|
Poll: Who Should Be Leader of HM Most Loyal Opposition? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Corbyn |
|
95 | 18.63% |
| Dennis Skinner |
|
53 | 10.39% |
| Angus Robertson |
|
20 | 3.92% |
| Tim Farron |
|
9 | 1.76% |
| Paul Ukips |
|
7 | 1.37% |
| Robot Lenin |
|
105 | 20.59% |
| Tony Blair |
|
28 | 5.49% |
| Pissflaps |
|
193 | 37.84% |
| Total: | 510 votes | ||
|
Fangz posted:My POV on Corbyn right now is that a PLP that is so distrusted by its members that it cannot be relied on to push any left wing policies, and relies on <15% support Corbynite figures to maintain the concept of leftishness, is fundamentally incapable of winning elections because no one trusts them to do anything even if they win. Corbyn is basically a symbol of this distrust. The current impasse is damaging and pointless, so Labour needs to rip off the bandaid in one of two ways - either actually move on deselections and so on, or let the PLP have their way and face the consequences of that. I feel like I'd be willing to accept actual attempts at reconciliation with the membership from the PLP, but that'd rely on A: Other people also being okay with that instead of laughing them off after everything else they pulled and B: Them being willing to actually do that at all, which seems even more unlikely than A or either of those other two things. EDIT: 104 was the number of guns on the HMS Victory. spectralent fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Mar 20, 2017 |
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
radmonger posted:A candidate who knew the difference between abolishing private schools and setting up new grammar schools realy should be achievable.. That seems to literally be the case, though? Certainly out of anyone who actually wants a leadership bid. I know a ton of people want Clive Lewis but he's repeatedly run away screaming whenever anyone tried to get him up for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
I'm not convinced that Corbyn's policies on trident or venezuela or whatever actually have anything to do with his popularity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
I think his stances on defence and foreign policy will absolutely have had an impact on his popularity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Personally I think the current polarisation within Labour supporters leads people to imagine the PLP is substantially worse than it is, because of the nature of the conflict and the way social media works. (I.e. anecdotes and situations that back up people's existing POVs are shared) I don't really think any sort of reconciliation is possible because the key concession the anti-PLP people want to force the PLP to make is an implicit acceptance that the PLP cannot be trusted to put forward leftwing candidates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
spectralent posted:That seems to literally be the case, though? Certainly out of anyone who actually wants a leadership bid. I know a ton of people want Clive Lewis but he's repeatedly run away screaming whenever anyone tried to get him up for it. Yes, every competent politician is going to be able to see how things will work out. If you stand against Corbyn, 50% plus of the (internal) electorate will immediately and irrevocably conclude that you are a backstabbing neoliberal charisma-free Blairite war criminal. Which gives you less chance of becoming Labour leader than Corbyn has of becoming PM. The problem is not personal, it is structural. It is like someone built a slalom course where the best Olympic skiers couldn't get through.the first two gates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
radmonger posted:A candidate who knew the difference between abolishing private schools and setting up new grammar schools realy should be achievable.. the candidates put forward so far were literally bad candidates. He ran against a guy who literally worked for pfizer and wanted privatisation, whose own constituency denied he was even welsh. radmonger posted:Yes, every competent politician is going to be able to see how things will work out. If you stand against Corbyn, 50% plus of the (internal) electorate will immediately and irrevocably conclude that you are a backstabbing neoliberal charisma-free Blairite war criminal. Which gives you less chance of becoming Labour leader than Corbyn has of becoming PM. "I'm going to make repeated bad faith arguments about how other people make bad faith arguments" if you think the problem of structure lies within the internal electorate and not the wider country you're talking nonsense. Either structures matter or they don't; in either case, labour's internal electorate are not going to define their problems very easily.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Yes, every competent politician is going to be able to see how things will work out. If you stand against Corbyn, 50% plus of the (internal) electorate will immediately and irrevocably conclude that you are a backstabbing neoliberal charisma-free Blairite war criminal. Which gives you less chance of becoming Labour leader than Corbyn has of becoming PM. Why should I, as a member of The Labour Party, vote for Clive Lewis? If it is because he was one of ARE BRAVE BOYS then sorry, lost me already.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
Dead Goon posted:Why should I, as a member of The Labour Party, vote for Clive Lewis? Clive Lewis is the one that definitely doesn't want you to vote for him and might actually turn out to be not poo poo you may be thinking of dan jarvis, one of many mps who gets an astonishing amount of column space for someone with near-zero public recognition
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Personally I think the current polarisation within Labour supporters leads people to imagine the PLP is substantially worse than it is, because of the nature of the conflict and the way social media works. (I.e. anecdotes and situations that back up people's existing POVs are shared) Why don't they, then? Also, why was the PLP okay with surrendering on the issue of the economy but isn't okay with changing nomination rules? One of those was certainly a massive issue with the electorate. Dead Goon posted:Why should I, as a member of The Labour Party, vote for Clive Lewis? He's generally a good egg but he really doesn't want the job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Getting rid of Corbyn and replacing him with somebody who holds much the same beliefs is actually a perfectly sensible plan. Polls show that most of Corbyn's policies are pretty popular: it's just that people don't want to hear them from Corbyn. So installing a fresh face at the top while continuing with the same policies would give Labour a huge boost. Yes this is monstrously unfair to Jeremy Corbyn but then, politics isn't fair, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
