To ask why JC won't resign for the good of the party

[AndNowItsSeven]

Could anyone explain why JC won't resign given that Labour has a strong chance of winning a possible Autumn general election, if but only if Labour has a strong leader.

far lady split

That is meant to read far left split

I don't disagree with you.

I want a Labour Party that stands up and says that benefit sanctions are a national disgrace and we should be ashamed that we've demonised the poor and forced people to rely on food banks to feed themselves and their families. I'll take a Labour Party that can at least get into a position to stop some of the suffering. Righteous speeches from the opposition benches won't put back the safety net.

WhereYouLeftIt, when you actually have conservative members come up to you telling you they have paid to join the Labour party just to vote him in knowing he wouldnt win then yes!!!!! I stand by what I say!

I love the argument that i democratically elected leader isnt electable!

"What about the many people who don't think labour is left enough! Like me! there's as many of us and JC is winning us back."

^ this

Did you read the link? That wasn't from a newspaper. It lays out what Labour have to achieve to win an election in terms of % swing needed and target seats.

But if the party in.power don't stop austerity all the terrible happening will.continue. and what whereyouleftit said

Sonic.said earlier. I'm on my.phone and it won't let me open.up the download. Also why mu.posts have full stops and lots.of mistakes

Why is everyone so obsessed with having leaders who are 'anti-establishment'? That is just code for inexperienced and incompetent.

It is all very well being principled but there are hard decisions to make in government and sometimes you have to sacrifice or flex your principles for the good of the country. Corbyn is not able to do that as his utter failure to support the remain campaign showed, so he would be a shit pm.

Sorry. Will try this.

The Labour party lost massively under Ed Milliband because epople didn't trust him on the economy and felt that unless you were in a zero-hours contract or affected by the bedroom tax, he had nothing to offer. They voted FOR more austerity instead. By what magic trick exactly are those voters going to turn around and vote for JC, who makes Milliband look like Margaret Thatcher on the economy?

Or are we talking about the mythical people who don't vote? You know, those ones who... er... don't vote?

Inexperienced? He's been an MP before I was born! And as someone else said 2/3 of his electorate voted remain, wrong on both accounts am afraid

It's from the Fabian Society.

It's true that 'austerity' measures have polled well. I find it hard to understand but I find the Thursday vote impossible to understand.

No jilly people voted because they wrongly thought austerity wouldn't affect them. They know better now.

He has no experience of leadership and completely failed to campaign so I am clearly not wrong on either count. But great logic there , I can see you really know what you're doing

Sonic I can't believe how high the thresholds are! Another reason to dislike Cameron!

Thunderbum look at the statistics please.

Sonic - yy, me too

Tired, the fact is, voters bought the ConDem line about not fixing the roof when the sun was shining, there being no money left etc. People still believe that. If Corbyn comes along with a high-tax, high-spend manifesto (unlikely, given that after almost a year as leader he's failed to come up with a single actual policy about anything), voters will reject it in droves.

Labour can only make people's lives better and lessen the devastating effects of austerity if it is in government. And it will only get into government if it wins back the voters who didn't trust Gordon Brown and Ed Milliband and voted Tory/LibDem/UKIP instead.

Same Thursdays vote really surprised me. It's worrying for me personally and professionally

Why look at the statistics? Corbyn can't win and he can't lead. Jesus, over a third of his cabinet would rather resign than work with him - even they don't think he has a hope in hell. He is not able to be smart or pragmatic and quite frankly he is a disappointing failure who will keep the Tories in government for the foreseeable future. Shame on him for not resigning.

I'm not opposed to replacing Corbyn, but it has to be with someone who is capable of turning the hatred of immigrants & the EU back towards the government who actually deserve it.

If there is anyone capable of that in the PLP, I haven't heard from them yet and the proper way twouldo go about it would be to have them in the media, asking the hard questions, suggesting solutions and getting people onside.

This would show Labour members and the wider public that there is another option. Until then, any coup is simply self harm. Which in my experience, the Labour party is fantastic at

To be elected and ease benefit sanctions they need to appeal to voters who are happy with benefit sanctions and think maybe they don't go far enough. It's utterly depressing how well blaming the poor or foreign people goes down in this country.

I haven't voted labour for over 25 years but if there was an election I would 100% vote for JC this time. He's the only trustworthy person in Westminster, it seems. If the elect another fake Tony Blair type I won't be remotely interested.

"Why is everyone so obsessed with having leaders who are 'anti-establishment'? That is just code for inexperienced and incompetent. "

Like Gordon Brown and Tony Blair were when they were elected in 1997.

The reason for the obsession with anti-establishment, is because the British electorate has just delivered a momentously anti-establishment verdict on Thursday, irrespective of the fact that the vast majority of British people will be terribly damaged by it. They were prepared to ignore the self-harm aspects of a Brexit vote, just to tell the establishment how much they hate them.

askbasil no, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were not 'anti-establishment' and didn't pretend to be. But in any event, the term is completely meaningless. It is used to dupe people, who gullibly seem to fall for it. 'Elite' is another one, as in 'political elite'.