteed vote of everyone on a low income (which he really really doesn't) and thus can win - and thus is justified in letting the party tear itself apart - is not realistic.

We need an opposition, we need a party willing to speak up for all society, but we do not need reasonable voices drowned out by righteous fury on the left that is simply anger and frustration rendered impotent by infighting and Tory tactics.

Edit - if you don't understand the power held by the centrist popular vote under our current electoral model (which is the real problem in my opinion), then you have no hope of understanding where the real political battlefield is and why Corbyn is doomed. It shouldn't be like this, but until we get PR and mandatory voting the true political desires of the electorate will never be known.

[DaveR]

"I really dont get the idea that he wont win an election, he represents the majority.......those living on ?25,000 a year or less which is the majority I believe. Those trying to get him out realise that, they just don't want politics to change in the way it would if he gets in."

I'm genuinely interested in why it is people believe that Corbyn can win, or that 'he represents the majority'. I don't believe it, not because I personally disagree with his views (I do), or because I claim to have any kind of deep/unique insight into the beliefs of the wider UK electorate, (I don't), but just because the evidence suggests that UK voters don't buy the ideological left position that he unashamedly represents. If they did, surely Ed Milliband would now be PM and the EU referendum would just be a bad dream?

Ah, people say, Ed lost because he wasn't left wing enough. But how does that square with the fact that people evidently chose to vote Tory instead? Labour failed to win target seats from the Tories, and that's why they lost the election. Are Labour more likely to win those seats under Corbyn? When, amongst his followers, 'Tory-lite' is an insult, and 'Tory' is a swear word?

Ah, people say, JC will galvanise people who previously didn't vote. As if nobody has ever tried that before, as if it was easy. 200,000 extra Labour members sounds a lot, but 30 million people voted at the last election.

As I said, I'm genuinely interested. Persuade me.

[miga]

I think you're right DaveR - even though we're probably at opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Labour (if it wants to stay Labour) is unelectable, because the electorate has moved a long way to the right. It's an unelectable shambles, but if it was run in a more unified way it would just be unelectable.

[Jeremy]

Corbyn has a rather fanatical following amongst his sizeable fan club. So no doubt he will mobilise thousands of previously disengaged voters. But nowhere near the millions more that they need to win an election!!

IMO there's no shame in broadening your appeal to the middle ground. You can either try to make the country a better place by compromising. Or you can stick to your guns and give the opposition free reign.

[bodsier]

.

[JoeLeg]

No?

Ok then...

[miga]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> IMO there's no shame in broadening your appeal to

> the middle ground. You can either try to make the

> country a better place by compromising. Or you can

> stick to your guns and give the opposition free

> reign.

I'm a permanently disappointed idealist. I tend to think that politics should be about ideological vision and convincing the public about why your vision is right. Which is pretty much the opposite of the real world.

[bodsier]

miga Wrote:

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

> I think you're right DaveR - even though we're

> probably at opposite ends of the political

> spectrum.

>

> Labour (if it wants to stay Labour) is

> unelectable, because the electorate has moved a

> long way to the right. It's an unelectable

> shambles, but if it was run in a more unified way

> it would just be unelectable.

After many years of thatcher and Blair, some have been indoctrinated to believe that a move to the right is the way forward. We have been duped into believing this, irrespective of whether it benefits us in the long term. Right now the rich are getting richer, and we have ascending numbers of food banks and homeless. Wages have been pushed down, employment rights decimated. The NHS is being dismantled, along with our education system. Wars for profit, and the displacement of millions of families. All a product of a move to the right. If that is what the centrist/Tory vote is about....not sure I want any part of it. Persuade me.

[Seabag]

From the FT:

"Mr Corbyn was a backbencher for 30 years ? voting about 500 times against his own leadership ? before he was elected last summer and many believe he is prepared to split Labour."

And we really could do with an opposition party right now, but Jeremy doesn't do 'compromise'. Hence the current situation makes the party totally and utterly unelectable IMHO

Which of course the Tories will be loving

https://next.ft.com/content/a0c54b8e-3e17-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a

[miga]

bodsier Wrote:

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

> miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think you're right DaveR - even though we're

> > probably at opposite ends of the political

> > spectrum.

