The labour party really is finished, isnt it?

Moby

HornetSaver wrote: »

With respect to whether Labour can recover by 2020, I think talk about Corbyn being ousted is missing the point.

It's not a question of whether the PLP has the will to oust him - most MPs took the line that he did not have their support, but that given the size of his win he had earned the right to try and change their minds. Hardly a ringing endorsement or a sign of a party rallying around the new leader.

It's not even a question of whether the PLP is able to oust Corbyn. MPs opposed to him have shown just about enough restraint to allow him to try and lead - without that restraint he can not possibly function as leader regardless of the wisdom or morality of opposing someone with majority support amongst the grassroots.

If we are talking about Labour challenging in 2020, one of three things needs to happen.

1. A living standards squeeze for the middle class of 2007-2010 proportions, which the public attribute to the Tories making the wrong decisions at the wrong times.

2. Labour doing badly enough at the ballot box, soon enough for the PLP to have a legitimate excuse to oust Corbyn, and someone tolerable to grassroots and PLP alike winning the resulting contest. That said, being willing to try to work with Corbyn would be a minimum requirement to getting grassroots support, so in practise you're probably restricting yourself to a handful of Shadow Cabinet members, who even then would have the disadvantage of trying to win despite being squeezed by at least one Corbynite and at least two Blair-lite opponents.

3. The Tories rip themselves apart to such an extent that 30% is enough to return Labour as the main party in the Commons (though most likely not a majority unless the SNP also rip themselves apart).

All of those scenarios are plausible. Only number two is remotely likely, but on the evidence of current opinion polls it won't happen this year.

Good laying out of the various scenarios. Its clear watching Corbyn in the Commons, he's being continually heckled by the tories and has very little back up from his own side.......as others have said the Tory infighting will give him more time than he otherwise may have had:(

Generali

Moby wrote: »

Good laying out of the various scenarios. Its clear watching Corbyn in the Commons, he's being continually heckled by the tories and has very little back up from his own side.......as others have said the Tory infighting will give him more time than he otherwise may have had:(

Labour simply don't seem interested in compromising with the broader electorate.

Given that:

1. The current budget is a cluster whatsit that is being turned into a massive Tory bunfight
2. The leading Tory outside the cabinet and many senior Tories inside the cabinet are fighting the leader on the EU
3. An ex-Cons leader has just quit the cabinet

You'd expect the Labour party to be leading by a lot more than c.1% yet that 1% seems likely to make the currently leadership inviolable. (Having said that the Labour Party AFAIK have never sacked a leader).

Apparently at this stage in the last Parliament Mr E. Milliband had a lead of 10% or more. Make of that what you will.

Moby

Generali wrote: »

Labour simply don't seem interested in compromising with the broader electorate.

Given that:

1. The current budget is a cluster whatsit that is being turned into a massive Tory bunfight
2. The leading Tory outside the cabinet and many senior Tories inside the cabinet are fighting the leader on the EU
3. An ex-Cons leader has just quit the cabinet

You'd expect the Labour party to be leading by a lot more than c.1% yet that 1% seems likely to make the currently leadership inviolable. (Having said that the Labour Party AFAIK have never sacked a leader).

Apparently at this stage in the last Parliament Mr E. Milliband had a lead of 10% or more. Make of that what you will.

I agree Labour are paralysed in their ability to respond to the tory infighting due to Corbyn's election. I do think though that people like Dan Jarvis, Yvette Cooper etc would compromise with the wider electorate. Did you see Dan Jarvis' recent speech drawing a line under Blairism but showing independence from Corbyn's take on things?

Generali

Moby wrote: »

I agree Labour are paralysed in their ability to respond to the tory infighting due to Corbyn's election. I do think though that people like Dan Jarvis, Yvette Cooper etc would compromise with the wider electorate. Did you see Dan Jarvis' recent speech drawing a line under Blairism but showing independence from Corbyn's take on things?

I've not seen Mr Javis's speech although I will look it out.

Party of Labour's problems stem from the fact that there doesn't seem to be an obvious talent to succeed Mr Corbyn or Mr Milliband for that matter, much the same problem that the Tories faced upon Mr Blair's election.

