I should have said could rather than would. But he certainly could. It would be an incredibly weak government though. The general point is that he is not that far off being Prime Minister as it stands so a small shift is all that is required.
I should have said could rather than would. But he certainly could. It would be an incredibly weak government though. The general point is that he is not that far off being Prime Minister as it stands so a small shift is all that is required.
Seems you also should have said statement of opinion, rather than fact.
Maybe, but it stands to reason that if the government fails somebody else would have a go or there would be an election and that somebody else would be Corbyn. His government would be too weak to survive but the point is how close it is. Do you dispute it is close?
what would have happened is may would've been unable to pass the queen's speech. Which would then have triggered another general election. Then who knows? But it would have required labour to have more seats than anyone else, or may would have seeked to form a government again. So yes, he does need to win an election.
Corbyn would have been given a chance to form a government and if unable or willing, then a general election.
Maybe, but it stands to reason that if the government fails somebody else would have a go or there would be an election and that somebody else would be Corbyn. His government would be too weak to survive but the point is how close it is. Do you dispute it is close?
I don't dispute it's close, I do dispute Corbyn will ever be PM though.
Wouldn’t Corbyn also have needed the DUP as well as every other MP outside of the Tories to form a government, otherwise he’d have less support that the Tories alone?
Long drive this evening so was listening to LBC and Nigel Farage show in particular. His show was focussing on David Davis’s letter to all Tory MP’s saying that if the government don’t change course on Brexit it could have dire electoral consequences for the party. Usual rabid callers in the main but the overall picture that developed was that a lot of Tory voters would not vote for the Tories again if the brexit they think was promised was not delivered even if that meant Corbyn and a labour government returned. This really is becoming a crisis for the Tories and at present it’s really hard to see a route out for them that doesn’t piss off at least half the party.
Wouldn’t Corbyn also have needed the DUP as well as every other MP outside of the Tories to form a government, otherwise he’d have less support that the Tories alone?
Yes but at the time he wouldn't have wanted to even if he could, he would have preferred another election.
Long drive this evening so was listening to LBC and Nigel Farage show in particular. His show was focussing on David Davis’s letter to all Tory MP’s saying that if the government don’t change course on Brexit it could have dire electoral consequences for the party. Usual rabid callers in the main but the overall picture that developed was that a lot of Tory voters would not vote for the Tories again if the brexit they think was promised was not delivered even if that meant Corbyn and a labour government returned. This really is becoming a crisis for the Tories and at present it’s really hard to see a route out for them that doesn’t piss off at least half the party.
It is the same crisis that led to the referendum in the first place now being played on the national stage. To save the party they have burned the country down and it is still in as much trouble.
Wouldn’t Corbyn also have needed the DUP as well as every other MP outside of the Tories to form a government, otherwise he’d have less support that the Tories alone?
I did say if it wasn't for the DUP. And if the government lost a vote of confidence which actually Corbyn could have helped if he sided with rebel Tories and stopped putting out his own EU amendments but that is another story,But in that scenario he would be able to try and form a government - which would be beyond weak admittedly. But the point is that he isn't far off as it stands. If current polls projected to an election, he would easily be Prime Minister, even if Labour may be doing much better without him.
Wouldn’t Corbyn also have needed the DUP as well as every other MP outside of the Tories to form a government, otherwise he’d have less support that the Tories alone?
I did say if it wasn't for the DUP. And if the government lost a vote of confidence which actually Corbyn could have helped if he sided with rebel Tories and stopped putting out his own EU amendments but that is another story,But in that scenario he would be able to try and form a government - which would be beyond weak admittedly. But the point is that he isn't far off as it stands. If current polls projected to an election, he would easily be Prime Minister, even if Labour may be doing much better without him.
Not just the DUP, to overtake the Tories he would have needed support from pretty much every MP from SNP, Lib Dems, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru, the one independent and one green as well as the DUP to make up the 64 seats he was short.
We've gone from if it wasn't for the DUP he'd be PM, fact, to he could have tried to form a government, more than a little different and a lot of if's and but's.
Wouldn’t Corbyn also have needed the DUP as well as every other MP outside of the Tories to form a government, otherwise he’d have less support that the Tories alone?
I did say if it wasn't for the DUP. And if the government lost a vote of confidence which actually Corbyn could have helped if he sided with rebel Tories and stopped putting out his own EU amendments but that is another story,But in that scenario he would be able to try and form a government - which would be beyond weak admittedly. But the point is that he isn't far off as it stands. If current polls projected to an election, he would easily be Prime Minister, even if Labour may be doing much better without him.
Not just the DUP, to overtake the Tories he would have needed support from pretty much every MP from SNP, Lib Dems, Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru, the one independent and one green as well as the DUP to make up the 64 seats he was short.
We've gone from if it wasn't for the DUP he'd be PM, fact, to he could have tried to form a government, more than a little different and a lot of if's and but's.
