Corbyn does not get enough nominations.

[Deleted]

I think if Burnham wins in this parallel universe, the Labour Party will be more pro a proper Brexit. Coming from a northern constituency Burnham will have realised the sword of Damocles currently hanging over Northern Labour seats, unlike the current condescending, smug and complacent Islington and Westminster set.

[beastofbedfordshire]

Jan 25, 2018 12:10:32 GMT @davidr said:

I think if Burnham wins in this parallel universe, the Labour Party will be more pro a proper Brexit. Coming from a northern constituency Burnham will have realised the sword of Damocles currently hanging over Northern Labour seats, unlike the current condescending, smug and complacent Islington and Westminster set.

I actually think the opposite. I feel like he would have given in to the pro eu, blairite section of the party that corbyn seems to alienate, and not the current fudge that the current leadership seems to think will hold their party together. Neither position is really satisfactory though to win over enough people.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

[Deleted]

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

I disagree with that commonly held belief. I always believed that Eurosceptism was/is deep rooted enough and broad enough to make the referendum Leave’s to lose. I won a nice wee bet on that assumption.

[beastofbedfordshire]

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

The referendum result was not about the labour or Conservative party (or even UKIP for that mater). The ordinary people of this country rose up against the ever encroaching powers of the european entity that have stifled growth and innovation here for the past 40 or so years. Millions of people had genuine grievances to the way that the country was being run and this vote was their chance to enact real change. 

[rivers10]

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

Could not disagree more, none and I mean none of the other Labour leadership candidates or any other leading Lab politician have the charisma and likeability to convince the WWC Eurosceptics to go against their base instincts and the simple, potent message from the Leave camp. With that in mind Corbyn's "7 out of 10" comments probably struck the right tone, the EU's far from perfect but on balance its best if we stay in. I honestly think that Burnham or Cooper would have been sensible enough to strike a similar tone.

The one thing that would have led to an even bigger Leave vote was if we were led by someone like Kendall or Ummuna for whom the EU could do no wrong and couldn't stop singing its praises, this would have went down like a puddle of sick in WWC Midlands and Northern towns. I remember during the campaign I watched a Question Time type debate with Chuka as one of the pro Remain reps. I distinctly remember it cos it was the first point I seriously thought Remain might loose. Chuka's performance was dismal, he was not sympathetic to Eurosceptics concerns at all and at one point while defending freedom of movement in its entirety  he actually got heckled by the audience. Lets imagine he had been asked the same "out of 10" question as Corbyn was and he responded "10 out of 10" (as he claimed at the time that JC should have) he would have lost all credibility with everyone bar the most committed Europhiles  

[rivers10]

Jan 25, 2018 12:32:16 GMT beastofbedfordshire said:

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

The referendum result was not about the labour or Conservative party (or even UKIP for that mater). The ordinary people of this country rose up against the ever encroaching powers of the european entity that have stifled growth and innovation here for the past 40 or so years. Millions of people had genuine grievances to the way that the country was being run and this vote was their chance to enact real change. 

I think it was more to do with concerns over immigration which itself rose from successive mediocre to rubbish governments that didn't/don't govern in most peoples interest and thus has led to 30 years of rising inequality, increased insecurity, unfair distribution of wealth across the nation and a general feeling of feebleness and decline but hey ho we see what we choose to see.

[Deleted]

I would have voted for Burnham again.

Had Corbyn not been leader and we had someone advocating an overtly pro eu message. I might have voted leave but idk for sure

[carlton43]

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

I really do not think that differences in the Leadership of the Labour Party would made even half of a point difference to the Leave or Remain votes.  That contest was pretty much apolitical in party policy terms.  I don't think much of the campaign made very much difference either.  The decisions had been made gradually in heads over many years for many reasons. This was not argument and policy lead. It was not even facts and expectation led.  It was an outpouring of undigested and partially understood distaste for the ruling classes, the massive social changes and the perceived effects of ever increasing mass immigration.

We of the engaged chattering classes may have agonized and changed position, teamed and ladled with conflicting fears and positions, but the majority just had a fairly untrammelled view and reaction to the offer of a referendum. They saw it as a Woden-sent opportunity to thump the ruling classes and to stop the flood of foreigners. To stop the flow of money out from our country and the making of laws abroad and the handing down of legal decisions by aliens abroad. Even a bit of 'If those Metropolitans down there love it' then let us take the opportunity to smash it.