Do you think Mr Jarvis is a likely future Leader of the HMLO or even PM? He seems to me to be cut from the Paddy Pantsdown cloth, no bad thing IMHO.

Moby

Generali wrote: »

I've not seen Mr Javis's speech although I will look it out.

Party of Labour's problems stem from the fact that there doesn't seem to be an obvious talent to succeed Mr Corbyn or Mr Milliband for that matter, much the same problem that the Tories faced upon Mr Blair's election.

Do you think Mr Jarvis is a likely future Leader of the HMLO or even PM? He seems to me to be cut from the Paddy Pantsdown cloth, no bad thing IMHO.

I dont know but when you think about it..... How many people could you have imagined as a leader prior to them getting the job. No one imagined Thatcher would turn out the way she did?
He has one thing going for him he had a life/career outside of politics. The public here and in the States clearly has a problem with politicians.

HornetSaver

Generali wrote: »

Labour simply don't seem interested in compromising with the broader electorate.

Given that:

1. The current budget is a cluster whatsit that is being turned into a massive Tory bunfight
2. The leading Tory outside the cabinet and many senior Tories inside the cabinet are fighting the leader on the EU
3. An ex-Cons leader has just quit the cabinet

You'd expect the Labour party to be leading by a lot more than c.1% yet that 1% seems likely to make the currently leadership inviolable. (Having said that the Labour Party AFAIK have never sacked a leader).

In fairness to Corbyn he has made a big deal about the "new PMQs" and about pandering to the media agenda, so I can understand why he is not using six questions a week on the EU. But Europe is such a burning issue in the political world that he comes across as weak purely by deciding not to go with it.

Blair, Cameron and Clegg all got regular opportunities to question the PM of the day on a decidedly uncomfortable issue for the government of the time. And whatever you think of any of them as leaders of their parties, all would have annihilated a Prime Minister in the position Cameron is in right now.

I say that as someone who agrees with Cameron's overall strategy on Europe, of renegotiating, putting that renegotiation to a referendum, and one way or the other putting the issue to bed for a generation. Though not the implementation - by allowing open disagreement on Europe earlier, rather than trying to cover up the very obvious discontent, the political momentum behind Leave would have enabled him to successfully negotiate for anything he wanted. Assuming of course that he did not get carried away and ask for Paris or something

Generali

These Labour types do really love to surround themselves with some terribly dodgy people.

http://order-order.com/2016/03/22/khan-no-evidence-of-aides-extremist-comments/

Sadiq Khan was grilled by ITV’s Paul Brand at the Pride hustings last night on his top aide Shueb Salar, who resigned in disgrace two weeks ago:

Brand: “You employed this guy. You worked closely with him. We all work with colleagues, you kind of get a sense of what someone is like. How could you not realise that someone you were working with day in day out held this kind of view?”

Khan: “Sure. I mean, throughout the time he was employed with me there was no hint or evidence at all of any of these sorts of comments. In my parliamentary office we had five members of staff, four women and him. At no time during the course of his employment did he exhibit any of the sort of things that his comments allude to.”

This is demonstrably untrue – the video of Salar brandishing a gun was posted in autumn last year, while he was working for Khan. Salar favourited a tweet about physically attacking Tory voters last May, again while he was working for Khan. He wrote that the Lee Rigby murder was “probably fake“, as well as posting a string of tweets about “faggots“. And who knows which of Sadiq’s staffers was responsible for following ISIS supporters on Twitter. Salar was up to no good during his employment with Sadiq, a fact he is now conveniently brushing over…

Oh well, I'm sure that despite the hatred of gays and women and his support for ISIS that, like Mr Corbyn, Mr Salar is a decent, honest man. He is certainly very open in his views although apparently not open enough for Mr Khan to notice.

Generali

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/corbyn-turns-down-free-pot-of-gold-20160322107389

Moby

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/osbornes-words-obscured-by-desire-to-punch-him-in-face-20160316107212

Spidernick

Generali wrote: »

These Labour types do really love to surround themselves with some terribly dodgy people.

Thatcher and Pinochet - enough said, I would suggest!