was corbyn really against the remain?

[C0ckney]

yeah good luck to them if it goes ahead: they'll need it. the last party to explicitly position itself between labour and tories was the lib dems in 2015...

[kentonio]

yeah good luck to them if it goes ahead: they'll need it. the last party to explicitly position itself between labour and tories was the lib dems in 2015...

Yeah but there was no real space between the Tories and Labour over the last 10 years. This would be a significant chunk of both parties that already occupy that ground breaking off and claiming it. They'd also be able to start without a lot of the baggage the existing parties have, apart from what individual MPs bring with them.

If it happens I can see it finishing off the Lib Dems.

[C0ckney]

that's true. but does that ground only exist in the commons? that is to say, is the public crying out for a(nother) bland centrist party? i have serious doubts about that.

[kentonio]

Why do you think New Labour did so well? Much as we might wish it wasn't so, most of the public are centrist. They don't want to take chances, and want a cautious government that will steady the ship not rock it (occasional mass protest votes like the last referendum aside). There's a reason protest votes rarely happen in large scale at general elections.

If a significant part of both major parties break off, I could well see them winning, especially as a new party would feed into the current anger in the country. The only real problem with it would be the number of very familiar faces that would be involved, but even then I can see people looking past it because of the new name and the bi-partisan nature of it.

[C0ckney]

i think that new labour did well because, although it was a middle class liberal party pretending to be a social democratic one, the working classes, and frankly mostly people, were fed up to the back teeth with the tories and were looking for change. i think that it also captured the spirit of the times well. now that people have seen 13 years of new labour, those working class voters have fled. some have gone to other parties; others have simply disengaged with politics. corbyn can reverse this of course, and we have seen the start of that.

as for a new party, we'll see. i think that the reason most people are 'centrist' is precisely because that has been the only real option offered to them (FPTP heavily favouring a two party system). but the political winds are changing, and if people are offered a real choice: a right-wing tory party, a social democratic labour party and some sort of blairite/cameroon centrist party, then we shall see where they really stand.

[C0ckney]

to put it another way, how many people vote for the reds/blues because they are genuinely inspired by their programmes, how many because they feel the reds/blues are the least worst option, and how many simply to vote against the red/blues?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Never underestimate the awesome power of that chunk of the electorate which is simply looking for the least dreadful option.

[BeBMan]

That Labour woman who - I understand - is challenging Corbyn now looks like Brienne of Tarth.

[C0ckney]

i'm not a great believer in media interviews and suchlike, but corbyn and eagle both appeared yesterday on the television. now of course i'm biased, but the gulf in quality between their performances was pretty remarkable. corbyn was relaxed, and he answered his questions clearly, directly and with a touch of humour; eagle (whose voice really grates) just waffled on about very little, refused to give an answer about whether corbyn should be on the ballot, and when asked about policy differences, she couldn't name a single one. i'm in it...because...i want to win it. jesus wept. anyway, watch the videos and decide for yourselves.

[C0ckney]

Angela Eagle faces the prospect of a no confidence vote from her own constituency Labour party, it has been revealed just hours before she launches her formal leadership challenge against Jeremy Corbyn.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

I have to say that the proposed attempt to exclude Corbyn from a leadership contest based on this clause-

ii: Where there is no vacancy nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of Party conference. In this case any nomination must be supported by 20% of the combined Commons members of the PLP and members of the EPLP. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void.

- is outright cack. It's clearly aimed at challengers, not incumbents, with the aim of excluding frivolous leadership bids. If that gets upheld by the courts I'll stick my LL.B up my arse.

[C0ckney]

it was just game playing in my view, trying to get corbyn to resign. anyone who can read knew very well what it said. all irrelevant now though, as the NEC voted by 18-14 to put corbyn on the ballot come what may.

there are some good conspiracy theories flying about. my favourite one goes like this: tom watson holds both the official talks with corbyn and the unions, which he abandoned rather suddently, and unofficial ones with some union members of the NEC. they do a 'deal' which involves them voting for a secret ballot and then voting against corbyn. waston, thinking he has a majority, then breaks off the talks 'with great regret' and has eagle launch her bid.

corbyn and len mclcuskey of course know all this, and in fact arranged for the union NEC members to do this deal, and for them to double cross watson on the secret ballot. corbyn thus gets the leadership election against a candidate he will beat comfortably (and perhaps two if owen smith decides to stand), and his opponents are completely wrong footed and now have no option except to shut up or split the party.

no idea if it's true, but it would be very funny if it were.

[kentonio]

So Corbyn is on the ballot but they introduced a rule whereby people have been members for less than 6 months can't vote (despite being told when they joined that they could) and they're putting the membership fee up from £3 to £25 because obviously Labour doesn't need to hear the voices of poor people.

[C0ckney]

yeah, from a blog post i read, after the corbyn vote, he and a couple of others left the hall, and then the remainder of the committee went on to discuss several things, including those you mentioned, that weren't on the agenda. they also banned local party meetings until the election is over because of the risk of 'intimidation' (we need really a :wanker: smilie), which is both bizarre and absurd. one wonders what measures could possibly be taken against a local party that decides to hold a meeting.

although obviously designed to limit corbyn's chances - i suppose 'saving labour' (heh) aren't really very confident that the 100,000+ who have joined in the last few weeks are anti-corbyn - it's difficult to see how it does. i somehow doubt that the several hundred thousand people who joined the party following corbyn becoming leader because he won the leadership election are going to vote against him en masse. there are also ways round the new limits, allowing people to sign up for just £2, and they're being widely advertised on social media and comment sections.

once again, it seems that the labour party are playing right into corbyn's narrative of being a man fighting an unpopular establishment that resorts to the basest trickery and chicanery to thwart the will of the people.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

If nothing else, Jeremy is exposing to what extent has Labour been hijacked by the people who do not care about the poor and the disenfranchised in the society.

I will be surprised if the other side of the party does not manage to create a scandal where they will somehow remove Jeremy from the ballot/manage to assassinate his character over next three months.

So far the **** is not sticking, but they will come across something that will stick. Kind of sad, but at least we have a spectacle to see to what extent has our society been hijacked by the ruling elites. Media "anti-Jeremy" frenzy is like a piranha feeding frenzy.



"Right" and "left" wing press united like never before. There was more disagreement about Iraq war, Syria, Libya, Arab spring, just about anything comparing to this "no holds barred" assault.