> >

> > Labour (if it wants to stay Labour) is

> > unelectable, because the electorate has moved a

> > long way to the right. It's an unelectable

> > shambles, but if it was run in a more unified

> way

> > it would just be unelectable.

>

>

> After many years of thatcher and Blair, some have

> been indoctrinated to believe that a move to the

> right is the way forward. We have been duped

> into believing this, irrespective of whether it

> benefits us in the long term. Right now the rich

> are getting richer, and we have ascending numbers

> of food banks and homeless. Wages have been

> pushed down, employment rights decimated. The NHS

> is being dismantled, along with our education

> system. Wars for profit, and the displacement of

> millions of families. All a product of a move to

> the right. If that is what the centrist/Tory vote

> is about....not sure I want any part of it.

> Persuade me.

Persuade you of what?

[JoeLeg]

bodsier Wrote:

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

>

> After many years of thatcher and Blair, some have

> been indoctrinated to believe that a move to the

> right is the way forward. We have been duped

> into believing this, irrespective of whether it

> benefits us in the long term. Right now the rich

> are getting richer, and we have ascending numbers

> of food banks and homeless. Wages have been

> pushed down, employment rights decimated. The NHS

> is being dismantled, along with our education

> system. Wars for profit, and the displacement of

> millions of families. All a product of a move to

> the right. If that is what the centrist/Tory vote

> is about....not sure I want any part of it.

> Persuade me.

Don't be deliberately obtuse; I'm not trying to persuade you to be part of that and you know it. All I'm doing is pointing out that there's a lot of people who DO think that way, and who view the direction this country has taken as a good thing.

For the record, and seeing as you need it pointed out, I'm far from being one of those people. But I recognise they are in the majority, and so if we want to affect real change they are the ones we need to persuade. It's not you or me. And to do that we need to work with them and stop them seeing Labour as a lunatic fringe. Corbym is not doing that.

Stop thinking that the hard left is the majority in the UK. It's not, and if we want radical social change it has to be done from within a system that is, and often has, been opposing such change.

[DaveR]

"After many years of thatcher and Blair, some have been indoctrinated to believe that a move to the right is the way forward. We have been duped into believing this, irrespective of whether it benefits us in the long term. Right now the rich are getting richer, and we have ascending numbers of food banks and homeless. Wages have been pushed down, employment rights decimated. The NHS is being dismantled, along with our education system. Wars for profit, and the displacement of millions of families. All a product of a move to the right. If that is what the centrist/Tory vote is about....not sure I want any part of it. Persuade me"

This is kind of my point. We all know what you think. But what makes you think that lots of other people think the same as you think? If that's not too much thinking?

[Jeremy]

It begs the question of what would be a sensible middle ground. It's possible to support commitment to welfare, education and healthcare, more council houses, moderate tax increases, and a reduced military (spending and presence) without going for full-on Corbynmania..

[miga]

But is it possible to do those things without upsetting the markets? Is that even something that voters care about?

[JoeLeg]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> It begs the question of what would be a sensible

> middle ground. It's possible to support commitment

> to welfare, education and healthcare, more council

> houses, moderate tax increases, and a reduced

> military (spending and presence) without going for

> full-on Corbynmania..

Momentum would beg to differ, it seems...

[bodsier]

What exactly is 'full on corbynmania?' What you Want is in line with his policies. I fear you are being duped by the vile attacks that have been made against him via the media. Are we a nation unable to think for ourselves anymore. Do we really still believe the tripe that is presented to us and push for the same 'because it is for the best?'

[bodsier]

"This is kind of my point. We all know what you think. But what makes you think that lots of other people think the same as you think? If that's not too much thinking?"

I don't assume they think the same as I do, what I would like is a true democracy that allows us to see for ourselves. Stopping new labour supporters from voting for him, and charging ?25. Hardly democratic is it....

[JoeLeg]

bodsier Wrote:

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

> What exactly is 'full on corbynmania?' What you

> Want is in line with his policies.