It didn't matter what the two campaigns said, or what the facts purported to show, or who led either major party, nor indeed what side those parties were on (in fact both solidly for Remain). It was an upswelling of genuine populism not led by anyone other than Farage and very latterly a few well known Conservatives. This was a peoples' revolt against many things encapsulated in a form of xenophobia caused by severe neglect and a failure to listen for decades. It was an 'Up Yours' squared and delightfully and wonderfully successful as such.

[spqr]

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

This comment says more things about you than it does anything else.

[Adam in Stroud]

Jan 25, 2018 12:28:18 GMT @davidr said:

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

I disagree with that commonly held belief. I always believed that Eurosceptism was/is deep rooted enough and broad enough to make the referendum Leave’s to lose. I won a nice wee bet on that assumption.

I tend to agree.

Firstly, I don't see any of the alternatives* to Corbyn adding to the Remain case - there was already a technocratic put out by Cameron and Osborne plus official Labour endorsement.  What might have made a difference would have been a passionate pro-EU case from a left or left-centre POV, pitching the EU as a force for international peace and Brexit as a wet dream for Thatcherites (a nasty line of attack for Leave in Labour strongholds). Corbyn might have done it but didn't want to: Andy Burnham vice versa IMO.

Secondly I agree that euroscepticism did not blow up during the campaign, it was the product of a substantial body that had never accepted our membership (the 33% who voted no in 1975 and their successors) plus a sustained campaign in the print media over decades, plus a growing majority in the Conservative party which keeping the matter live.The pro-European case went by default as the establishment complacently assumed no-one would be silly enough (in their view) to do it. The euro crisis was probably the defining moment, after that pro-Europeans were too embarrassed to even mention the thing.

If you want to blame a Labour leader for Brexit ironically I'd pin it on Blair, who came to power on the back of Tory divisions over Europe and had a decade of power and prosperity to make the case that membership was working for us; to celebrate the adoption of e.g. Minimum Wage, statutory holiday pay and other employment rights (all in the Social Chapter, opposed by the Tories and the eurosceptic press, all adopted by Labour to general popularity;) to emphasise that his increase in NHS spending (also popular) was based on harmonising our contribution level to the EU average; to hit the Tories as unfit to govern due to divisions on Europe.  He also might have influenced the creation of the euro as a critical friend, especially if he'd not been fighting Brown and had listened more to Brown's objections. He also should have adopted a common EU approach to Iraq, mirroring that of the French and Germans, rather than essentially adopting the eurosceptic approach of seeing our natural role as ally of the USA even when it was being run by neo-cons.

[Adam in Stroud]

Jan 25, 2018 13:42:29 GMT carlton43 said:

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

I really do not think that differences in the Leadership of the Labour Party would made even half of a point difference to the Leave or Remain votes.  That contest was pretty much apolitical in party policy terms.  I don't think much of the campaign made very much difference either.  The decisions had been made gradually in heads over many years for many reasons. This was not argument and policy lead. It was not even facts and expectation led.  It was an outpouring of undigested and partially understood distaste for the ruling classes, the massive social changes and the perceived effects of ever increasing mass immigration.

We of the engaged chattering classes may have agonized and changed position, teamed and ladled with conflicting fears and positions, but the majority just had a fairly untrammelled view and reaction to the offer of a referendum. They saw it as a Woden-sent opportunity to thump the ruling classes and to stop the flood of foreigners. To stop the flow of money out from our country and the making of laws abroad and the handing down of legal decisions by aliens abroad. Even a bit of 'If those Metropolitans down there love it' then let us take the opportunity to smash it.

It didn't matter what the two campaigns said, or what the facts purported to show, or who led either major party, nor indeed what side those parties were on (in fact both solidly for Remain). It was an upswelling of genuine populism not led by anyone other than Farage and very latterly a few well known Conservatives. This was a peoples' revolt against many things encapsulated in a form of xenophobia caused by severe neglect and a failure to listen for decades. It was an 'Up Yours' squared and delightfully and wonderfully successful as such.

