|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 19, 2021 14:13:26 GMT
Say what you like about Corbyn but he was a total disaster and would have been ethically objectionable even if he had been electorally popular which he wasn't.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 19, 2021 14:50:59 GMT
For the avoidance of doubt, people saying this generally aren't doing so because they think Jezza was actually good.
|
|
|
|
Post by london(ex)tory on Jun 19, 2021 14:52:36 GMT
Say what you like about Corbyn but he was a total disaster and would have been ethically objectionable even if he had been electorally popular which he wasn't. Say what you like about Corbyn but... Starmer was perfectly happy to serve as a senior member of his Shadow Cabinet so he can’t have been that “ethically objectionable” to Starmer. |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 19, 2021 14:57:08 GMT
Say what you like about Corbyn but he was a total disaster and would have been ethically objectionable even if he had been electorally popular which he wasn't. Say what you like about Corbyn but... Starmer was perfectly happy to serve as a senior member of his Shadow Cabinet so he can’t have been that “ethically objectionable” to Starmer. Also, those who constantly go on about Corbyn do so to take attention away from the failure of Starmer. 20 points in the lead, remember.....?? He just doesn't have anything to say. And on core issues how different would it be from the Government? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 19, 2021 14:58:18 GMT
Which means the hardcore "never Corbyn" crowd don't trust him, but his committed supporters instead recall that he resigned from the front bench for about five minutes (metaphorically rather than literally speaking, but still) And its OK to take the line that "if you are displeasing both extremes then you are doing something right" - but only if you have something distinctive to offer yourself. And there, perhaps, is the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2021 15:05:18 GMT
Say what you like about Corbyn but... Starmer was perfectly happy to serve as a senior member of his Shadow Cabinet so he can’t have been that “ethically objectionable” to Starmer. Also, those who constantly go on about Corbyn do so to take attention away from the failure of Starmer. 20 points in the lead, remember.....?? He just doesn't have anything to say. And on core issues how different would it be from the Government? The only people who claimed that were over-excited FBPE LibDems who thought he would turn Labour into LibDem mark 2 and sweep a centrist, re-enter the EU now government to power. Nobody with a brain took him seriously and even that group turned on him very quickly when reality bled through |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 19, 2021 15:09:05 GMT
Also, those who constantly go on about Corbyn do so to take attention away from the failure of Starmer. 20 points in the lead, remember.....?? He just doesn't have anything to say. And on core issues how different would it be from the Government? The only people who claimed that were over-excited FBPE LibDems who thought he would turn Labour into LibDem mark 2 and sweep a centrist, re-enter the EU now government to power. Nobody with a brain took him seriously and even that group turned on him very quickly when reality bled through Interesting description of Tony Blair! I don't feel that the "aren't the Tories dreadful,let's wait for them to implode" option is sensible |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 19, 2021 20:32:11 GMT
The only people who claimed that were over-excited FBPE LibDems who thought he would turn Labour into LibDem mark 2 and sweep a centrist, re-enter the EU now government to power. Nobody with a brain took him seriously and even that group turned on him very quickly when reality bled through Interesting description of Tony Blair! I don't feel that the "aren't the Tories dreadful,let's wait for them to implode" option is sensible Blair was well to the right of the Lib Dems of that time... |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jun 19, 2021 20:36:04 GMT
Interesting description of Tony Blair! I don't feel that the "aren't the Tories dreadful,let's wait for them to implode" option is sensible Blair was well to the right of the Lib Dems of that time... Blair was well to thr right of today's Tory party in terms of economic policy! |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 19, 2021 20:44:38 GMT
Anyway from the outside the alternatives to Keir Starmer did not seem like they would set the blood racing. Just saying.
