|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Jan 29, 2021 21:26:00 GMT
If the Tory landslide that had been predicted actually happened and Corbyn resigned. How do you think the leadership contest would of gone down and what would of been Labour Brexit positioning afterwards?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2021 21:30:01 GMT
Whoever won it would have been an absolute bloodbath
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jan 29, 2021 22:08:08 GMT
If the Tory landslide that had been predicted actually happened and Corbyn resigned. How do you think the leadership contest would of gone down and what would of been Labour Brexit positioning afterwards? My belief is that Labour would take the position on Brexit it has now-and not spend too much time trying to fight Article 50-and that Tom Watson might have become Labour leader after Jeremy Corbyn. |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979 
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Jan 30, 2021 5:41:28 GMT
If the Tory landslide that had been predicted actually happened and Corbyn resigned. How do you think the leadership contest would of gone down and what would of been Labour Brexit positioning afterwards? My belief is that Labour would take the position on Brexit it has now-and not spend too much time trying to fight Article 50-and that Tom Watson might have become Labour leader after Jeremy Corbyn. Would Watson have held his seat if there was a Tory landslide? It was lost in 2019. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 30, 2021 10:54:42 GMT
There's actually a chance that it still might have been Starmer, he was in fact positioning himself for such a possibility even before the 2017 GE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2021 16:17:23 GMT
There's actually a chance that it still might have been Starmer, he was in fact positioning himself for such a possibility even before the 2017 GE. In 2017 I think it would still have been whoever Corbyn appointed as his successor. I don't think the left were collectively as worn out in 2017 as they were in 2019 |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 31, 2021 11:04:48 GMT
But that still raises the question of who it might have been, the fact Pidcock was promoted by so many on the left before she lost her seat surely tells its own story.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,055
|
Post by jamie on Jan 31, 2021 11:34:23 GMT
In 2017 I think it would still have been whoever Corbyn appointed as his successor. I don't think the left were collectively as worn out in 2017 as they were in 2019 If Labour had lost 2019-esque badly in 2017 I think there’s a good chance the left would have been discredited. They would have benefitted from the undermining of Corbyn but that would have been balanced out by the inability to blame Brexit for Labour losing votes. |
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Jan 31, 2021 19:01:28 GMT
Lisa Nandy or Yvette Cooper. Starmer probably hadn't established himself enough by that point.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,442
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 31, 2021 19:15:06 GMT
John McDonnell given the lack of other options. The party would have had a higher chance of splitting. Rather putting off the inevitable but best it happens with a different electoral system. I think after the next election if there's a pact to get electoral reform, if not it may be the one after that as such a pact is Inevitable when Labour lose again
|
|
|
|
Post by johnhemming on Jan 31, 2021 19:30:16 GMT
John McDonnell given the lack of other options. John McDonnell is a lot more aggressive in his politics than Jeremy Corbyn. What impact that would have had on a leadership election is unclear. I do normally get a ballot paper for the Labour leadership, but have never cast a ballot in that election. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,789
|
Post by john07 on Jan 31, 2021 21:09:55 GMT
John McDonnell given the lack of other options. John McDonnell is a lot more aggressive in his politics than Jeremy Corbyn. What impact that would have had on a leadership election is unclear. I do normally get a ballot paper for the Labour leadership, but have never cast a ballot in that election. Whatever his strengths, assuming he has any, McDonnell is hardly a charismatic individual. More likely Yvette Cooper. |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,442
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 31, 2021 22:36:20 GMT
John McDonnell is a lot more aggressive in his politics than Jeremy Corbyn. What impact that would have had on a leadership election is unclear. I do normally get a ballot paper for the Labour leadership, but have never cast a ballot in that election. Whatever his strengths, assuming he has any, McDonnell is hardly a charismatic individual. More likely Yvette Cooper. In 2017 McDonnell would have beaten Cooper. Who, in any case is the sort of Labour MP who makes me realise how deep my dislike for the Labour party has become |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Feb 1, 2021 10:16:25 GMT
John McDonnell is a lot more aggressive in his politics than Jeremy Corbyn. What impact that would have had on a leadership election is unclear. I do normally get a ballot paper for the Labour leadership, but have never cast a ballot in that election. Whatever his strengths, assuming he has any, McDonnell is hardly a charismatic individual. More likely Yvette Cooper. And, historically, doesn't play well with other children. Depending on how that played out in an election campaign, he could well still have won though. It just happened to be Corbyn's turn to stand. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 1, 2021 11:17:55 GMT
John McDonnell is a lot more aggressive in his politics than Jeremy Corbyn. What impact that would have had on a leadership election is unclear. I do normally get a ballot paper for the Labour leadership, but have never cast a ballot in that election. Whatever his strengths, assuming he has any, McDonnell is hardly a charismatic individual. More likely Yvette Cooper. So, McDonnell doesn't have charisma - but would have lost out to someone who arguably has even less? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 1, 2021 11:23:06 GMT
McDonnell is more able to try to charm people than Corbyn. But he is also deeply ideological in a way that Corbyn isn't (and that's possibly why Corbyn got the leadership - he was firmly on the left but in a very vague and general way that allowed people to project their own idea of what he stood for).
