Why doesn't Corbyn understand that he lost?

[Sittinonthefloor]

I'm totally bemused! He thinks it's an absolutely 'incredible' result and that May should resign. Has no one told him that more people voted for her and the tories have more MPs? The tories ran an appalling campaign, trying to sell hugely unpopular policies, May comes across dreadfully (all twitchy and brittle) yet still more people voted for her - even with all the bribes he was offering. A decent candidate could have won it for labour, (Yvette cooper?) I know there's been a big swing, but still! Not winning against a poor opponent who's run a dreadful campaign is hardly a cause for celebration.

*as he cant

Not at the time Brexit negotiations are beginning and we've had two major terrorist incidents on domestic territory within the last few weeks. People want government, leadership, stability, safety.

There is literally nothing Corbyn could do at this point to provide those things, given the position we find ourselves in thanks to the stupidity of two successive Tory PMs. He is thus doing what he has a mandate to do, and oppose, in the only way he's really able to at the moment until we see whether the backbench will unite around May or not.

And really, the national security stuff was tried during the campaign and failed. TM as HS and then PM presided over cuts to the intelligence service and in particular the police, and intelligence leads about the Manchester bomber in particular weren't followed. It is now a mainstream political view, held by at the very least a significant minority of the population, that her cuts made a situation like this more likely. The argument that TM should be backed because of terror incidents has failed. It's been rejected. It's at best spurious and at worst rather ethically dubious to make it now.

Nor will him and the other leaders calling for May to go from the sidelines have the slightest impact on Brexit negotiations. Even in her best case scenario, she's already coming to them as a lame duck.

One thing I will say about the Tories is that once they fully decide to get rid of a leader they do it quickly.

We won't see months of it dragging on as we have with Labour in the past.

They may decide to let her hang on for a bit but once the 1922 committee decide it's time for to go she goes.

They are ruthless over things like that.

I agree but it is also giving people false hope that don't get that he can't currently be PM without another GE.

Hmm, I'd have said it was probably more the daft interviews from McConnell etc saying they'd form a minority government and take it on a vote by vote basis that are doing that. I mean, that's obviously not got the slightest chance of happening.

Maybe they could have an actual vote and ask the Conservative party members who they want?

They tend to try and avoid doing that where possible orlantina, because the membership have an unfortunate habit of choosing unelectable loony wingers when they get the chance! The MPs are usually more pragmatic. After what they did in 97 and 01, the MPs chose between themselves in 03. The membership did manage to pick Cameron over David Davis in 05, but they'd been battered into submission by the prospect of 13 years in opposition at that point.

Good point about the contradiction of the managed migration and single market membership!

I hadn't appreciated that...brexit is going to derail whoever has to implement it, I do think it's a toxic issue with little glory...the politicians should be wanting cross party implementation to share the blame at the very least!

Hmm, I'd have said it was probably more the daft interviews from McConnell etc saying they'd form a minority government and take it on a vote by vote basis that are doing that. I mean, that's obviously not got the slightest chance of happening.

Tbf that is true. It's ridiculous talk.

Sorry that was badly worded about Corbyn and Mcdonnell being in the driving seat. It's more that May is still in the driving seat but she's trying to steer with two (self inflicted) broken arms and the DUP is in the back seat, pointing a gun at her head which may or may not be loaded.

Or something.

I think the point is that for the moment, Corbyn and McDonnell have an aura about them. Journalists have been blindsided - they realise they've got things badly wrong (as incidentally, did I!) so all of a sudden, they're treating them with respect. It won't last and there's no-one better at surviving than the Tory party, which is why I think they will ditch May as soon as it's expedient to do so and why I believe Corbyn has a lot to do.

MissShittyBennet There is nothing ethically dubious about stating we need a stable government at a time where our national security is threatened. Were May's government to fall Corbyn can't offer an alternative. Another election so soon and inevitably another hung parliament while Brexit is still in the mix, far too precarious.

The fact that Corbyn is crowing about a non existent win and talking about plans to bring down the government that a majority did vote for in a time of crisis is making him look less and less like Prime Minister material.

Piglet. The problem with are the talk from Corbyn/ Thornberry that they won the election is it makes some of the more 'idiot' elements that voted for them believe the state is denying them Government !

The consequence could be 'Riots' because they actually believe they have been cheated out of Government.

Thornberry Et.al need to stop now unless it is their aim to create massive public disorder on the streets !

"One thing I will say about the Tories is that once they fully decide to get rid of a leader they do it quickly."

I'm not sure that's such a positive thing.

