Anyone a monumentem (sp) member?

[BrandNewAndImproved]

Never heard of them before Corbyn. Now they're everywhere.

The important issues in regards to nuclear weapons

About 50% of the population favour Trident renewal. When asked to list their top three, five, ten or (for all I know) hundred issues, it doesn't get a look in. It isn't an electoral issue unless Labour make it one, and when it is made an issue, it is and remains nothing like the winner you appear to think it is. Yes, I have done doorstep canvassing in marginal seats, since you ask.

The strategy you are outlining is the "pile up more votes in such affluent urban seats as we already hold". I don't doubt that CLPs in safe Labour seats are energised by Corbyn, and I don't doubt that there's a chance (not as much of a chance as his supporters think, but a chance) that some Labour MPs in those seats will increase their majorities. For people with relatively safe and secure jobs, like yours or mine, a bit of virtue signalling about nuclear weapons and immigration is great. For people struggling to survive on zero-hours contracts? They have more pressing concerns.

In the meantime, Scotland is completely SNP (ie, Labour can't win a general election without an immense swing) the north of England is a sea of previously safe seats under severe pressure from UKIP which may split the vote enough to let Tories in (look up Ann Black's last Labour NEC report, again nailing the "but UKIP only take votes from the Conservatives" nonsense) and suburban and small town seats all look extremely dubious. On the current boundaries current polling gets the Tories a 150 seat majority; the new boundaries are generally regarded as favouring the Tories, so who knows what it means in 2020?

Yes, Corbyn will give Labour an increased number of votes (I think) and possibly an increased majority in some seats we already hold. Meanwhile, a whole swathe of England north of a line from Bristol to The Wash will haemorrhage votes and seats.

And that's before we start on the ructions that are bound to happen when Corbyn tries to sell unilateral disarmament to the unions: the places that build and maintain the weapons are massively unionised, remember.

www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/welcome-for-labour-pledge-on-trident

But not, I suspect, the pledge you think they are welcoming.

Smith is an idiot did you see him on news night?

Yes I did.

He isn't an 'idiot'

Funny how people throw words like that around about people who don't support Corbyn but won't accept any criticism about Corbyn.

If he loses nearly half the MPs in a GE will he go then or stay as 'he has a mandate'.

You say your step dad is 'in trenches in his views' well so is Corbyn. He hasn't changed in 30 plus years. How much is he willing to compromise? If he doesn't it is not a leadership but a dictatorship.

Bristol isn't North it's South West and labour. It's mps that were on the shadow cabinet who stepped down have been told by the unions in Bristol (I think it was unions but that could be wrong, it was definitely who gives them money for campaigning) they won't be getting anymore money from them.

The old Labour Party members really like corbyn and his politics in Bristol but some were/are worried about him winning an election. They say corbyn holds traditional labour values and I agree with them.

Owen backtracks, he says things one day and the opposite the other. At least corbyn being entrenched (I don't agree with that) means he doesn't swap what he believes in for votes and likes.

Corbyn isn't the reason the north won't vote labour. The north and Scotland stopped voting labour before Corbyn. He does however get amazing receptions in Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle and other cities up there. More then any other politician. I saw a few tweets that showed the huge numbers of people going to see him talk in Manchester and the BBC showed a few lines trying to make out that it wasn't that busy. People that were there tweeted photos to show the true amount of people.

Corbyn will keep the trade unions and name if the party splits. I really hope it doesn't come to that and mps and members (both which Owen said didn't matter at different times) pull it together.

Bristol is also marginal - could/will swing back to LibDem or even Tory in areas

One union has withdrawn funding - due to Momentum requesting it they even work out of their office at times - hope that helps clarify

How can you talk for the 'old party members' know them all well? Cobyn gets great receptions at CORBYN RALLIES - ofcourse he does the clue is in the title

Sorry to burst your bubble but I would have thought it will go to vote with the union members re which way they would go - as all members will also get a choice in the event of a split. So there is no guarantee. There are currently 14 TU affiliated with I think just under 150k affiliated members.

Their contribution is overshadowed by donors - some of whom have refused to donate since Corbyn became 'the leader'. In addition the finances of the party really are not great - so if you want the debts keep them

You get that ""north of a line from Bristol to The Wash" doesn't include Bristol, right?

I saw a few tweets that showed the huge numbers of people going to see him talk in Manchester

That's pretty much the definition of "I live in an echo chamber". You realise that Twitter isn't the electorate, or anything like it, of course.

I don't for a second deny Corbyn can pull a crowd of Labour supporters in Manchester. The question is, "so what?"