As finso points out, McDonnell's one big experience before then of trying to work in a political team didn't end too well.
|
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,563
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 1, 2021 13:28:14 GMT
McDonnell is more able to try to charm people than Corbyn. But he is also deeply ideological in a way that Corbyn isn't (and that's possibly why Corbyn got the leadership - he was firmly on the left but in a very vague and general way that allowed people to project their own idea of what he stood for). As finso points out, McDonnell's one big experience before then of trying to work in a political team didn't end too well. During the Corbyn era, my father once commented "John McDonnell is the one with the brains". I sometimes think of the relationship between Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell to be like the relationship between Donald Trump and Mike Pence. In times of crisis, it would be McDonnell/Pence who would rein in Corbyn/Trump (as Pence did after the Capitol riot) but, if given a chance, would be more ruthless and efficient in pursuing radical policies. Jeremy Corbyn only stood as a candidate for the leadership as the token lefty candidate (as Diane Abbott did in the previous election) and would have had no expectation of winning - and presumably not much preparation of how or what he would do. His attitude to politics has always been the rebel who makes anti-war speeches in Trafalgar Square, or who defies the whip, and he never had any real aspirations to be leader. It was only by accident, and because of his charisma as a rebel, that he won. John McDonnell would have been more organised, would have had more detailed policies, but would not have won anyway. |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Feb 1, 2021 21:32:42 GMT
A lot would depend on the texture of the parliament and the nature of the landslide. If it had been mainly Brexity Red Wall seats that fell as per 2019, that would leave a different composition to a near-uniform swing with traditional Lab-Con marginals and semi-marginals changing hands and a 1987 style result.
A slightly more decisive 2019-like result could've seen Cooper lose her seat, along with Pidcock, Lavery, Burnham (if he stood) etc. OTOH, a more historically replicative result might've meant trouble for McDonnell, Creasy and others. And any kind of landslide will include its own Portillo moments that can't be reliably foreseen.
However, Starmer's seat looks like it would've been pretty much immune to any sort of Tory landslide. And on that basis, he'd have been a likely successor to Corbyn in 2017. Mind you, on that basis Luciana Berger would've been in with a shout too...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 1, 2021 21:58:59 GMT
A lot would depend on the texture of the parliament and the nature of the landslide. If it had been mainly Brexity Red Wall seats that fell as per 2019, that would leave a different composition to a near-uniform swing with traditional Lab-Con marginals and semi-marginals changing hands and a 1987 style result. A slightly more decisive 2019-like result could've seen Cooper lose her seat, along with Pidcock, Lavery, Burnham (if he stood) etc. OTOH, a more historically replicative result might've meant trouble for McDonnell, Creasy and others. And any kind of landslide will include its own Portillo moments that can't be reliably foreseen. However, Starmer's seat looks like it would've been pretty much immune to any sort of Tory landslide. And on that basis, he'd have been a likely successor to Corbyn in 2017. Mind you, on that basis Luciana Berger would've been in with a shout too... I could just about give you Hayes & Harlington (it voted Boris in 2008 certainly, though I think not in 2012). But Walthamstow voted over 80% Labour in 2017 and 14% Conservative. I know we are envisaging a somewhat different outcome overall, but it was never going to be that different |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Feb 1, 2021 22:49:44 GMT
A lot would depend on the texture of the parliament and the nature of the landslide. If it had been mainly Brexity Red Wall seats that fell as per 2019, that would leave a different composition to a near-uniform swing with traditional Lab-Con marginals and semi-marginals changing hands and a 1987 style result. A slightly more decisive 2019-like result could've seen Cooper lose her seat, along with Pidcock, Lavery, Burnham (if he stood) etc. OTOH, a more historically replicative result might've meant trouble for McDonnell, Creasy and others. And any kind of landslide will include its own Portillo moments that can't be reliably foreseen. However, Starmer's seat looks like it would've been pretty much immune to any sort of Tory landslide. And on that basis, he'd have been a likely successor to Corbyn in 2017. Mind you, on that basis Luciana Berger would've been in with a shout too... I could just about give you Hayes & Harlington (it voted Boris in 2008 certainly, though I think not in 2012). But Walthamstow voted over 80% Labour in 2017 and 14% Conservative. I know we are envisaging a somewhat different outcome overall, but it was never going to be that different
I'm not suggesting it was ever going to happen (or indeed in H&H) - just using an extreme example to illustrate how the nature of how landslides aren't always the same, e.g. in a 1987-like landslide, Walthamstow goes Tory but Sedgefield remains Labour. Right now the opposite is true. And in both situations Holborn and St Pancras is Labour.
It's probably reasonable to assume that /if/ there had been a landslide in 2017 it would've resembled 2019 closely, but that's not the only type of possible landslide and 1987 and 1931 etc. are historical examples of different flavours of landslide.
A few years ago the idea that there could be an 80 seat Tory majority that didn't include Canterbury or Hove or Putney would've attracted ridicule. (And it arguably still should!)
|
|