But that's not ALL of his policies, is it? He openly admitted he would never launch nuclear weapons; how do you rink that made him look amongst those who worry about foreign policy?

I fear you

> are being duped by the vile attacks that have been

> made against him via the media.

I'm not being duped by anyone and you insult me by claiming otherwise. I'm perfectly capable of making up my own mind - I'm not a naive 18 year old.

Are we a nation

> unable to think for ourselves anymore. Do we

> really still believe the tripe that is presented

> to us and push for the same 'because it is for the

> best?'

You still insist on thinking that people who disagree with you do it because they've fallen for some kind of brainwashing. By treating your opponents as such (as Momentum has) you alienate anyone who might be willing to see some of your point of view. Face reality, there are a lot of voters who oppose your positions and who do it out of sincere belief, not because they're stupid.

Corbyn will be reelected, Labour will go nowhere and you'll still be wondering why. We need to start persuading the floating voters and the ones considering UKIP and the young that Lanour can be a force for good amongst the whole country. If we govern we have to govern the rich and the powerful as well, and that doesn't happen if they think you just want to get the boot into them.

Thatcher did a lot of terrible things to us, but mostly she gave us the freedom to do them to ourselves, and so we did. And now if we want a progressive government that can help everyone we have to persuade a lot of people who actually saw there world get better in the 80's and have passed on their ethos to their kids. Extremism will get us nowhere, and as much as you tell yourself it's not so, Corbyn has a PR issue, because he's seen like that. And that's his responsibility to fix if he wants to be the big man.

Edit - and this is an interesting counterpoint

https://medium.com/@matatatatat/the-terrifying-hubris-of-corbynism-6590054a9b57#.ntzbdo6a3

[JoeLeg]

bodsier Wrote:

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

> "This is kind of my point. We all know what you

> think. But what makes you think that lots of other

> people think the same as you think? If that's not

> too much thinking?"

>

>

> I don't assume they think the same as I do,

But if they think differently you assume they are fools or have fallen for lies. A lot of these people would disagree with you.

what I

> would like is a true democracy that allows us to

> see for ourselves.

Now here we agree. But First Past The Post will never deliver or. Proportional Representation combined with mandatory voting. But I'm not holding my breath that we'll ever get it.

Stopping new labour

> supporters from voting for him, and charging ?25.

> Hardly democratic is it....

That's an internal Labour party matter, not really relevant to a GE, but I agree it's a low blow.

[Loz]

bodsier Wrote:

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

> I fear you are being duped by the vile attacks that have been

> made against him via the media.

I read this claim a lot, but I've seen very few 'vile attacks'. Mostly I see comments in the Guardian that basically amount to "how very dare you not agree with everything St Jeremy of Corbyn says". Nothing has been said about Corbyn that has been anything near what Cameron endured with 'piggate'.

So, I'd like to see some of these 'vile attacks'. Can you give examples?

[Otta]

The Canary is every bit as biased as The Sun.

[Jeremy]

bodsier Wrote:

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

> What you want is in line with his policies.

Yes that's because I specifically highlighted the areas of overlap. In terms of economics and commerce... we are worlds apart.

[rendelharris]

Loz Wrote:

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

> bodsier Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I fear you are being duped by the vile attacks

> that have been

> > made against him via the media.

>

> I read this claim a lot, but I've seen very few

> 'vile attacks'. Mostly I see comments in the

> Guardian that basically amount to "how very dare

> you not agree with everything St Jeremy of Corbyn

> says". Nothing has been said about Corbyn that has

> been anything near what Cameron endured with

> 'piggate'.

>

> So, I'd like to see some of these 'vile attacks'.

> Can you give examples?

The near-daily accusations of being an anti-semitic supporter of terrorists? Daily Telegraph articles headed "Corbyn will be cheered on by terrorists and racists"? I'm not a Corbynista at all, in fact I think whatever his personal qualities he ought to go for the good of the party, but there's no doubt he's come under more sustained and concerted attack in the press than any main party leader in my lifetime apart from maybe Michael Foot. A bit of a giggle about Dave getting jiggy with a piggy doesn't compare.

[Henry_17]

RH,

Links ??