It's fact that if the DUP weren't backing Theresa May, and a multitude of other things happened and all the stars aligned on a specific Sunday when it is a full moon, that in my opinion, Corbyn would be close to being prime minister.
You couldn't make some of the bollocks on this thread up.
If people have no desire to understand the point being made and focus on the wrong detail of the message the learning point for me the poster is that it is a waste of time. Is it on purpose? Yes, If all things aligned he could be Prime Minister. It would be an unworkable position, and he would be an incredibly weak prime minister, I accept that, but the point is he is already not far off and the swing required is small. Labour doesn't need to get more seats than the Tories at the next election, just a small number more than they have now. That is the element of the point I mistakenly thought people might get, especially when I sought to clarify if my example may not have been articulated perfectly! It wasn't even meant to be party political, just a comment on the situation!
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You make some good points but there is no way Corbyn's background can be considered as 'rags', even comparatively.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You make some good points but there is no way Corbyn's background can be considered as 'rags', even comparatively.
I used the words 'closer to' and compared him to Tory leaders.
Private and grammar schools for his entire education, yet only managed two E grades at A-level. He also managed to bomb out of a polytechnic after just a year.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
I have not deliberately ignored momentum, but in terms of timeline and events we have a chicken and egg situation with Corbyn. I think it is true to say that the exponential growth of momentum-like activists came about after Corbyn became a candidate then leader. Ed Miliband lost and resigned, Corbyn only just got enough nominations to stand with hours to go, and he had to see off three others. Hardly a calculated momentum plan, but once Corbyn emerged he subsequently gave the left of the party something to rally round. Where is the myth there?
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Thanks, I was aware - i guess poorly written on my part, but i'm pretty sure they have influence on keeping him in the 'riches' part of the story...
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
I have not deliberately ignored momentum, but in terms of timeline and events we have a chicken and egg situation with Corbyn. I think it is true to say that the exponential growth of momentum-like activists came about after Corbyn became a candidate then leader. Ed Miliband lost and resigned, Corbyn only just got enough nominations to stand with hours to go, and he had to see off three others. Hardly a calculated momentum plan, but once Corbyn emerged he subsequently gave the left of the party something to rally round. Where is the myth there?
Like your other replies, selective.
The myth in my post refers to the lack of rags in this rags to riches tale.
Momentum is a big part of the Corbyn story, like it or not, and an ongoing one.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
Considering the vile anti semitic abuse lashed out on twitter by corbyn cultists, I'd hardly call him "wholesome" after his cack handedness in dealing with it.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Thanks, I was aware - i guess poorly written on my part, but i'm pretty sure they have influence on keeping him in the 'riches' part of the story...
You are right they do have influence, but his only challenger has been Owen Jones since they were formed. They hardly had to keep him there.
As to that influence, what did Kinnock and Blair do to the party when they took control? Why is it there is such a lack of talent in the party to challenge him? Why is it filled with so many plastic former special advisors? Momentum will be there long after he has gone, it is a movement within the party as the trade unions were.
I think everyone is taking it a bit too literally. Seth clearly says in political/power terms rather than economic/educational background.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Thanks, I was aware - i guess poorly written on my part, but i'm pretty sure they have influence on keeping him in the 'riches' part of the story...
You are right they do have influence, but his only challenger has been Owen Jones since they were formed. They hardly had to keep him there.
As to that influence, what did Kinnock and Blair do to the party when they took control? Why is it there is such a lack of talent in the party to challenge him? Why is it filled with so many plastic former special advisors? Momentum will be there long after he has gone, it is a movement within the party as the trade unions were.
I think everyone is taking it a bit too literally. Seth clearly says in political/power terms rather than economic/educational background.
Not sure Owen Jones would ever challenge Corbyn!
I'm not convinced Momentum will be there long after he's gone, i'm not sure how many cuddly faces are left there to front them. Without that front, i don't think there is much popular appeal.
There is talent there, but they seem unwilling to move past sniping from the sidelines because it is centrist talent.
My question is, despite their widespread support, how can they not motivate the young people they aim their policies at to actually vote?
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Thanks, I was aware - i guess poorly written on my part, but i'm pretty sure they have influence on keeping him in the 'riches' part of the story...
You are right they do have influence, but his only challenger has been Owen Jones since they were formed. They hardly had to keep him there.
As to that influence, what did Kinnock and Blair do to the party when they took control? Why is it there is such a lack of talent in the party to challenge him? Why is it filled with so many plastic former special advisors? Momentum will be there long after he has gone, it is a movement within the party as the trade unions were.
I think everyone is taking it a bit too literally. Seth clearly says in political/power terms rather than economic/educational background.
Not sure Owen Jones would ever challenge Corbyn!
I'm not convinced Momentum will be there long after he's gone, i'm not sure how many cuddly faces are left there to front them. Without that front, i don't think there is much popular appeal.
There is talent there, but they seem unwilling to move past sniping from the sidelines because it is centrist talent.
My question is, despite their widespread support, how can they not motivate the young people they aim their policies at to actually vote?
they do, however momentum and corbyn cultists seem completely unaware that to win an election they would have to win seats from the tories. All well and good if you can increase your vote share in hackney if you can't win rural seats.
