Labour MPs pass Corbyn no-confidence motion - Polidicks

Good Corbyn is going in the bin he's a bit pathetic

he should start a petition for a second vote

How amazing would it be if he won a second leadership bid

[QUOTE=person11;50610971]How amazing would it be if he won a second leadership bid[/QUOTE] pretty good way to galvanise the anti-establishment vote

[QUOTE=benzi2k7;50610974]pretty good way to galvanise the anti-establishment vote[/QUOTE] more like the death of the labour party. ironically your awful politics which has led you to support corbyn so strongly has meant eternal tory rule without any opposition because they are so useless

This is the best argument for PR. Both of the parties are only held together because they have to be due to the FPTP system - and there are warring factions within them that hold totally opposing ideologies. The Conservatives and Labour should really split to form 4-5 different parties, but they can't.

[QUOTE=person11;50610971]How amazing would it be if he won a second leadership bid[/QUOTE] 'amazing!' theresa may exclaims, letting her entire campaign team go because they're no longer necessary.

"Eternal tory rule" sounds really scary. I hope this doesn't mean the end of center-to-left politics in the UK.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50610978]more like the death of the labour party. ironically your awful politics which has led you to support corbyn so strongly has meant eternal tory rule without any opposition because they are so useless[/QUOTE]how is the alternative opposition not just as useless? they accept tory austerity, with scotland basically locked out of the vote i don't see how going centre and still ignoring the working classes deterioration makes them open to more votes in england and wales, it didn't work last time. jeremy isn't very charming, but his policies (outside of foreign policy), if they had someone to put forward who is more 'electable' than i'd love that but they don't. all of the candidates put forward (tom watson, yvette cooper, angela eagle) i disagree with on a few fundamentals: 1. abstaining from the welfare bill, when they were in control of the labour party they let this bill pass unopposed, even though it hitting the exact same people they are suppost to protect the hardest. 2. non-commitment to ending austerity, no deindustrialised cities & working class towns will get better without commitment to investment 3. voting for the war in iraq, and against investigations in iraq i live in a town that has suffered under this government, and the last government. he seems to be the only one offering a proper platform for stopping these policies.

This is a complete shitshow. [media]https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/747848059267219456[/media] If the PLP are truly so inept that they think a cardboard cutout like Angela fucking Eagle will inspire the membership, I truly lament. I suppose she could always be a stalking horse, but why even bother?

[QUOTE=person11;50610531]What do actual Labour voters think of him though? The MPs have always hated him in power.[/QUOTE] Labour party members like him a lot [IMG]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/4032902/thumbs/o-ELECTION-DATA-570.jpg?7[/IMG]

That is pre brexit where a general election seemed hears away.

[QUOTE=The mouse;50610846]But look it from the view of many of the working classes. As far as they're concerned they've got nothing to lose if the economy tanks because their areas are already deprived and high in unemployment. Successive governments have failed to listen to their concerns on immigration and so the EU referendum gave them a chance to finally make their concerns clear.[/QUOTE] dude if half your house is on fire you don't go pouring fuel all over the other half while going "welp it's all going to go up in flames eventually, might as well!"

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;50611225]That is pre brexit where a general election seemed hears away.[/QUOTE] It's also only 1,217 out of about 380,000, so, y'know

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50611279]It's also only 1,217 out of about 380,000, so, y'know[/QUOTE] A randomly distributed sample of that size is more than enough to assert he was liked before brexit. Given of course that there was no bias towards a certain area or somebody votes more than once

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;50610740]I've always backed Corbyn but it's clear now that he can't lead the party or win a general election. We need a labour with a leader who is distinctly left of the Tories but stands chance of at least being able to form a coalition with the SNP.[/QUOTE] David Cameron

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50611272]dude if half your house is on fire you don't go pouring fuel all over the other half while going "welp it's all going to go up in flames eventually, might as well!"[/QUOTE] For them it's closer to already having their house burnt down and blaming the immigrants for arson.

[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;50612450]David Cameron[/QUOTE] What do you mean?

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;50610740]I've always backed Corbyn but it's clear now that he can't lead the party or win a general election. We need a labour with a leader who is distinctly left of the Tories but stands chance of at least being able to form a coalition with the SNP.[/QUOTE] You mean because his MPs orchestrated a coup against him after having long decided they wanted him out before he was even elected leader? The reason Labour is looking disorganised and divided is because of these people, they should accept the overwhelming mandate Corbyn got, and stop trying to destroy the party. I'd imagine without all of this bullshit infighting to distract he'd be in a very strong position. He tried to include them in the party process, and include every wing of the party in the cabinet (despite how little they reflect the political make up of the party membership) and it backfired even though it was the right thing to do.