Of the 27 seats in Greater Manchester, we already hold 22 of them and of the five seats held by the Tories, two of them are safer than a safe thing or, at the most deluded optimistic view, LibDem/Tory marginals. Labour are below 20% in Cheadle and in Hazel Grove. Labour are at 27% in Altrincham and Sale West, but not even the most energetic Corbynite thinks that overturning 13 000+ majorities is going to happen.

So there are two (Bolton West and Bury North) which are marginal, with Tory majorities in three figures. They are very, very difficult seats with a huge UKIP presence: UKIP hold the balance, more than the balance, of the constituency. Do you think that Corbyn is going to win people from UKIP to Labour? Because if he can't, you're asking for Corbyn to win people who voted Conservative in 2015 back to Labour in 2020. Do you think that's likely?

So all that enthusiasm in Manchester equates to, maybe, with a lot of work and dealing with UKIP - which there is no evidence whatsoever that Momentum or Corbyn have the slightest idea of how to do - winning two additional seats out of 27 provided there is a substantial swing to Labour and, crucially, that all of this isn't made worse by the 2020 redistricting.

I don't think cuboid was suggesting Bristol is in the 'North', just suggesting that a lot of the country north of a line ending in Bristol won't vote Labour under Corbyn. I am not sure I agree with that.

X post sorry

PS Hi Momentum nice of you all to join us

To a point raised earlier about signing Momentum's 'ethics' - since I joined and agreed them 3 weeks ago they have been hugely changed (eg pretty sure the trident point wasn't on there)

I haven't seen any email to ask me to re-sign this drastic change. But I guess that's just part of the way Momentum is managed?

53 MP's were newly elected in 2015 - how on earth are they 'Blairites' that is ridiculous

I actually thought Smith was goo don Newsnight - never seen him in action before. He described policies, actions he would like to take. I likes the lack of rhetoric that I hear when Corbyn speaks. I think you can only call him an idiot if I can call Corbyn the bastard son of thatcher (after all he is achieving all her aims - splitting the party, splitting the TU's etc)

It would be really great if people understood the concept of leadership. If the party is doing badly in the polls it is the leaders responsibility, if they lose seats it is the leaders responsibility. If there is a culture of intimidation likewise. You can not be leader and blame everyone else - that in itself is showing zero leadership. Even football mangers understand this - why can't a 30 year experienced politician or it's marketing team aka Momentum

It's really that simple

showme - good post. How many elections has Jeremy Corbyn lost for Labour in the last 9 months as leader? You know including local elections, by-elections, ward elections etc.? It might help to add meat to your post.

Christ, when did this thread turn into something with such scathing undertones?

Absolutely no sense addressing every point as most are covered on other threads, but what I will say is if you understand how to interpret data and statistics at all you will know that the current GE polling does not say Labour will lose 150 seats at the next general election. What that poll indicates is that were people able to vote in a GE today the results of that GE would be 150 lost seats for Labour. But this is not a very useful tool for analysing what will happen at the next GE, and at the next GE the circumstances will be fundamentally and materially different to now; so the results are necessarily not comparable. It is not possible for there to be a GE whilst there is a leadership contest underway so recent polls are an extreme of hypothetical - in that the reality they're modelling is IMPOSSIBLE - and once the leadership challenge is complete there will be fundamental differences between how things stand now and the allure to voters of a Labour party with a leader - any leader. Gosh, I hate seeing data being used to misrepresent.

Another thing to consider is the possibility of a left-liberal collaboration to bring in proportional representation. Everything you think you know about seats and marginals is being heavily, HEAVILY challenged in parliament according to my local MP and change may well be afoot. I mean there is so much I could say about seats, marginals, swing voters etc. that is quite contrary to some of the beliefs expressed so far (although granted, only my beliefs, but just to show no-one has a monopoly on thinking they know best about how these things work) and yes, I have some lovely (pointless) anecdotal evidence to support those. But frankly I don't want this post to turn into an essay so I'll just leave the whole "alternative voting" thing out there for everyone to mull over.

showme - good post. How many elections has Jeremy Corbyn lost for Labour in the last 9 months as leader? You know including local elections, by-elections, ward elections etc.? It might help to add meat to your post.

He had nothing/very little to do with Khan's mayoral election.

Oldham by election was a great councillor who wasn't for Corbyn and has endorsed Smith.

Corbyn in his leadership bid making a big thing about an election in Thanet and a win from UKIP in his leadership speech the other day was ridiculous as it was a parish council vote on less than 13% turnout.

This city will most likely turn from all Labour MPs to having maybe one if there is a GE. One could be called as early as Autumn. Yes it isn't as easy to do as used to be due to fixed parliament but it isn't impossible.

Plus let's not forget... Corbyn wants one.