Perhaps if they'd taken a bit more time to choose their new leader instead of being satisfied with the poor choice last time, they wouldn't be in this mess now.

I can understand tory supporters supporting their party. That's what you do.

I can understand closing ranks and publicly backing Theresa May. Again, that's what they do and they do it well.

I cannot understand how privately, anyone can honestly believe she's not dead in the water.

(Mind you I didn't think Corbyn had a scooby so what do I know!)

*May is still in the driving seat but she's trying to steer with two (self inflicted) broken arms and the DUP is in the back seat, pointing a gun at her head which may or may not be loaded.

Or something.*

That made me lol - it's a very good analogy

I think the Tories will do what they do best & get on with the job in hand at the mo, be realists and then cleanly dispatch of TM at an opportune moment when they have a suitable replacement lined up, and there will be minimum fuss.

Summer recess this year or next perhaps?

Brexit is going to derail whoever has to implement it.

It can't derail. Article 50 has been triggered, we're already on our way out. The power to reverse that lies with Brussels and they won't unless we agree full membership. Not an option after the Leave vote.

Unfortunately a lot of Labour voters were misled in to thinking Soft Brexit was an option.

Surely it could be an option if it's clear that we'd be up shit creek without any trade deals, i.e. the alternative was clearly way worse. Also there could be another referendum on whether to accept the deal or not. Also the Leave vote wasn't legally binding.

It seems to me that Soft Brexit is very much an option and that there isn't a clear mandate for Theresa May's hard Brexit "no deal is better than a bad deal" Brexit.

The right wing press did absolutely everything to run him into the ground and he still had a fantastic election taking seats off the tories and the snp left right and centre. Fantastic campaign, won over the right wing of the labour party, came within a few thousand votes of winning outright. Literally a month after shitty local election results. Bloody amazing. No they didn't win, but compared to TM, he did.

And yet the person who wrote Article 50 thinks it's a process and is reversible. I am not saying this will happen, but the idea that it couldn't possibly is simply an assertion.

MissShittyBennet There is nothing ethically dubious about stating we need a stable government at a time where our national security is threatened.

Nah, it's spectacularly ethically dubious to use national security as a reason why Corbyn shouldn't do what Leaders of the Opposition do (and what the leaders of the next two biggest parties have done as well). It's particularly iniquitous when the policies of the woman he wants to oust may well have been a contributing factor to the success of the attacks!

I state again: there is no stability because of Tory stupidity, and Corbyn calling for May's resignation will have no impact. Just as him ceasing wouldn't put her in a stronger negotiating position with the EU. Trying to use these things as a stick to beat him with shows you are not making your point in good faith. It's pretty awful really.

Corbyn is doing what opposition leaders do. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not, and he will keep on doing it because he has a mandate to do so, and also because at the present time it's the only opposition activity he can do.

Summer recess this year or next perhaps?
I'd say sooner than next year. She's badly wounded and I can't see them letting her limp on for long.
But whenever it happens, it'll be beautifully managed and there will be photos of her with a big smile on her face as she hands over the mantle. That's what they do. They remind me a bit of Liverpool (FC) in the 70s - you may not like them but hell, what a team.

I don't understand how McDonnell's statement this morning about the single market is compatible with them working with any party other than the tories. The two leaderships are adamant we are leaving the single market but the HofC overall is probably in favour of SM...and the Labour leadership now has more in common with May on this massive issue than May does with the Scottish tories?

The Leave vote was democratically binding as ultimately recognised by Remainers within Parliament and triggering Article 50 is legally binding in the sense treaties now have to be renegotiated. Soft Brexit as defined by Labour isn't on the table in Brussels.

Reality is going to set in for those hoping for Soft Brexit/a stall on the process in the coming weeks.

Depends what you mean by Soft Brexit. We're very obviously not going to get the preferred option of Labour and apparently most Leavers ie staying in the single market with no FOM. That ain't happening. If you mean Soft Brexit as in an EEA type option, that remains procedurally possible- it may or may not be politically possible.

But once again, anyone saying that Article 50 cannot be reversed is simply guessing. As is anyone who says it can, actually. We don't know.

Didn't Corbyn say he would take any offer that was presented from the EU.

So announcing that if he was in charge.. I think Brussels would be wondering what pass take they could get away with.

I think they should be called out on it - we could have another GE soon. I know many people who voted LAbour thinking they were voting for a soft(er) Brexit. What John McD has said this morning has made it clear that isn't on the table. I suspect the membership disagree with the leadership on this.