Like I said in the other thread, Corbyn was elected democratically by the labour members and he hasn't even gone through one general election to see how well he stands The fact that this coup is napping is so fucking stupid, 170 of those members need to cross the floor or back the only person who has the general Labour voters ideologies at heart

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;50613137]Like I said in the other thread, Corbyn was elected democratically by the labour members and he hasn't even gone through one general election to see how well he stands The fact that this coup is napping is so fucking stupid, 170 of those members need to cross the floor or back the only person who has the general Labour voters ideologies at heart[/QUOTE] There's no point in being absolutely faithful to the party's ideology if it can't win you elections. Take a look at Bernie Sanders. He had a heart of gold; he cared deeply about the American people. But he failed to sell himself. For starters, calling himself a democratic socialist is such a no-no in America, and then his legions of zealous supporters probably didn't help his cause either. Corbyn might have been democratically-elected by the Labour Party members. But they aren't the entirety of the voters in the electorate. He might be popular within Labour, but with swing voters he may be very weak. The Labour MPs have realised this. If Corbyn isn't replaced, there may be no hope of Labour returning to government in the UK. It's important to remember that those party elite have to pander to the swing voters in the general population, not the party members. Political battles are fought and won in the centre; Corbyn is taking Labour to the left where they will lose. [editline]29th June 2016[/editline] Like I'm not suggesting that Labour elect a leader who is a neoliberal, but the spectrum goes from centre-right, to centre, to centre-left, then Corbyn much farther on the left. Labour needs someone closer to the centre, such as Bill Shorten of our own Labor Party.

The question the Labour party needs to ask is whether it wants to win the next general election. I can guarantee with almost 100% certainty that they won't if Corbyn stays at the helm - as above, he's not popular enough with moderate Labourites and floater voters. At the moment, Labour is a party of principles, which don't win elections. Unfortunately, you have to have a dash of Machiavelli in you in order to be good at getting votes. It's good that Britain has a socialist party in opposition, but if Labour's ambitions are more than spending the next however long on the wrong side of the bench, they need to make themselves more open to people a bit closer to the centre. There's a ripe opportunity here for Labour to pick up disillusioned Tories and people who, after Brexit, want to get more involved in politics. Now isn't a good time to be a principled party. We need someone who's going to effectively oppose the hard right of the Tories.

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50617622]The question the Labour party needs to ask is whether it wants to win the next general election. I can guarantee with almost 100% certainty that they won't if Corbyn stays at the helm - as above, he's not popular enough with moderate Labourites and floater voters. At the moment, Labour is a party of principles, which don't win elections. Unfortunately, you have to have a dash of Machiavelli in you in order to be good at getting votes. It's good that Britain has a socialist party in opposition, but if Labour's ambitions are more than spending the next however long on the wrong side of the bench, they need to make themselves more open to people a bit closer to the centre. There's a ripe opportunity here for Labour to pick up disillusioned Tories and people who, after Brexit, want to get more involved in politics. Now isn't a good time to be a principled party. We need someone who's going to effectively oppose the hard right of the Tories.[/QUOTE] Too basic an analysis IMO. What is a "moderate Labourite"? It's first past the post - they'll vote labour anyway. Secondly - roughly 50% of the population wanted to remain in the EU, and they will be loathe to vote for Boris Johnson, who is almost single-handedly responsible for Brexit. Thirdly, I would contest the assessment of his popularity with floating voters. Given that elections have been largely successful since he was appointed (mayoral, by-elections, council, etc) I would say he's doing a pretty good job.

