To actually be really cross with Labour for letting this happen?

[RunBackwards]

How did they manage to be so bad at the last two elections that places like Mansfied ended up Tory?

Dominic Cummings is probably pulled over in a lay-by somewhere, having a frantic wank into a hanky. This thread is everything he wants: proof positive that it doesn't matter how indescribably awful the Tories are - people are always prepared to make their being in power the failure of Labour to provide scent opposition. Bollocks. You make a positive choice when you go into that booth, not a negative one. You choose to vote Tory. Fine. But don't pretend anyone forced your hand.

decent

to think anyone in politics gives a second thought to what is debated on MN

Establishment media bias.

I'm amazed too. Worked in Mansfield for a while, virtually everyone seemed to be on some kind of benefit for some kind of long term condition.

I can’t believe what I’m reading here. Corbyn wasn’t perfect and Momentum were
Very much a factor in all of that. I’m a lifelong labour voter and member but I didn’t originally vote for JC- someone left of centre is much more who I’m going to vote for, not because I’m not much further left but because I’m realistic about who the wider public will vote for. However Boris Johnson and this shitshow of a government are awful, morally bankrupt human beings who lie, cheat, self serve, defend their rule breaking advisors, lie about their own rule breaking, can’t get track and trace up and running (but can fund their mates with the failed setting up of it) and who DON’T WANT TO FEED POOR KIDS And this is somehow Jeremy Corbyn’s fault? What the fuck?! That’s a lot of words for “I’m true blue but I’m ashamed of it”. Own your Conservatism if that’s what you are, but don’t blame Corbyn for your own moral stance.

As for the PP who said something along the lines of “this is all terrible but I keep thinking how much
worse it would be under Corbyn and McDonnell”..... I genuinely LOLed. How exactly could it be worse? 45k are dead, more than half of those since things were apparently “getting under control”. Things could be worse if the country was on fire or flooded I guess, but it’s hard to see how the government could have handled this worse.

@ItsAlwaysSunnyOnMN

If Labour had a leader that middle voters would have voted for a leader that more a leader that could lead their own party then they would have received more votes

It’s not that difficult to understand why Labour lost voters Corbyn was out of his depth which we witnessed over and over again especially in Parliament.

How can you have a party leader in an election that is dominated by Brexit that wants to remain neutral what fucking idiot came up with that idea and thought that will win voters over

Isn't that part of the problem though? That Labour had to appeal to remainers and leavers whereas Tories were mainly appealing to leavers to win over the ukippers? Simplistic I know, but in essence. Had Labour been explicitly remain it would have lost the predominantly leave voting north (which it did anyway) and had it explicitly supported leave it would have alienated the predominantly remain voting urban areas. Corbyn was between a rock and a hard place. And his neutrality is seen as a weakness. I agree with everything Deathgrip says. Those that voted Tory are responsible for the state of this country. Those that voted Tory because they wanted a 'change' are particularly thick.

Stop blaming Labour and Corbyn.
No one was forced to vote tory.
Take responsibility for your own shit.

That's like me blaming the chocolate cupboard for being fat.

And to answer previous few quotes, if people really think that Corbyn was not the reason for the Tories winning, then they are pretty deluded (and pretty thick). To suggest that all of a sudden people in huge numbers voted Tories because they believed the media (supposed) bias, is pretty dumb. They managed okay previously to make their own decisions, so something happened obviously to change that. Doesn’t take a genius to see who the common denominator was.

The 'people's vote' posse are more to blame than Corbyn.

When Brexit was kept out of the 2017 election Labour forced a hung parliament and were on the front foot. Then the 'people's vote' took over Labour and they got battered in 2019 after Corbyn had pledged to respect the result before that.

@ChaChaCha2012

Come to Mansfield and speak to locals before making judgment. They voted for Bradley because they wanted change (despite the Tories having been in power for seven years at that point), they didn't want to be left behind anymore (despite having been decimated by pit closures by the Tories), but more than anything they wanted Brexit.

People in Mansfield like Bradley because 'he tells it like it is'. They fail to see that it's people like them that he's laughing at. He's spent the past week (and many times before) openly deriding the demographic that makes up most of his constituency.

If there was an election tomorrow they'd vote him in again.

All true, but what happens in 2024 when the Tories have been in 14 years and we've been out the EU a few years, they're still left behind and they still want change? Who do they blame then? Who do they vote for then?

Rayner and Nandy are venomous, how Rayner got her position is very puzzling - the latter is against women's rights - deplorable! The whole party is a shit show.

