Labour

[hans kraay fan club]

Bloody hell, Gwylan! You want your cake and eat it. First it's a Tory rag, then you say it's always been independent. Surely choosing who they think was the least worst at a particular time rather than slavishly following party lines is a true test of independence. It seems you got the hump because they didn't pick who you wanted. You're not going to get a good idea of its stance from just one day's copy. It IS broadly just left of centre though.

As for the Independent having never backed anyone at a previous General Election...

WTF has Connect 4 got to do with anything??

 

[Buzzer]

I had actually read that link earlier in the week, and correct me if I'm wrong, but this is his findings on Labour up until May, he makes no mention of Corbyn, or potential policy directions post May. It is a review of where Labour were, and a promotion of ideas of where they should go if they are to win back voters. I think you are making a bit of a leap in concluding he is saying Corrbyn stands no chance.

These findings are why Labour lost the elections in May. Contrary to what social media would have you believe, English voters haven't all jumped into bed with the Morning Star ready to embrace Corbynomics. Corbyn has had no bounce from the general electorate. That's practically unprecedented. Remember, this is a detailed finding by Cruddas and the TUC, not by me and the findings haven't all of a sudden become obsolete because Labour members have taken leave of their senses and voted in a man more left-wing than Miliband. Just look at Cruddas' words of warning throughout.

If these findings were now obsolete then Cruddas would not have made the conclusions and the warnings that he has done. He delivered this speech well after Corbyn was made leader. No disrespect but I think he's in a better position to judge the state of the party than you or me and his words "To conclude Labour is not in good shape in England. We collided with the electorate in May and our post-election research has empirically exposed the scale of our problem. We can either ignore it or try to understand it."

I've made no leap at all , I wrote that Corbyn stands no chance if Cruddas is correct. That is as plain as day. Honestly, please explain how any of the five issues Cruddas identifies will be solved by having Corbyn as leader. Genuinely, I really would like to know because I don't see it.

His words are in the present tense. He's trying to understand them. I'm not sure you are.

 

[Bold Seagull]

These findings are why Labour lost the elections in May. Contrary to what social media would have you believe, English voters haven't all jumped into bed with the Morning Star ready to embrace Corbynomics. Corbyn has had no bounce from the general electorate. That's practically unprecedented. Remember, this is a detailed finding by Cruddas and the TUC, not by me and the findings haven't all of a sudden become obsolete because Labour members have taken leave of their senses and voted in a man more left-wing than Miliband. Just look at Cruddas' words of warning throughout.

If these findings were now obsolete then Cruddas would not have made the conclusions and the warnings that he has done. He delivered this speech well after Corbyn was made leader. No disrespect but I think he's in a better position to judge the state of the party than you or me and his words "To conclude Labour is not in good shape in England. We collided with the electorate in May and our post-election research has empirically exposed the scale of our problem. We can either ignore it or try to understand it."

I've made no leap at all , I wrote that Corbyn stands no chance if Cruddas is correct. That is as plain as day. Honestly, please explain how any of the five issues Cruddas identifies will be solved by having Corbyn as leader. Genuinely, I really would like to know because I don't see it.

His words are in the present tense. He's trying to understand them. I'm not sure you are.

Of course the findings are not obsolete, the conclusions are made based on what went wrong in May, and a vision of what should be done in the future. It is a message to Corbyn on what he should be looking to do, it is not a review of Corbyn's first 2 weeks in the job. Whether Corbyn does ignore it or not, we'll have to wait and see.

I have no issue with his judgement of the Labour Party, but that isn't a judgement of Corbyn's Labour Party as he's not shaped any really policy yet, he's only just formed his shadow cabinet.

I understand the words don't worry, I'm not rushing to make any conclusions just yet, I might give him a bit longer than 2 weeks though.

 

[BLOCK F]

Bloody hell, Gwylan! You want your cake and eat it. First it's a Tory rag, then you say it's always been independent. Surely choosing who they think was the least worst at a particular time rather than slavishly following party lines is a true test of independence. It seems you got the hump because they didn't pick who you wanted. You're not going to get a good idea of its stance from just one day's copy. It IS broadly just left of centre though.

As for the Independent having never backed anyone at a previous General Election...