Quoted to like again, and part of the issue was the way in which "Brussels red tape", "political correctness" "the nanny state" and "heath and safety gone mad" had, over decades, coalesced into a single but amorphous body of irritations with the modern world, and the Referendum became an opportunity to stick two fingers up to it.

Conversely, this is why a whole load of other people are throughly pissed off with it and will take it out on the Conservatives whenever they can; because for these people, Brexit represents mindless reaction. Again, facts and policies are not primary, and I think there is a similar refusal to take the other side's views seriously.

[Jack]

If Corbyn had campaigned more fervently, I definitely would have voted Remain.

...said no one ever.

[finsobruce]

Jan 25, 2018 13:43:20 GMT spqr said:

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

This comment says more things about you than it does anything else.

but that doesn't actually invalidate the point. 

However........ it might be that a much more pro remain leader may have made things "worse", or possibly a little better depending on who it was and how they campaigned. it can also be argued that Corbyn's style of campaigning in the referendum actually  helped, in that it didn't alienate a section of  more labour leave voters where a remainer would have done.. 

and so on and so forth. 

[carlton43]

Jan 25, 2018 14:03:05 GMT Adam in Stroud said:

Jan 25, 2018 13:42:29 GMT carlton43 said:

I really do not think that differences in the Leadership of the Labour Party would made even half of a point difference to the Leave or Remain votes.  That contest was pretty much apolitical in party policy terms.  I don't think much of the campaign made very much difference either.  The decisions had been made gradually in heads over many years for many reasons. This was not argument and policy lead. It was not even facts and expectation led.  It was an outpouring of undigested and partially understood distaste for the ruling classes, the massive social changes and the perceived effects of ever increasing mass immigration.

We of the engaged chattering classes may have agonized and changed position, teamed and ladled with conflicting fears and positions, but the majority just had a fairly untrammelled view and reaction to the offer of a referendum. They saw it as a Woden-sent opportunity to thump the ruling classes and to stop the flood of foreigners. To stop the flow of money out from our country and the making of laws abroad and the handing down of legal decisions by aliens abroad. Even a bit of 'If those Metropolitans down there love it' then let us take the opportunity to smash it.

It didn't matter what the two campaigns said, or what the facts purported to show, or who led either major party, nor indeed what side those parties were on (in fact both solidly for Remain). It was an upswelling of genuine populism not led by anyone other than Farage and very latterly a few well known Conservatives. This was a peoples' revolt against many things encapsulated in a form of xenophobia caused by severe neglect and a failure to listen for decades. It was an 'Up Yours' squared and delightfully and wonderfully successful as such.

Quoted to like again, and part of the issue was the way in which "Brussels red tape", "political correctness" "the nanny state" and "heath and safety gone mad" had, over decades, coalesced into a single but amorphous body of irritations with the modern world, and the Referendum became an opportunity to stick two fingers up to it.

Conversely, this is why a whole load of other people are throughly pissed off with it and will take it out on the Conservatives whenever they can; because for these people, Brexit represents mindless reaction. Again, facts and policies are not primary, and I think there is a similar refusal to take the other side's views seriously.

I think we see this through a very similar glass?  The analysis on both sides in the media appears to me to be deeply flawed for a want of attempting to see the whole thing from the point of view of an ordinary person without any general let alone specialist knowledge.  The Leave vote was a visceral outpouring of hurts accumulated over decades and all subsumed into the hate figure of the EU and to a lesser extent those seen to be too clever by half Metropolitan set who have benefited from it.

Again, the Leavers have not engaged at all with why the Remainers are 'Remain'.  They see them as a class apart who embrace selling out the country to enrich themselves and make their lives easier at the expense of the masses. The Remainers often seeing Leavers as a pig ignorant, ill-educated sub class too stupid to see the benefits that have trickled down to them and the many benefits accruing within a more liberal and homogenized internationalist free trade area.

Yes, the Conservatives may be branded as the Brexit Party and the cause and initiator of Brexit. To the extent that they have a lot of members and MPs who are bitterly Euro-sceptic, that is not unfair.  It is true that Cameron was the facilitator of the Referendum and not unfair to consider him doing it for internal party political reasons to stall further vote losses to UKIP, and thus to further condemn the Conservatives with the Brexit result.

