What the actual fuck is wrong with Corbyn?

[HarrisIsGoingOut]

He is less useful than a chocolate teapot anyway, but for a man who blusters on so much about "listening to the members" and "making policy based on the members" he's certainly got an odd way of showing it.

I just find it extraordinary that such a shambolic, self-interested and, frankly corrupt, government has been enabled to get away with it because the opposition is so extraordinarily ineffectual.

He is doing the sensible thing.

If Labour supports a 2nd referendum, they will divide their coalition of the "metropolitan" vote and their traditional heartlands. They need their working class vote to stand a chance of winning an election and they won't get it by ignoring their vote in the 1st referendum.

The opposite is true of supporting Brexit so his only option is to keep quite, let it go wrong and then blame it on the Conservatives.

I don't think his support would achieve much anyway. He doesn't have strong authority among the parliamentary party. On a vote as big as Brexit, most MPs would vote for what they want, no matter what labour party policy is. There would be plenty of leave voting Labour MPs, MPs in leave constituencies and MPs who believe it is undemocratic who would vote against a 2nd referendum so the numbers would not be there without Government support. And of course, MPs won't be voting on it at all unless the Government tables it.

It would be pointless to inflict the electoral damage on the Labour party, when it is unlikely to be successful anyway.

A decent Leader of the Opposition does more than Keep Quiet.

If Labour supports a 2nd referendum, they will divide their coalition of the "metropolitan" vote and their traditional heartlands. They need their working class vote to stand a chance of winning an election and they won't get it by ignoring their vote in the 1st referendum

This is true IF all he does is follow but how about he leads? explains the issues, the pros and cons and carries the Labour heartlands with him in support of a PV or revocation?

If he doesn't, he'll have to explain why the poorest are being hit the hardest, due to something he supported! and of course he loses the remain vote in its entirety.

So another 5 years in opposition...

They need their working class vote to stand a chance of winning an election and they won't get it by ignoring their vote in the 1st referendum

And this fear is based on assuming that those dyed in the wool Labour voters will vote Tory instead. I am really doubtful that they would.

Actually, I am pretty sure that the 'Labour position' on Brexit is being determined by the struggle at the very top of Labour, around Corbyn.

The motion at Conference arose from a massive, grassroots push to get Labour to oppose Brexit.

It reflected a real struggle between the grassroots and the leadership (hence it being a 'road map', rather than s straightforward position, and it not being a straight promise of opposition).

Sadly, I don't think the current position has anything to do with the'Leave voting heartlands'. Research tells us that Labour voters there will continue to vote Labour.

No. The opposition to a PV and to Remain arises because the Corbyn leadership are still trying to secure their position at the head of the Party.

The MPs and members organising for s PV and for a stronger opposition to Brexit are perceived as a threat to Corbyn's leadership by the group around Corbyn. Which is, I think, paranoid and also I incredibly, solllipsistically short-sighted.

There are too many popular -'Centrist' (a term which is utterly void of meaning at this point and should be seen for what it is: a slur used against anyone they perceive as a potential threat to Corbyn) MPs and members involved in the PV campaign. It terrifies the group around Corbyn.

The Corbyn group are expending enoous amounts of energy trashing the Labour-organised section of the PV campaign at the moment.

They are bugging up 'Lexit' not out of any belief that Lexit is possible (it's not) but to trash intra-Party threats to Corbyn.

It's beyond cynical.

It's dangerous.

Not only is it the most bizarre choice of target to attack at this terrible political moment (stop in-fighting - concentrate on national politics) IT ALSO PREVENTS THE MOST IMPOTANT POINT ABOUT BREXIT BEING MADE : from beginning to end, BRexit has been an ultra-right project; an ultra-right coup.

The cynical waving of 'Lexit' (a fantasy), in order to launch an intra-Party fight (in order to further secure Corbyn's position) and attack the Labour section of the PV campaign is dangerous, cynical and appalling.

That is what is wrong with Corbyn.

And it is very, very wrong indeed.

'Who will rid me of this turbulent priest politician?'

It's insane.

Brexit is being determined by the ERG (200 members); the 68% of the Conservative Party's 125,000 members (average age 71) who think 'No Deal' is great; and a small faction of mad Corbynites in the Labour Party.

It bloody isn't the 'will of the people'.

It's a massive political upheaval being determined by a tiny group of people.

Personally, I think it's a catastrophe that Corbyn is climbing into bed here with a group of right-wing loons. ☹️

Both Labour and Conservative are knackered as half the population wants Brexit (therefore half doesn't or can't decide). That division crosses both parties. It also splits the parties in half too... so neither party can back 'in' or 'out' without causing uproar.

The best either can do is say 'we will go with the will of the people' knowing full well that what people voted for was impossible anyway. People were sold the idea of a Brexit where the UK just got everything its own way - much like telling someone who is going to get a divorce that it's going to be fairly pain-free and they'll get the house, the car, full custody etc.
The reality is that this divorce is not going to be pain-free. Whoever is in government has to face giving the population what it wanted - at the same time as giving them a black eye. It's a poisoned chalice of the highest order.

