I don't think Labour can split, tobee's right about the name (and funding & data) - the Party without that would die under FPTP (as BigChoc says).
I think Just is wrong in implying Labour should have backed 'Leave': the data suggests that would have been fatal.
I know a lot of Corbynites are pushing a narrative that it was the Second Referendum that undermines victory - but, again, the data really doesn't support that.
The age issue worries me a little, BigChoc. Alas, one or two people think it just shows that if 'we' dig down, weather out the next 20 years out of power, victory will ultimately be
'Ours'.
That's kind of cynical, really. What of all those people who can't wait 20 years? (I would put myself in that category - I could do with a well-funded NHS right now). And what makes them think a Hard Right government is going to sit on its hands, waiting patiently for it's inevitable toppling in 20 years? And what will 20 years of watching Labour act like an irrelevance do to the political leanings of that 'youth' vote?
The one thing I am praying for is an end - Dear God, let there be an end - to the talk of 'Blairite and 'Blairism'.
It's used as a kind of a scapegoat/bogeyman/ 'othering device' to keep people in line.
A mass outbreak of critical thinking would be good.
No-one, absolutely no-one is proposing a return to 1997. It is, as they say, history.
I've also seen proposals from hard Left people that Labour now work with Johnson to accomplish Brexit. Which is the inevitable result of the 'it was allowing the centrist Remainers to take charge that caused the defeat' line of reasoning.
There is so much wrong with this, it is hard to know where to begin.