' . . . people really think that Corbyn was not the reason for the Tories winning, then they are pretty deluded (and pretty thick) . . . Doesn’t take a genius to see who the common denominator was.'

Well, Corbyn wasn't in charge when Labour lost in 2015, but was when they managed a hung parliament two years later.

That's not what common denominator means at any rate, and you certainly can't use it when taking about a single election result.

But go ahead. Live, love, be happy - and talk about other people being thick, by all means.

The Tories slogan was Get Brexit Done. The Lib Dems said they would stop Brexit. Both of those were clear policies, easy to understand.

What should Labour have done then once the election was in place?

Campaign for Remain and they'd have got absolutely battered as a fact given most constituencies were majority Leave. There was no winning at all in doing that. That would have been suicide outside of the big cities that they won anyway.

Campaign for Brexit and alienate the majority of its members who are Remain and see an exodus of MP's across the floor (as it was a few left but a Brexit position would have seen a major revolt).

Corbyn tried to balance the two positions strategically but was unable to prevent the party being hammered because as you said how can you campaign against your own deal? He was an impossible position though.

The mistake Labour made was campaigning against Brexit in the years before the 2019 election and getting into bed with the 'people's vote' movement. That's where they lost the election so badly, as it enraged their own heartlands.. They should have accepted the result but campaigned and then voted for a softer Brexit. Had they done that May would still be PM and we'd be out the EU but with a less catastrophic deal or no deal.

@PoorMansPaulaRadcliffe

' . . . people really think that Corbyn was not the reason for the Tories winning, then they are pretty deluded (and pretty thick) . . . Doesn’t take a genius to see who the common denominator was.'

Well, Corbyn wasn't in charge when Labour lost in 2015, but was when they managed a hung parliament two years later.

That's not what common denominator means at any rate, and you certainly can't use it when taking about a single election result.

But go ahead. Live, love, be happy - and talk about other people being thick, by all means.

Corbyn's Labour got a hung parliament in 2017. Two years later of the party trying to frustrate and stop Brexit and they got hammered in 2019.

Corbyn was unfit to be PM (as is Boris) as he was never a leader, but the reason they lost so badly was the anti-Brexit campaign at the heart of the party (which Corbyn was against, as he wanted the referendum respected). A failure of leadership, perhaps, but he was an impossible position by the facts of Labour having a majority Remain membership and PLP and majority Leave voters going into an election.

Well, I largely agree - per my post - but am slightly confused as it appears as though you're arguing with me . . .

I agree with you largely @annabel85 but I would put all of the blame on a failure of leadership by Corbyn, who just didn't possess the kind of brutality that a Labour leader needs to keep the squabbling back-seat drivers quiet.

Although Boris is a rubbish PM, you could argue that he is a better leader of his party. Any Tory MP who didn't agree with his Brexit policy when he was planning his Brexit election got binned, whereas Corbyn tolerated open dissent. The results speak for themselves.

The other stuff is just window dressing but there is some truth in the idea that Corbyn presents as rather ... institutionalised? A kind and decent man, but one who has spent 35 years going to fringe political meetings with other like-minded souls, while pursuing his dream career with 100% job security. For all his good intentions, I don't think he has any greater claim to be connected with reality than Boris does.

@stuckdownahole

I agree with you largely *@annabel85* but I would put all of the blame on a failure of leadership by Corbyn, who just didn't possess the kind of brutality that a Labour leader needs to keep the squabbling back-seat drivers quiet.

Although Boris is a rubbish PM, you could argue that he is a better leader of his party. Any Tory MP who didn't agree with his Brexit policy when he was planning his Brexit election got binned, whereas Corbyn tolerated open dissent. The results speak for themselves.

The other stuff is just window dressing but there is some truth in the idea that Corbyn presents as rather ... institutionalised? A kind and decent man, but one who has spent 35 years going to fringe political meetings with other like-minded souls, while pursuing his dream career with 100% job security. For all his good intentions, I don't think he has any greater claim to be connected with reality than Boris does.

Corbyn was never a leader which was part of the problem. He was a backbench campaigner all his career who somehow ended up leading a PLP of predominantly Blairite centrists and careerists and who thus hated his guts.

The problem was he was desperate to bring in what he deemed a fairer society and bring about genuine social change. However Brexit kept getting in the way.

Ironically he was heavily defeated because of Brexit because the northern heartlands wanted 'change' I.e. Brexit. But again it was a failure of his leadership that contributed to the lost Brexit vote in 2016.