...so bad things happen under him and the leader has to be held accountable, but good things happen under him and he can't take any credit for those at all? Only Corbyn, 'ey.

so bad things happen under him and the leader has to be held accountable, but good things happen under him and he can't take any credit for those at all? Only Corbyn, 'ey

No not saying that at all.

What I am saying is I don't see him as some sort of Messiah (and I have actually heard people say that he is ) nor is everything always the media's fault.

Neither do I believe he is some sort of Messiah, nor is everything the media's fault. However he is my preferred candidate to be leader of the Labour party out of him and Smith. I also think the media do have a responsibility regarding the democratic process that at times they have been derelict in when covering Jeremy Corbyn.

once the leadership challenge is complete there will be fundamental differences between how things stand now and the allure to voters of a Labour party with a leader

Yeah, because six months ago with a leader the Labour Party was polling...ah, behind where Miliband was at the same point in the cycle.

Another thing to consider is the possibility of a left-liberal collaboration to bring in proportional representation

Another thing to consider is the return of Jesus Christ in a flaming chariot, accompanied by his host of angels, coming to deliver a new Jerusalem. That would shake things up a bit.

It's about as likely to happen.

Particularly as, outside obsessive wonkery, there is little public interest in electoral reform, particularly not for PR, and there was a referendum five years ago which you might recall was an annihilation (yes, it wasn't for PR, no, the electorate don't care about the distinction). The fantasy of said wonks (that Liberal and Labour form an electoral pact and run on a two clause manifesto, one for PR, one suspending the fixed term parliament legislation so that parliament can be dissolved as soon as PR is established) would result in a massive Tory landslide, even if theit prospective prime minister had just announced they were a lizard who ate babies. It's another articulation of the myth of the progressive majority, which is just that: a myth.

Even if you won such a scheme, which I regard as almost impossible, the ensuing PR election would be an utter bloodbath: the government formed would be a Tory/UKIP coalition. Unless you think that Labour would enter into a Lab/UKIP pact, which seems a trifle unlikely. Or a Lab/Tory national government, with UKIP as the rump opposition? Such japes.

Wow, so many very self-assured but entirely discreditable statements in that diatribe Cuboidal!

I'm curious as to why you feel you have to be so antagonistic in this discussion; in fact I'm not sure you actually want to have a discussion, moreover just tell everybody you're right. You have to understand that this kind of "we know best" attitude is one of the main things driving the divide in Labour; that a different perspective on things - perhaps one that challenges the "old guard" so to speak - must be stamped out, because it is wrong. That democratic process (such as immediately triggering a leadership election instead of organised resignations or a litany or rule changes) should justifiably be circumvented because that would be RIGHT, and in the party's/the country's/the people's best interests. Because WE KNOW BEST.

I was just rereading your post seeing if there was anything in it I could actually directly reply to, but seeing as it's predominantly hysterical "you're wrong and silly and I know best" I'm afraid to say I have nothing in return!

Well, we'll see in 2020, won't we?

I'll be out campaigning for Labour on the doorsteps in the hope of getting rid of this appalling government. Momentum will be on Twitter, talking to themselves.

What exactly will we see in 2020? We certainly won't ever see what would have happened if the PLP hadn't attempted to bypass party process. We won't see what would have happened if half the party hadn't consistently slurred the other half in the hope of getting their way; and if they don't get their way, they'll only have hurt themselves. And if they do get their way, they'll have cut off their nose to spite their face.

But yes, in 2020 we will certainly see something. And if it's Owen Smith loosing seats I'm sure there will be cries of "it was Corbyn wot dunnit!". Either way I'm happy with my choices.

But do you honestly think we could, in any possible version of reality, see Owen Smith elected as PM in 2020? And I ask that as a genuine question.

I have to say I really do not want PR. I prefer broad based main stream parties that have to internally balance and have to try and keep everyone happy rather than extreme Right or Left wing parties holding the balance of power - as happens often in PR. All that horse trading is also exhausting and open to corruption

A snap election will see the Labour party decimated losing between 40- 100 seats. TM may not go for this yet...but if her party starts to wobble internally she might do to increase her majority. How does this help Corbyn or Labour deliver any mandate - it doesn't. Corbyn then still may not go - he hasn't actually said he would. I don't have the stats but it would be interesting to see how many of Corbyns MP supporters are in safe seats and how many are not.

So Labour would have decreased number of seats. Decreased influence in the house, still be internally divided. Oh but Corbyn could still be leader. So this is Corbyn/Momentums aim? Meanwhile TM and the Tories can do what they want. But as long as the LP membership is 800,000 and the majority support Corbyn we are all OK. Nope. These numbers mean nothing if they can not be extrapolated to the electorate -and they can not.