I think rather that it would just cause the PLP to throw another poo poo fit and ruin another leader.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
radmonger posted:The one thing on this thread more consistent than Pissflaps's post are the Corbyn fans in this thread making the claim that he is the only one in the Labour Party in favour of popular policies. Like it was impossible to be in favour of the NHS, higher wages, or rail nationalisation without also supporting unilateral disarmament, the government of.Venezuala, and the whole student politics wish list. Nobody's saying this - even Corbyn was reluctant to stand for leadership, but it was 'his turn' in the left-wing group that does support all that stuff. And he won because people wanted the things he represents. But it's incredibly difficult for the left wing to make inroads the way the Labour party currently is, and one of Corbyn's priorities is to reform things so other candidates with the same goals have a chance instead of being shut out forever by the party establishment. He's literally trying to make it possible for a good left-wing candidate to become leader, while the dominant factions are trying to shut that down
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Dead Goon posted:Why should I, as a member of The Labour Party, vote for Clive Lewis? Presumably, for the policies he shares with Corbyn (but by all accounts is better at articulating). Do you think those policies are good policies, and so it would be good if they were to be tried?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
I dunno, I reckon the PLP would get behind anyone who isn't Corbyn at this point. Being simultaneously in Opposition AND having most of your party membership disagreeing with you must be pretty draining: I bet most of the PLP would be relieved to be able to draw a line and move on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Why don't they, then? Also, why was the PLP okay with surrendering on the issue of the economy but isn't okay with changing nomination rules? One of those was certainly a massive issue with the electorate. Like I said, it's the implicit admission. People generally think of themselves as good people. The PLP considers themselves as left wingers. In order to re-establish trust with the members you are asking them to accept a self-image of themselves as untrustworthy right wingers. There's an inherent contradiction here. Anyway, on a lighter note... https://twitter.com/miqdaad/status/843562522984796163
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:I dunno, I reckon the PLP would get behind anyone who isn't Corbyn at this point. Being simultaneously in Opposition AND having most of your party membership disagreeing with you must be pretty draining: I bet most of the PLP would be relieved to be able to draw a line and move on. I guess this is the trustworthiness thing, because I feel like they probably consider Corbyn to have been solely at fault and don't consider any policies they hold or activities of anyone on "their side" to have anything to do with it, and probably believe that if they can lock out the lefties and go back to talking tough on immigration everything will be fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Corbyn will end up being replaced by John McDonnell or Dianne Abbott.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Fangz posted:The PLP considers themselves as left wingers. Not sure that's true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
the third way was a mistake
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Not sure that's true. Why not?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Why not? Because they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Why not? The PLP have shown a marked hostility to Corbyn's rather moderate left policies since he entered the leadership contest. There's also Blair's "I wouldn't want to win on a left wing platform" thing which seems pretty representative of a substantial faction of the PLP. The prevailing attitude before Corbyn in the labour party was very definitely centrist with appeal to the right. They were pro austerity, anti immigration. The phrase tory-lite was not without foundation. So I don't think that people who work in politics professionally are so ignorant that they believe themselves to be left when they are very definitely not. This is not a situation which is well explained by stupidity rather than malice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I guess this is the trustworthiness thing, because I feel like they probably consider Corbyn to have been solely at fault and don't consider any policies they hold or activities of anyone on "their side" to have anything to do with it, and probably believe that if they can lock out the lefties and go back to talking tough on immigration everything will be fine. There's a whole bunch of old Blairites who seem to think that if they could just get rid of Corbyn, it'd suddenly be 1997 again and Labour would be sweeping triumphantly back into power as the electorate sang along to "Things can only get better". They just can't comprehend that the social and political context of 2017 is radically different and requires a different approach.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The PLP have shown a marked hostility to Corbyn's rather moderate left policies since he entered the leadership contest. There's also Blair's "I wouldn't want to win on a left wing platform" thing which seems pretty representative of a substantial faction of the PLP. What's wrong with that if you're a centre left politician ?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:There's a whole bunch of old Blairites who seem to think that if they could just get rid of Corbyn, it'd suddenly be 1997 again and Labour would be sweeping triumphantly back into power as the electorate sang along to "Things can only get better". They just can't comprehend that the social and political context of 2017 is radically different and requires a different approach. Given how negatively the public has responded to it, in what way is Corbyn's approach better suited to 2017?