Thus I feel the sole way forward for the Conservative Party is to warmly endorse Brexit, make the best of it or quit and leave the party. If they are seen as the sole Pro-Brexit party and start to tub thump about it and to use economic facts about EU waste and to calculate our outpouring of money very accurately so it cannot be combated and then set it out on a per day and per person basis it would be telling. Make a positive virtue of being the Peoples' Champion in delivering Brexit against the wishes of the Bosses, International Capitalists, Metropolitan moaners, the EU duplicitous smart set, foreign interferers and people wanting us to take more refugees as 'our share', then I think we will maximize a vote in the mid 40s with Remainers split between all other parties. 

In those circumstances, there will be a very divisive and unpleasant election and Mike is right to suggest it will all be down to differential turnout by party and by area. Labour had a near uniquely good set of coalescing trends last time and are very unlikely to pull that off again. So I see either a small outright win for us up to a very heavy win.  But only if the Conservatives have a Boris or Jacob thumping that tub and jollying out a very big turn-out. I am quietly confident.

[Merseymike]

Jan 25, 2018 12:10:32 GMT @davidr said:

I think if Burnham wins in this parallel universe, the Labour Party will be more pro a proper Brexit. Coming from a northern constituency Burnham will have realised the sword of Damocles currently hanging over Northern Labour seats, unlike the current condescending, smug and complacent Islington and Westminster set.

You think Corbyn is an uncritical Europhile?
The policy is as it is now because of those northern seats.

[Merseymike]

Jan 25, 2018 14:49:53 GMT carlton43 said:

Jan 25, 2018 14:03:05 GMT Adam in Stroud said:

Quoted to like again, and part of the issue was the way in which "Brussels red tape", "political correctness" "the nanny state" and "heath and safety gone mad" had, over decades, coalesced into a single but amorphous body of irritations with the modern world, and the Referendum became an opportunity to stick two fingers up to it.

Conversely, this is why a whole load of other people are throughly pissed off with it and will take it out on the Conservatives whenever they can; because for these people, Brexit represents mindless reaction. Again, facts and policies are not primary, and I think there is a similar refusal to take the other side's views seriously.

I think we see this through a very similar glass?  The analysis on both sides in the media appears to me to be deeply flawed for a want of attempting to see the whole thing from the point of view of an ordinary person without any general let alone specialist knowledge.  The Leave vote was a visceral outpouring of hurts accumulated over decades and all subsumed into the hate figure of the EU and to a lesser extent those seen to be too clever by half Metropolitan set who have benefited from it.

Again, the Leavers have not engaged at all with why the Remainers are 'Remain'.  They see them as a class apart who embrace selling out the country to enrich themselves and make their lives easier at the expense of the masses. The Remainers often seeing Leavers as a pig ignorant, ill-educated sub class too stupid to see the benefits that have trickled down to them and the many benefits accruing within a more liberal and homogenized internationalist free trade area.

Yes, the Conservatives may be branded as the Brexit Party and the cause and initiator of Brexit. To the extent that they have a lot of members and MPs who are bitterly Euro-sceptic, that is not unfair.  It is true that Cameron was the facilitator of the Referendum and not unfair to consider him doing it for internal party political reasons to stall further vote losses to UKIP, and thus to further condemn the Conservatives with the Brexit result.

Thus I feel the sole way forward for the Conservative Party is to warmly endorse Brexit, make the best of it or quit and leave the party. If they are seen as the sole Pro-Brexit party and start to tub thump about it and to use economic facts about EU waste and to calculate our outpouring of money very accurately so it cannot be combated and then set it out on a per day and per person basis it would be telling. Make a positive virtue of being the Peoples' Champion in delivering Brexit against the wishes of the Bosses, International Capitalists, Metropolitan moaners, the EU duplicitous smart set, foreign interferers and people wanting us to take more refugees as 'our share', then I think we will maximize a vote in the mid 40s with Remainers split between all other parties. 

In those circumstances, there will be a very divisive and unpleasant election and Mike is right to suggest it will all be down to differential turnout by party and by area. Labour had a near uniquely good set of coalescing trends last time and are very unlikely to pull that off again. So I see either a small outright win for us up to a very heavy win.  But only if the Conservatives have a Boris or Jacob thumping that tub and jollying out a very big turn-out. I am quietly confident.