Whatever you think about Corbyn as Leader he showed himself to be a campaigner capable of enthusing 40% of the electorate. And so was Blair.. Rebecca Long-Bailey? I am afraid not
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 19, 2021 22:43:01 GMT
Interesting description of Tony Blair! I don't feel that the "aren't the Tories dreadful,let's wait for them to implode" option is sensible Blair was well to the right of the Lib Dems of that time... It was Blair who said that Labour would be 20 points ahead with another leader |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,931
|
Post by Tony Otim on Jun 20, 2021 10:46:01 GMT
Anyway from the outside the alternatives to Keir Starmer did not seem like they would set the blood racing. Just saying. Whatever you think about Corbyn as Leader he showed himself to be a campaigner capable of enthusing 40% of the electorate. And so was Blair.. Rebecca Long-Bailey? I am afraid not The trouble is that most of that 40% were enthused to vote against him... |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 20, 2021 11:02:36 GMT
Anyway from the outside the alternatives to Keir Starmer did not seem like they would set the blood racing. Just saying. Whatever you think about Corbyn as Leader he showed himself to be a campaigner capable of enthusing 40% of the electorate. And so was Blair.. Rebecca Long-Bailey? I am afraid not The trouble is that most of that 40% were enthused to vote against him... No, they voted to Get Brexit Done, and the result would have been exactly the same under any other leader while Labour were advocating a second referendum. Of course, if what you say is true, then Labour should now be streets ahead. But they aren't. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 20, 2021 11:18:15 GMT
Tbf I think that Tony Otim was referring to the 2017 GE there. Though the answer to that was seeing at how the party's platform and appeal then could be improved, rather than just ditching it wholesale because "we still lost". |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 20, 2021 12:44:45 GMT
Anyway from the outside the alternatives to Keir Starmer did not seem like they would set the blood racing. Just saying. Whatever you think about Corbyn as Leader he showed himself to be a campaigner capable of enthusing 40% of the electorate. And so was Blair.. Rebecca Long-Bailey? I am afraid not The trouble is that most of that 40% were enthused to vote against him... If the Lib Dems had been stronger as they were in 1997-2005, everyone would be going on about the 2017 Corbyn landslide. If there were no SNP, Labour would have been the largest Party. There is an ABL vote well over 50% which is there regardless of Labour Leader, and what Labour need to win a majority (given the SNP) is absolutely a centre Party capable of taking Tory votes in marginal seats. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 20, 2021 12:47:53 GMT
Blair was well to the right of the Lib Dems of that time... It was Blair who said that Labour would be 20 points ahead with another leader I am not sure he was thinking of a more left wing leader though... |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 20, 2021 12:51:47 GMT
It was Blair who said that Labour would be 20 points ahead with another leader I am not sure he was thinking of a more left wing leader though... When we get one we can see! |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,562
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 20, 2021 13:11:46 GMT
Tbf I think that Tony Otim was referring to the 2017 GE there. Though the answer to that was seeing at how the party's platform and appeal then could be improved, rather than just ditching it wholesale because "we still lost". Personally I thought the 2017 approach was better. More targeted, more realistic, less daily retail offer, acceptance of leaving the EU.... |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jun 20, 2021 19:07:01 GMT
Labour did worse in 2019 for multiple reasons, not a single reason including, but not exclusively;
1. Getting Brexit done.
2. Corbyn turning toxic (voters not Labour because of him, not the case in 2017)
3. Boris Johnson was vote gold (unlike Theresa May in 2017)
4. Anti-Semitism was an electoral negative for Labour.
5. The manifesto being poor.
Labour needed to change leader after losing in 2019. It now seems more and more likely that their choice of their leader after Corbyn was not a good one.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 20, 2021 21:46:16 GMT
Labour did worse in 2019 for multiple reasons, not a single reason including, but not exclusively; 1. Getting Brexit done. 2. Corbyn turning toxic (voters not Labour because of him, not the case in 2017) 3. Boris Johnson was vote gold (unlike Theresa May in 2017) 4. Anti-Semitism was an electoral negative for Labour. 5. The manifesto being poor. Labour needed to change leader after losing in 2019. It now seems more and more likely that their choice of their leader after Corbyn was not a good one. It is always worth remembering that Labour still got more votes in 2019 than in 2015 or 2010. The big problem was the BXP/ Kipper voter consolidating to Tory. |
|