That's not quite right now.

We do know some of the options available, so nuance is emerging.

That matters.

So, for example, we know that only 18% of the UK want 'No Deal' (as opposed to 60+% of Conservative Party members).

Nuance matters because it tells you who - and what - is driving policy and direction at this precise moment.

The narrative of 'half the country want Brexit' (which isn't, in fact, true any longer) lets our politicians off the hook. It gives them an excuse to absolve themselves from washing their hands - when in fact it is precisy in a national emergency such as this they need to do their job.

Honestly, a rabbit-in-the-headlights fatalism is not good enough.

We deserve - and should demand - better.

Both Labour and Conservative are knackered as half the population wants Brexit (therefore half doesn't or can't decide). That division crosses both parties. It also splits the parties in half too...so neither party can back 'in' or 'out' without causing uproar

How about something called Leadership?

If May stood outside no10, said she was revoking A50 as it wasn't in the national interest, made the case and couldn't be delivered, despite trying really hard, she would win the next GE by a landslide.

Look at Blair, he took a 1940s style and unpopular Labour party, made the case for change and got them back winning... he led.

Unfortunately, this probably beyond Corbyn and the Labour top team.

'half the country want Brexit'

Even in 2016 only 36% of the electorate voted FOR brexit, meaning 64% didn't or don't care.

Its an old argument but needs to be restated, a minority have always driven this irreversible change.

Stalin had a way of dealing with dissent in his party, unfortunately for the UK it is the 'wrong way up' with regard to the Labour party in that Corbyn is the biggest problem.

If May stood outside no10, said she was revoking A50 as it wasn't in the national interest, made the case and couldn't be delivered, despite trying really hard, she would win the next GE by a landslide.

No she wouldn't. The brexiteers would vote for whichever party promised Brexit - a party like UKIP would re-emerge and hoover up those votes, taking votes from both Tory and Labour again. It's why the referendum happened in the first place - UKIP were getting too many votes/seats in Parliament.

Polls suggest otherwise.

Personally, an interesting historical counter-factual might have been to have let UKIP win (or more likely, not win) a few Conservative seats, and suck up a few of those 125,000 elderly Conservative Party members, rather than setting fire to the UK.

Which is what Brexit is doing.

That pandering to the fear of s short-term rise in far-right populism in the UK (a problem for the Conservative Party far more than for the UK as a whole) and accidentally trashing our political system and our economy , is what will lead to Cameron and May going down as the worst PMs ever.

UKIP didn't win any seats in the U.K. parliament. They may win a few seats in Brexit areas with no strong party affiliations like Lincolnshire but not enough to seriously challenge as a party.

The Tory's were concerned because UKIP got enough votes to make them lose seats and let Lib Dem's or Labour in.

FPTP seriously disadvantages parties with no local base.

Not true at all - ukip never got a single elected MP and at their height of popularity - 3,8m voters.

DC called the referendum to help rid the Tory party of the internal division it has suffered for the last 50 years....which worked really really well !

But ... this thread is about Corbyn.

I agree with you, Jasjas - it would make an enormous difference if we were to see some actual, real, principled leadership at this stage.

May wouldn’t win the next election because she has promised to stand down before it. It was a condition of her winning the no-confidence vote, which really says they don’t have much confidence in her at all!

Which means the next election could potentially be Corbyn v Johnson which might swing a few votes Corbyn’s way.

I'm a Corbyn supporter (why does that feel like an AA statement or a confession) but he has irked me somewhat with his new stance on Brexit, conference was quite clear but he'll face up to that if he does fuck it up after all he wanted more power given to the members and we will use that. In the lead up to the referendum he was quite active in promoting remain but was barely given any inches or media time for it and I agreed with his position that to change the EU you needed to be in the EU. I think he's had to ride a very fine line because of how toxic the Brexit debate is, the Remain side being less likely to go all out traitor mode if he seems a bit brexity but imagine if he came ouit 100% remain the right wing rags would have a field day and that would then stop us from hearing more important news (N.B I do not think Corbyn is that media savvy to be doing this conciously) I think right now hes blunderiung ahead in a very dangerous direction as far as the membership is concerned because if he does vote through asny version of a shit show tory brexit then theres not a chance I will vote for him in any other leadership election, those of you on the remain side denigrating momentum, they are also actively pushing as best as they can for a PV so far now there is that as a common goal at least

In the lead up to the referendum he was quite active in promoting remain but was barely given any inches or media time for it

Oh come on. He disappeared off on holiday at one point and refused to share a stage with Cameron and others high profile political remainers.

Lets not try to make out he did his best because he certainly wasn't.

I dont blame him for not sharing the stage with Cameron in any way shape or form that wouldnt have helped him with his base, Even Angela Smith during the chicken coup said so herself that hed been 'up and down the country' also the appearance on The Last Leg, but could he have done more absolutely he could of, but anything was better than sharing a stage with that ham faced etonian

Did you think he sounded convinced / convincing Just?

I think I am now too old and cynical. It seemed obvious to me he's not really into the EU.

Because of this I'm struggling with the whole premise of the opening post!