[QUOTE=Mesothere;50617906]Too basic an analysis IMO. What is a "moderate Labourite"? It's first past the post - they'll vote labour anyway. Secondly - roughly 50% of the population wanted to remain in the EU, and they will be loathe to vote for Boris Johnson, who is almost single-handedly responsible for Brexit. Thirdly, I would contest the assessment of his popularity with floating voters. Given that elections have been largely successful since he was appointed (mayoral, by-elections, council, etc) I would say he's doing a pretty good job.[/QUOTE] A moderate labourite would be someone who disagrees with Corbyn on Trident, on Israel, on Northern Ireland, nationalisation of the utilities, the Falklands, that sort of thing. People who aren't quite so left wing and who are feeling alienated by the direction Corbyn has taken the party. The divisions in the party between the centre and the left aren't new, they've existed since Corbyn was elected - last year Labour peers were arguing that more needed to be done to attract the moderates, and Mandelson said that 30,000 members left the party (I'd call it more like 20,000 personally) since the election. It's flared up now, and I think it's likely to get worse post-Brexit. As for anti-Borisness, I think the Lib Dems are more attractive to people who want someone other than Boris. There's a sense of betrayal from Labour remainers regarding Corbyn's efforts, and I don't think it's wise for Labour to take their position as second party for granted any more. Perhaps this is wishful thinking on my part, but it's been reported that since Brexit the Lib Dems have seen a membership increase of about 2,000 (far less than Farron's claim of 6,000 but still significant), and I think (hope?) that trend will continue. To me, the Liberals seem the best party for disgruntled Remainers, even if they weren't stellar in the campaign. I also want to point out that in mayoral and council elections people are more likely to be voting for a person rather than their party, and probably to a lesser extent in by-elections as well. Corbyn can't take the credit for his party members winning seats, I don't think, especially since a lot of those people are also voting against him - their constituents might follow them.

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50618064]A moderate labourite would be someone who disagrees with Corbyn on Trident, on Israel, on Northern Ireland, nationalisation of the utilities, the Falklands, that sort of thing. People who aren't quite so left wing and who are feeling alienated by the direction Corbyn has taken the party. The divisions in the party between the centre and the left aren't new, they've existed since Corbyn was elected - last year Labour peers were arguing that more needed to be done to attract the moderates, and Mandelson said that 30,000 members left the party (I'd call it more like 20,000 personally) since the election. It's flared up now, and I think it's likely to get worse post-Brexit. As for anti-Borisness, I think the Lib Dems are more attractive to people who want someone other than Boris. There's a sense of betrayal from Labour remainers regarding Corbyn's efforts, and I don't think it's wise for Labour to take their position as second party for granted any more. Perhaps this is wishful thinking on my part, but it's been reported that since Brexit the Lib Dems have seen a membership increase of about 2,000 (far less than Farron's claim of 6,000 but still significant), and I think (hope?) that trend will continue. To me, the Liberals seem the best party for disgruntled Remainers, even if they weren't stellar in the campaign. I also want to point out that in mayoral and council elections people are more likely to be voting for a person rather than their party, and probably to a lesser extent in by-elections as well. Corbyn can't take the credit for his party members winning seats, I don't think, especially since a lot of those people are also voting against him - their constituents might follow them.[/QUOTE] A LibDem surge could be interesting, but I just don't think it will happen. They made a generationally fatal mistake in 2010. The wounds have not healed for those who felt betrayed by them. As it stands, if you disregard the Lords (which you should), the party is marginalised to the point of irrelevance. You suggest a membership swell of 2000+ for them since Brexit, but Labour have reported for themselves an increase of 13,000+ - so i'd hardly call it a great measure of LibDem success. As for your last point - you could potentially be correct, but many MPs have been consistently briefing that Corbyn would be electoral poison, and yet, in the majority of elections since, Labour vote share has increased. If such a thing were true, wouldn't you expect a smaller share of the vote, or even some losses? Is it not entirely possible that they have attracted more voters than they have lost? Neither of us can say for sure, but I'd say evidence suggests that.

[QUOTE=Mesothere;50618104]A LibDem surge could be interesting, but I just don't think it will happen. They made a generationally fatal mistake in 2010. The wounds have not healed for those who felt betrayed by them. As it stands, if you disregard the Lords (which you should), the party is marginalised to the point of irrelevance. You suggest a membership swell of 2000+ for them since Brexit, but Labour have reported for themselves an increase of 13,000+ - so i'd hardly call it a great measure of LibDem success. As for your last point - you could potentially be correct, but many MPs have been consistently briefing that Corbyn would be electoral poison, and yet, in the majority of elections since, Labour vote share has increased. If such a thing were true, wouldn't you expect a smaller share of the vote, or even some losses? Is it not entirely possible that they have attracted more voters than they have lost? Neither of us can say for sure, but I'd say evidence suggests that.[/QUOTE] You're probably right; I think my hope for a Liberal return is optimistic, but they've recovered membership since 2015, nearly back up to their pre-Coalition numbers. To be honest the last week or so has been so weird and hectic that we could wake up tomorrow being ruled by sentient apes and I wouldn't be too shocked.