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The PLP have shown a marked hostility to Corbyn's rather moderate left policies since he entered the leadership contest. There's also Blair's "I wouldn't want to win on a left wing platform" thing which seems pretty representative of a substantial faction of the PLP. I think you are strongly conflating your opinion of people with their opinion of themselves. Like the previous poster said, the PLP can and has reconciled itself with Corbyn's policies. The hostility is about what Corbyn represents today. Which is 'gently caress the PLP'. That's why the nomination change is a dealbreaker. I don't think there's much point sticking with Labour as a MP if you didn't consider yourself at least somewhat left of UK politics. They might consider themselves less left wing than Corbyn, but there's a huge gulf between their image and your image. Fangz fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Mar 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I think you are strongly conflating your opinion of people with their opinion of themselves. Like the previous poster said, the PLP can and has reconciled itself with Corbyn's policies. The hostility is about what Corbyn represents today. Which is 'gently caress the PLP'. That's why the nomination change is a dealbreaker. Have they? This has flown me by if it is the case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I think you are strongly conflating your opinion of people with their opinion of themselves. Like the previous poster said, the PLP can and has reconciled itself with Corbyn's policies. The hostility is about what Corbyn represents today. Which is 'gently caress the PLP'. That's why the nomination change is a dealbreaker. I doubt they have done that. I see no reason to believe they won't immediately try to return to their old policies as soon as they can. And of course there's a reason, you get paid for it. You're in a party which, until Corbyn, spent most of the previous two decades parachuting people into seats as long as they follow the blairite leadership. You have a guaranteed job with a political bent you like where most of the previous leadership have used it as a springboard into further wealth and careers. Now the politics have changed and you're being held accountable for not keeping up. Why should I think otherwise? What reason do I have to think that posh boy Chuka Umunna gives a poo poo about the poor and isn't just looking for a way to get money and power like any other posh tory boy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The PLP have shown a marked hostility to Corbyn's rather moderate left policies since he entered the leadership contest. Again, the evidence-free assertion that the disagreement is with the moderate policies. As opposed to the alternative view that those who worked with him full time came quickly to the perception that Corbyn is a poor advocate of those moderate policies That latter view is more or less universally accepted by now. Corbyn isn't, and won't be, a successful politician. Acknowledging that means that acknowledging that at least some of those who were prematurely anti-Corbynite were not so very far wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Again, the evidence-free assertion that the disagreement is with the moderate policies. As opposed to the alternative view that those who worked with him full time came quickly to the perception that Corbyn is a poor advocate of those moderate policies That does not hold up with the evidence that the PLP has been consistently opposed to him since before he even won the election. They started out refusing to work with him. So regardless of his individual competence, it does not detract from the fact that they are clearly opposed to his policies, or at the least, anyone being in control of the party who won't be doing them favors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That does not hold up with the evidence that the PLP has been consistently opposed to him since before he even won the election. Given he's spent 30 years in parliament it's likely most of his colleagues had had opportunity to form an opinion on his abilities as a politician and potential leader.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Its worth pointing out that many of then had been "colleagues" with him for years beforehand I think
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
It also seems to be an issue that much criticism was labelled on calling Corbyn a throwback, saying he was damaging economic credibility, and so on. I don't remember any complaints to the effect of "we'd love a leader with those policies but Corbyn's not good at keeping a schedule".
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
If the PLP thought Corbyn was such a poor candidate they wouldn't have given him the nominations that let him run. The turn came when it seemed like the token leftie might actually win, which would shatter the triangulation consensus that had dominated the party to that point. I would take the idea of the PLP as experts on winning elections protecting the party from itself more seriously if they showed any, y'know, success in winning the party's internal elections.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
What will it actually take to prove that the PLP can accept moderately left wing policies but just dislike Corbyn personally, and for what he represents?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I would take the idea of the PLP as experts on winning elections protecting the party from itself if they showed any, y'know, success in winning the party's internal elections. Every member of the PLP succeeded in being elected a member of parliament.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Fangz posted:What will it actually take to prove that the PLP can accept moderately left wing policies but just dislike Corbyn personally, and for what he represents? Recent statements by them in support of those things. That is, specifically those things rather than meaningless stuff about fairness or efficiency or whatever. Also what does he represent if not left wing policies?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Every member of the PLP succeeded in being elected a member of parliament. So did Corbyn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:If the PLP thought Corbyn was such a poor candidate they wouldn't have given him the nominations that let him run. I think they gave him the nominations precisely because they thought he was such a poor candidate he wouldn't win A lot of people disagreed with them though
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2017 18:48
|
|