The next Labour leader thread

[Mr Jack]

Another great article from a former supporter. Like him, I love most of what Corbyn has to say but I've come to believe that he simply cannot lead the Labour party. We've managed to pull the Labour back to the left, now Corbyn must go and let a better leader carry on the fight.

 

[datalol-jack]

I give up, tbh. Smith needs to keep hammering away at Saint Corbyn, of course, but he'll only martyr him further in the eyes of his followers. So we're roughly looking at one term in chaos, which makes the Ed Stone look like the pinnacle of detailed policy planning, and further two terms to turn the party around if it's salvageable. It's like a protest rally gone turgid with everyone wondering: 'What do we do next? Anyone know?' Not to mention student SWP meetings -- interminably tedious and indecisive -- which nearly always ended with one more demo, some laughable sabotage or a pub crawl; the one on advice for comrades in Syria before it all kicked off there particularly stands out, at least they got fighting-good slogans. And now the same bunch are all grown up, have graduated and are riding Corbyn's coattails or the fringes of Momentum.

McD inadvertently put it best: '******* useless!'

 

[Caged]

The Guardian isn't really a paper for the slightly left anymore though it's a paper based around self-indulgent interest politics and a crusader-like dedication to (selective) anti-discrimination politics.

I've been trying to succinctly describe what The Guardian is for a while, and you've nailed it. The Guardian is student politics stuck in a Neverland-like state.

 

[datalol-jack]

I've been trying to succinctly describe what The Guardian is for a while, and you've nailed it. The Guardian is student politics stuck in a Neverland-like state.

A mass of individuals without a grand narrative.

But judging from the running battles in their comments sections, the line can be traded back and forth quite effectively.

 

[Mr Jack]

I give up, tbh. Smith needs to keep hammering away at Saint Corbyn, of course, but he'll only martyr him further in the eyes of his followers.

Hammering away at Corbyn is stupid, imo. The normal response of people to attacks is to become defensive. Smith needs to present himself as having policies and beliefs close to Corbyn but with the support of the Labour party and a better chance of winning an election. Going hard on the attacking Corbyn line won't sway the voters he needs to sway.

This is, incidentally, why I still hold that having only one challenger to Corbyn was a huge mistake. They should have had someone who could run hard on the anti-Corbyn stuff, acted as a lightning rod, and let Smith come through the middle.

 

[Mr Jack]

The Guardian isn't really a paper for the slightly left anymore though it's a paper based around self-indulgent interest politics and a crusader-like dedication to (selective) anti-discrimination politics.

The Guardian isn't really a leftist paper. It's a progressive paper. Progressive and leftist politics tend to have large overlaps but their concerns are different. And it publishes a fairly wide range of opinion from that spectrum so it's not really true to say that there is a single Guardian opinion.

 

[RaohNS]

The one problem here on this forum that people are still refusing to accept is Corbyn has the mandate of the Labour party.

If people feel so strongly against him, sign up and vote for Smith.

 

[Xordium]

The Guardian isn't really a leftist paper. It's a progressive paper. Progressive and leftist politics tend to have large overlaps but their concerns are different. And it publishes a fairly wide range of opinion from that spectrum so it's not really true to say that there is a single Guardian opinion.

No, there isn't which was kind of my point but it never used to that way it has gone from being a paper largely dominated by labour readers to now a paper mainly read by hipsters. However, your labour voter has changed over that time too in all fairness.

The Guardian quite clearly don't like Corbyn.

I will openly admit I am not a Guardian fan I find them terribly biased in what they do and they will quite happily not cover important events and then point them out if they then can point the finger in the aftermath. I know this from personal experience where they had the opportunity to raise a spotlight on an important issue, but failed to because it would have shown a friend of their clique in a bad light, but then instantly covered the resulting damage and pointed the finger at the Tories. I found that utterly shameful and tbh I see them as no better than the Daily Mail now for pushing personal and editorial interests at the expense of true journalistic truth.

 

[Mr Jack]

The one problem here on this forum that people are still refusing to accept is Corbyn has the mandate of the Labour party.