Corbyn has reached his current position by participating in the Democratic systems in the Labour Party. All out there in plain sight. He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success. Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template. What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power. May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP. If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise. His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
You seem to be forgetting the influence of momentum in his 'rags to riches' story.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Momentum was formed after his rise to power, hence the name.
Thanks, I was aware - i guess poorly written on my part, but i'm pretty sure they have influence on keeping him in the 'riches' part of the story...
You are right they do have influence, but his only challenger has been Owen Jones since they were formed. They hardly had to keep him there.
As to that influence, what did Kinnock and Blair do to the party when they took control? Why is it there is such a lack of talent in the party to challenge him? Why is it filled with so many plastic former special advisors? Momentum will be there long after he has gone, it is a movement within the party as the trade unions were.
I think everyone is taking it a bit too literally. Seth clearly says in political/power terms rather than economic/educational background.
Not sure Owen Jones would ever challenge Corbyn!
I'm not convinced Momentum will be there long after he's gone, i'm not sure how many cuddly faces are left there to front them. Without that front, i don't think there is much popular appeal.
There is talent there, but they seem unwilling to move past sniping from the sidelines because it is centrist talent.
My question is, despite their widespread support, how can they not motivate the young people they aim their policies at to actually vote?
they do, however momentum and corbyn cultists seem completely unaware that to win an election they would have to win seats from the tories. All well and good if you can increase your vote share in hackney if you can't win rural seats.
I think people foam at the mouth when they look at momentum because they are conditioned to do so, but I don't think it is sinister like the press seek to make out. It is trying to get a leftist Labour party elected, which whilst people may not agree with, it surely isn't unreasonable from its own perspective. Look at the attacks Corbyn has had to face from Blairites within his own party, is not that a different side of the same coin?
Corbyns power base in momentum is a direct result of the surge in party membership whereby the flotsam and jetsam of leftish politics has found a home when previously they were divided between various fringe groups. The problem for centre left labour voters like me is that the party has effectively been hijacked. Democratically hijacked but hijacked nonetheless. There will never now be harmony within the Labour Party because of the competing factions from extreme left nutjobs to moderates. The tories look like they could really implode and even irrevocably split. Circumstances are looking ripe for a new party that sits in the centre that could be a home for politicians and voters s of different flavours.
Comments
We've gone from if it wasn't for the DUP he'd be PM, fact, to he could have tried to form a government, more than a little different and a lot of if's and but's.
You couldn't make some of the bollocks on this thread up.
He overcame his challengers, his party has the largest membership in Europe, and he has campaigned in a way that has been true to the politician he is and enjoyed a degree of success.
Corbyn is seen by many as useless, even dangerous, but so far he seems to have been far less duplicitous than most politicians. In the brexit debate there is talk of what is democracy or not, it might be worth comparing and contrasting the elevation of May and Corbyn against a democratic template.
What remains is whether or not Corbyn can participate well enough in further democratic action to achieve power.
May called an election and has achieved power by bribing the DUP.
If the debate is somehow about the wholesomeness of the party leaders in their positions as it stands, Corbyn beats May hands down, that may change if Corbyn actually achieves power, but the regime of Theresa May certainly does not feel like the bar is set very high and Corbyn may continue to surprise.
His is closer to a rags to riches political story than most of the Tory leadership born into wealth, power and influence, and the comfort blanket of being part of the establishment.
His story might be closer than some of the Tory party, but it's still pretty far away from a rags to riches story.
Works for him and his supporters to perpetuate the myth though...
Private and grammar schools for his entire education, yet only managed two E grades at A-level. He also managed to bomb out of a polytechnic after just a year.
Idiocy to political riches, certainly.
Rags to riches, you're having a laugh.
I think it is true to say that the exponential growth of momentum-like activists came about after Corbyn became a candidate then leader.
Ed Miliband lost and resigned, Corbyn only just got enough nominations to stand with hours to go, and he had to see off three others. Hardly a calculated momentum plan, but once Corbyn emerged he subsequently gave the left of the party something to rally round.
Where is the myth there?
The myth in my post refers to the lack of rags in this rags to riches tale.
Momentum is a big part of the Corbyn story, like it or not, and an ongoing one.
As to that influence, what did Kinnock and Blair do to the party when they took control? Why is it there is such a lack of talent in the party to challenge him? Why is it filled with so many plastic former special advisors?
Momentum will be there long after he has gone, it is a movement within the party as the trade unions were.
I think everyone is taking it a bit too literally. Seth clearly says in political/power terms rather than economic/educational background.
I'm not convinced Momentum will be there long after he's gone, i'm not sure how many cuddly faces are left there to front them. Without that front, i don't think there is much popular appeal.
There is talent there, but they seem unwilling to move past sniping from the sidelines because it is centrist talent.
My question is, despite their widespread support, how can they not motivate the young people they aim their policies at to actually vote?