It has got beyond the point of blaming the PLP or insisting that 170 plus people (they are people you know) have to hold their nose and cow tail to Corbyn against their principles, against their experience as people working for him. That is not collaborative, constructive politics. That is dictum, directive and authoritarian politics. Lazy and dangerous

eat you have often resorted to 'I am not going to answer' that is your right. For someone who is not a Momentum member I still think you are very invested in them

Who is to say Smith will be leader? If/when the party splits I think others will stand up to the plate. If he is leader of 170 people thankfully we won't see Corbyn in the media much anymore. And Momentum et all can preach to the converted as much as they want

A snap election will see the Labour party decimated losing between 40- 100 seats.

I'm curious as to how you see the alternative; what is your prediction for an (unlikely by imaginable) snap election under Smith?

Actually why am I even asking about Smith; there's always been talk that he's a stalking horse, and should he win the leadership perhaps he'll stand aside for someone more credible who didn't want their reputation tarnished by this dirty process. I don't know though, I just enjoy the speculation; the idea of Owen being more electable in real terms is a bit baffling if I'm honest.

Also personally I'm not blaming the PLP for their assessment, however I am holding them responsible for not following party protocol, and frankly their timing was irresponsible at best - a massive underestimation of public mood, for sure - and a horror at worst. Also it's clear that only a core were "plotters" so to speak, their actions deliberately planned to rattle any others who may be on the fence. So many I'm sure were swayed by the weight of events.

For someone who is not a Momentum member I still think you are very invested in them

I think I just take a more balanced perspective on things personally, but it's your right to put forward a particular perspective - and you have. Many of your assertions and speculations have been refuted, but you continue with them - which is fine - but I'll continue to point out they're not based in fact.

Um... totally haven't said I won't answer, have said there isn't anything to answer!

Also, X Post over stalking horse Owen Smith. Don't you think that's disingenuous? I mean I know it's politics, but really...

Actually I notice you're talking about the party splitting, not about Smith winning. Do you think he can't win then? I'm curious. What's the point in roundly disagreeing with Corbyn and his supporters if you think it's a foregone conclusion?

So what's your best case scenario here? Smith wins then someone else steps in who might actually win in 2020? Smith wins then he's the leader at the next GE and he does... well? Really? I mean I could be convinced, but right now I can't see how. Or they spilt, the defectors become the official opposition under... Smith? Someone else? And then what??

I have already said splitting is the only option I can see but as yet the decision hasn't been made. I have also said that I didn't necessarily support Smith. And I have also said that Smith wouldn't necessarily win

Haven't seen any facts refuted at all. Polls ARE down. Support for Corbyn outside the LP IS very low. Labour WOULD lose seats if an election was called. Membership of the LP doesn't not equate to electoral numbers - these are all facts (if fact if there was a correlation between membership numbers and election votes how come the Tories do so well with under 200,000 members?)

Yes if/when they split the 170 odd would be the majority and this is how they can do it. I will repost the link that I posted previously

constitution-unit.com/2016/06/29/what-if-labour-splits/

If/when they split any 'power' Corbyn has is effectively nullified even if you keep the name (and the debts)

Looking at the overall picture. The bigger picture gives a balanced view. Looking at one man and his 'virtues' doesn't I'm afraid. That won't protect the NHS or the poor or vulnerable - only having the power to change does that.

Oh and actually I favour Starmer or Nandy - but they aren't standing..... at the moment

frankly their timing was irresponsible at best - a massive underestimation of public mood, for sure

What public mood? Outside a tiny (in electoral terms) hardcore of true believers, Corbyn has already lost the next election, it's just a matter of what the body count is. Look at the Tories bastards : they have just had the loss of a referendum which the party leader backed, they have lost their Prime Minister, Chancellor and most of the front bench, have run a rather nasty leadership election and had to install a new cabinet in a tearing hurry.

She's up in every poll, and has a huge lead over Labour however you slice it. What do you think is going to change that? The public have looked at Corbyn and said "no thanks". What's his amazing strategy to turn that around? What's going to make anyone who didn't want to vote for him six months ago suddenly decide to do so now, or more to the point in 2020? Because we've now had two general election of our strategy being basically "hold tight, the Tories are bound to fuck it up" and they haven't, and they sure as hell won't under May and Hammond.

We need concrete policies which make us distinctive, and so far we haven't got much beyond "better Sourdough artisan bread in Zone 1". Trident isn't an electoral issue and anyway the chances of getting a unilateralist position through conference are approximately zero (and the GMB would disaffiliate if we did). Our alleged New Economics panel have all resigned. What's Corbyn's silver bullet?