Totally this.
Gwylan, you can twist and turn as much as you like; however, you really are talking nonsense.

 

[Gwylan]

As for the Independent having never backed anyone at a previous General Election...

I stand corrected: I remember the first few years when it refused to back anyone and thought it had persisted with that. As I said, it plumped for Tory last time so that currently makes it Tory-supporting. I haven't got the hump about it - I don't really read the Indy (as you can tell from my ignorance of its stance at previous elections) so it doesn't bug me.

As for the Cruddas speech, I don't see any contradiction between accepting what Cruddas says and supporting Corbyn. I voted for Corbyn but I think he has very little chance of winning the election. I'm not quite sure why you think voting Corbyn in as leader means accepting Cruddas's analysis as inaccurate

 

[Buzzer]

Okay, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the Indy.

Re. Corbyn of course there is no contradiction if you vote for Corbyn knowing he has little chance of winning, it's entirely consistent with Cruddas' evidence because practically every major point in the platform Corbyn won the leadership on will only exacerbate Labour's 5 main identified issues when presented to the rest of the voting and non-voting public.

 

[jakarta]

Re. Corbyn of course there is no contradiction if you vote for Corbyn knowing he has little chance of winning, it's entirely consistent with Cruddas' evidence because practically every major point in the platform Corbyn won the leadership on will only exacerbate Labour's 5 main identified issues when presented to the rest of the voting and non-voting public.

Yes but you will doing the RIGHT THING...


I'm sure Call Me Dave will approve of your Sincerity.

 

[Gwylan]

Okay, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the Indy.

Re. Corbyn of course there is no contradiction if you vote for Corbyn knowing he has little chance of winning, it's entirely consistent with Cruddas' evidence because practically every major point in the platform Corbyn won the leadership on will only exacerbate Labour's 5 main identified issues when presented to the rest of the voting and non-voting public.

Yeah, I don't want to be drawn on the Indy - it was a minor point.

I disagree with one of Cruddas's findings:I don't think Labour was out of step with the public on public services (if you're treating welfare as a separate issue) - all the polls suggested that Labour was well ahead of Tories on the NHS and narrowly ahead on education but I think the rest is pretty accurate. Labour has a tough road back, a really tough road. Corbyn's not the man to do it but I think he had to be elected because Burnham/Cooper/Kendall were on a road to nowhere. Despite his initials, I see JC more as a John the Baptist than the saviour of the party.

It won't win the next election but it will have transformed itself - and could be in a good position by 2025

 

[Buzzer]

Yes but you will doing the RIGHT THING...


I'm sure Call Me Dave will approve of your Sincerity.

Sorry, it's been a long, stressful day today so this post has gone right over my head. I'm not sure if you're having a pop at me or what.

 

[Buzzer]

Ignore previous post - it was me being thick.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Do Labour have any conerent policies at the moment pr arw they still trying to understand what has happened to themselves

 

[beorhthelm]

Do Labour have any conerent policies at the moment pr arw they still trying to understand what has happened to themselves

they have their party conference this week where they will select their policies, which apparently Corbyn will accept. unlike recent leaders who made up their own regardless of the party, to varying success. this will be a very interesting week for Labour and left politics in UK, probably more important than Corbyn leadership itself as it will determine how fractured or consensual the party will really be, and where Corbyn takes the party.

 

[Hampster Gull]

they have their party conference this week where they will select their policies, which apparently Corbyn will accept. unlike recent leaders who made up their own regardless of the party, to varying success. this will be a very interesting week for Labour and left politics in UK, probably more important than Corbyn leadership itself as it will determine how fractured or consensual the party will really be, and where Corbyn takes the party.

That will be fascinating. I am sure they can on some interesting policies. But Corbyn was the most rebellious of MPs when on the backbenches and i suspect many will see that as a green light to do what they want if they disagree.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

That will be fascinating. I am sure they can on some interesting policies. But Corbyn was the most rebellious of MPs when on the backbenches and i suspect many will see that as a green light to do what they want if they disagree.

Yep, live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

[Hampster Gull]

The Party of excessive taxation is back

 

[Hampster Gull]

Labour imploading on Trident. "Leader". Hmz. Utter shambles