However that would see a revival of the LibDems because big business wouldn't back this stance and neither would a reasonable minority of Tory voters - and current Mps for that matter.

[Merseymike]

Jan 25, 2018 14:49:53 GMT carlton43 said:

Jan 25, 2018 14:03:05 GMT Adam in Stroud said:

Quoted to like again, and part of the issue was the way in which "Brussels red tape", "political correctness" "the nanny state" and "heath and safety gone mad" had, over decades, coalesced into a single but amorphous body of irritations with the modern world, and the Referendum became an opportunity to stick two fingers up to it.

Conversely, this is why a whole load of other people are throughly pissed off with it and will take it out on the Conservatives whenever they can; because for these people, Brexit represents mindless reaction. Again, facts and policies are not primary, and I think there is a similar refusal to take the other side's views seriously.

I think we see this through a very similar glass?  The analysis on both sides in the media appears to me to be deeply flawed for a want of attempting to see the whole thing from the point of view of an ordinary person without any general let alone specialist knowledge.  The Leave vote was a visceral outpouring of hurts accumulated over decades and all subsumed into the hate figure of the EU and to a lesser extent those seen to be too clever by half Metropolitan set who have benefited from it.

Again, the Leavers have not engaged at all with why the Remainers are 'Remain'.  They see them as a class apart who embrace selling out the country to enrich themselves and make their lives easier at the expense of the masses. The Remainers often seeing Leavers as a pig ignorant, ill-educated sub class too stupid to see the benefits that have trickled down to them and the many benefits accruing within a more liberal and homogenized internationalist free trade area.

Yes, the Conservatives may be branded as the Brexit Party and the cause and initiator of Brexit. To the extent that they have a lot of members and MPs who are bitterly Euro-sceptic, that is not unfair.  It is true that Cameron was the facilitator of the Referendum and not unfair to consider him doing it for internal party political reasons to stall further vote losses to UKIP, and thus to further condemn the Conservatives with the Brexit result.

Thus I feel the sole way forward for the Conservative Party is to warmly endorse Brexit, make the best of it or quit and leave the party. If they are seen as the sole Pro-Brexit party and start to tub thump about it and to use economic facts about EU waste and to calculate our outpouring of money very accurately so it cannot be combated and then set it out on a per day and per person basis it would be telling. Make a positive virtue of being the Peoples' Champion in delivering Brexit against the wishes of the Bosses, International Capitalists, Metropolitan moaners, the EU duplicitous smart set, foreign interferers and people wanting us to take more refugees as 'our share', then I think we will maximize a vote in the mid 40s with Remainers split between all other parties. 

In those circumstances, there will be a very divisive and unpleasant election and Mike is right to suggest it will all be down to differential turnout by party and by area. Labour had a near uniquely good set of coalescing trends last time and are very unlikely to pull that off again. So I see either a small outright win for us up to a very heavy win.  But only if the Conservatives have a Boris or Jacob thumping that tub and jollying out a very big turn-out. I am quietly confident.

However that would see a revival of the LibDems because big business wouldn't back this stance and neither would a reasonable minority of Tory voters - and current Mps for that matter. Also the free market preferences of Rees-Mogg simply wouldn't cut it in Stoke South.

[carlton43]

Mike

The voters of South Stoke will not view it as you do. They will have little or no idea of the differences in stance by May, Boris and Jacob. If they could turn out for May in that Woden-awful campaign they would love a Jacob fronted campaign echoing many of their own deep thoughts.

[Merseymike]

Jan 25, 2018 12:28:18 GMT @davidr said:

Jan 25, 2018 12:22:58 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

If anyone other than Corbyn won the leadership, the result of the referendum may well have been different.

I disagree with that commonly held belief. I always believed that Eurosceptism was/is deep rooted enough and broad enough to make the referendum Leave’s to lose. I won a nice wee bet on that assumption.

Actually I agree. Many usual non voters turned out who by definition weren't interested in what any politician had to say.
Also the Remain campaign was utterly hopeless. Its hardly surprising that you can't complain about an organisation for years, expect to get more concessions than anyone else, still carry on complaining and expect to be taken seriously when you mount a thin and weak campaign based entirely on perceived economic benefit - or more, the fear of not receiving that benefit. When so many people didn't see that benefit in their own lives it sounded rather hollow.