Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Malthusian

If Corbyn loses the election - not that elections are of any consequence in the dialectical march of history - it will be the hated Blairites' fault for preventing Corbyn from giving the British people the radical socialist manifesto that they are crying out for, and demonstrate that Labour needs to move even further to the left.

Who have Labour got that could take over? The most credible candidate they had in the post-Miliband election was Chuka Umunna, and he was only credible because he was "from South London" to use Line of Duty parlance. And he was seemingly Urquharted out of the running. In the failed anti-Corbyn coup the best they had was Owen Smith. Who's left?

westernpromise

Malthusian wrote: »

Who have Labour got that could take over? The most credible candidate they had in the post-Miliband election was Chuka Umunna

Chuka Umunna was an oily holier-than-thou creep.

In the failed anti-Corbyn coup the best they had was Owen Smith.

That was actually Elvis Costello.

Elvis Costello:
http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article8416480.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Owen-Smith.jpg

Owen Smith:
http://www.nndb.com/people/509/000024437/elvis-crop.jpg

Thrugelmir

antrobus wrote: »

Jeremy Corbyn to resign on 9 June 2017?

The end of Corbynomics as we know it?

Depends on which MP's keep their seats.

Moby

I've heard rumours Chukka may be more willing this time. Interestingly the election will spike the Labour left's attempts to lower the number of Labour MP's it takes to nominate a candidate because they were going to try and push that through conference. If the current rules apply a moderate, soft brexit candidate should win through on a ticket of unifying the party and opposing the tories hard brexit stance?

antrobus

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Depends on which MP's keep their seats.

That's true.

At the moment, the Labour rule book has it that any leadership candidate needs to be nominated by at least 15% of the Parliamentary Labour Party; Labour now has 229 seats and 15% of that is 35. I would assume that, were Corbyn to resign, that the PLP wouldn't make the same mistake again, and that as things stand today, any replacement leftie would struggle to get nominated. Which is why the Corbynites are trying to change that nomination threshold to 5%.

With a GE set for 8 June, it is possible that the result will be a disaster for Labour and that Corbyn will resign, (although there is no guarantee that he will), and that the leadership election would take place under the current rules. So whether or not the likes of McDonnell can get nominated might depend on whether the composition of the PLP changed as a result of the GE.

I suppose one could look at the list of Labour marginals, work out which MPs were likely to find themselves unemployed on the 9th June, http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative#

and then have a look at the super secret list of pro and anti Corbyn MPs http://labourlist.org/2016/03/leaked-list-ranks-labour-mps-by-hostility-to-corbyn/

and then work out if anything has changed.

setmefree2

Moby wrote: »

I've heard rumours Chukka may be more willing this time. Interestingly the election will spike the Labour left's attempts to lower the number of Labour MP's it takes to nominate a candidate because they were going to try and push that through conference. If the current rules apply a moderate, soft brexit candidate should win through on a ticket of unifying the party and opposing the tories hard brexit stance?

But only if Corbyn resigns - he might not leave - even if he loses.

Who are you going to vote for? If you vote Labour you are voting Corbyn and he will use your vote to argue that he has your full support when he refuses to resign.

davomcdave

setmefree2 wrote: »

But only if Corbyn resigns - he might not leave - even if he loses.

Who are you going to vote for? If you vote Labour you are voting Corbyn and he will use your vote to argue that he has your full support when he refuses to resign.

It's not quite true but it's perceived to be correct more often than how the constitution actually works so good enough I guess.

Malthusian

Moby wrote: »

I've heard rumours Chukka may be more willing this time.

If he couldn't - or wouldn't - run when his strongest opposition was Jeremy Corbyn, he probably never will.

Moby

setmefree2 wrote: »

But only if Corbyn resigns - he might not leave - even if he loses.

Who are you going to vote for? If you vote Labour you are voting Corbyn and he will use your vote to argue that he has your full support when he refuses to resign.

We'll be voting Labour despite Corbyn. We live in a tight Labour Tory marginal and voting anything else will just let a tory candidate that I have a real problem with in. If the Lib Dems had a chance I'd be tempted though. Where's Rugged.......... we need him/her on here giving the Corbyn perspective to spice the thread up!

antrobus

setmefree2 wrote: »

But only if Corbyn resigns - he might not leave - even if he loses....

Wilson lost in 1970 and didn't resign. Kinnock lost in 1982 and didn't resign.

I'd guess it depends on how badly Corbyn loses. (Assuming he does lose.) There must be some level of electoral disaster which would embarass even that nice Mr Corbyn.

setmefree2 wrote: »

... Who are you going to vote for? If you vote Labour you are voting Corbyn and he will use your vote to argue that he has your full support when he refuses to resign.

It's a tough question. One that many Labour voters must be asking themselves. Do I stay at home on the 8th June, (or even vote Con/Lib Dem/whatever) and hasten the demise of Corbyn, in the hope of a future revival. Or do I vote Labour and risk the nightmare continuing.

Or perhaps it will make no soddin difference if the polls are even a bit right.:)