Corbyn pushing his mandate is a bit rich when he ignores the party mandate on other issues (i.e. Trident*). Corbyn has failed as leader; he needs to go.

* Labour party policy is multilateralism, as voted for by the Party as recently as 2015.

 

[datalol-jack]

Hammering away at Corbyn is stupid, imo. The normal response of people to attacks is to become defensive. Smith needs to present himself as having policies and beliefs close to Corbyn but with the support of the Labour party and a better chance of winning an election. Going hard on the attacking Corbyn line won't sway the voters he needs to sway.

This is, incidentally, why I still hold that having only one challenger to Corbyn was a huge mistake. They should have had someone who could run hard on the anti-Corbyn stuff, acted as a lightning rod, and let Smith come through the middle.

Faced with a fight you can't win, there are two options: you keep mum or argue back. If people can't take valid criticism from their own party, they'll get shredded by everybody but. And it doesn't have to go direct to the person: unwrapping Corbyn's many and conflicting ideas about a fairer, kinder, greener(he has green policies?) and socially secure Britain of today will do.

Smith's objective should be to show that saying nice things isn't enough: knowing what they mean in practice is important; knowing how to get them through parliament is important; not letting things slip into vague non-definition when the going gets rough is crucial; understanding at least the basic maths of how to fund policies is vital; and accepting that not all priorities can be equal in a crisis is essential. Owen can do well on at least some of those things, and it's a start.

For Corbyn the question remains: Why Britain that is broadly supportive of May as PM and has voted for Brexit should change for him?

 

[Judgeneo]

 

[Hagar]

http://www.labourbristol.org/

Thought it was worth posting, The owner of the site has rewritten it and The Labour party have no control. They say that they have taken action against him, but cannot access it to reinstate the original content.

 

[Freddie1980]

With any luck Momentum will be successful in getting some of the more moderate MP's deselected and replaced with more anti Semitic radicals who are obviously more appealing to the average Jo voter.

 

[StriderX]

With any luck Momentum will be successful in getting rid of the Labour party.

Fixed

 

[Cosimo]

Fixed

That would be a proper fix.

 

[Scotty123]

http://www.labourbristol.org/

Thought it was worth posting, The owner of the site has rewritten it and The Labour party have no control. They say that they have taken action against him, but cannot access it to reinstate the original content.

BBC say the site was "hacked" . Not sure a site is hacked if you are the owner and change the content of it?

 

[Sliver]

That would be a proper fix.

No it wouldn't. Right wingers are totally out of touch in modern politics, always voting with respect to their own selfish own interests. Liberal left wingers though care about people less fortunate than themselves and in doing so have the moral high ground. Society is a mix of well off and not well off. If we are going to build a society that works for all, then we need to encompass everyone, not just the wealthy.

 

[StriderX]

No it wouldn't. Right wingers are totally out of touch in modern politics, always voting with respect to their own selfish own interests. Liberal left wingers though care about people less fortunate than themselves and in doing so have the moral high ground. Society is a mix of well off and not well off. If we are going to build a society that works for all, then we need to encompass everyone, not just the wealthy.

Labour wanted to help so much, that they neutered a whole generation of society with free hand-outs, so no... there is a limit to this ideology where it starts damaging rather than healing.

 

[Sliver]

Labour wanted to help so much, that they neutered a whole generation of society with free hand-outs, so no... there is a limit to this ideology where it starts damaging rather than healing.

What are you talking about? Free handouts? What? Labour endorse the Welfare State in order to help the poor. The Tory scum have taken away that safety net from millions of people who need it. This is basic politics 101. Left wing help the poor, right wing punish them in order to give the rich tax breaks. How can you not understand this simple premise?

 

[drs101]

What are you talking about? Free handouts? What? Labour endorse the Welfare State in order to help the poor. The Tory scum have taken away that safety net from millions of people who need it. This is basic politics 101. Left wing help the poor, right wing punish them in order to give the rich tax breaks. How can you not understand this simple premise?

It may have been like that once but not anymore, they are all in the pocket of big business, bankers and globalists, just look at what has happened with public utilities and housing in the last 20 years.

A pox on em all I say.