What exactly is Jeremy Corbyn's plan?

Evilmags

ToneControl said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/labour-rebels-plan-to-be intimidated by noisy momentum trolls, get de selected and retire-gr/

corrected for accuracy. I´d add Labour to lose at least 100 seats and Teresa May wins a landslide to those predictions. He has to keep this charade up for years, with 170 sitting MPs who think he´s an idiot. Unlike Cameron, who would get accused of bullying if he went for the jugular, in the case of May he can check his white male privilege in at the door, she won´t afford him the same quarter.

For the Tory party and UKIP he is just the gift that keeps on giving. After 3 years of eviscaration at the hands of May he´ll have totally destroyed the Labour party and caused a Tory revival the likes of which has not been seen since Thatch. 

ToneControl

Evilmags said:

ToneControl said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/labour-rebels-plan-to-be intimidated by noisy momentum trolls, get de selected and retire-gr/

corrected for accuracy. I´d add Labour to lose at least 100 seats and Teresa May wins a landslide to those predictions. He has to keep this charade up for years, with 170 sitting MPs who think he´s an idiot. Unlike Cameron, who would get accused of bullying if he went for the jugular, in the case of May he can check his white male privilege in at the door, she won´t afford him the same quarter.

For the Tory party and UKIP he is just the gift that keeps on giving. After 3 years of eviscaration at the hands of May he´ll have totally destroyed the Labour party and caused a Tory revival the likes of which has not been seen since Thatch. 

yes, it sounds like a poor plan
probably only realistic  options are to hang in and see if they get deselected, or defect en masse and  take over the LibDems

Evilmags

I really can´t see how this will end well for the Labour party. 

snakemanStoo

The cynic in me suggests it will end will Labour being in power while the Conservatives go through several leadership crisisisies*. 

Or to put it another way, it'll keep going round in circles just as it always has.



*may have got a little confused with the spelling, I've not been awake for long and only had 1 cup of tea.

randella

Evilmags said:

I really can´t see how this will end well for the Labour party. 

I'll save you the bother of trying, it isn't going to end well for the Labour Party. In ten short months, Corbyn will have done what every Tory leader has been dreaming of doing for a hundred years.

stickyfiddle

The labour won't exist in its current form in 12 months. 

Corbyn will win the current content because he has the support of momentum and the unions, but nobody else. On he wins they'll split, and he'll continue to lead Labour, a big fish in an ever shrinking pond.

Myranda

Have just seen a momentum video on Facebook saying how Trade Union members should vote Corbyn...

It mentions that of 3,000,000 only 70,000 voted in the last leadership election. Presumably the point is to get more people out voting for Corbyn...

But as a result of mentioning this is realised something...

The majority of the PLP members didn't vote Corbyn in. The majority of a little over 2% voted him in.

He's been clinging to power based on his mandate from the people... but 97 and a pit per cent didn't even turn up to vote for him ... he had no mandate ... so is he insane or desperate? 

And those are figures from Momentum... not the opposite team.

Wow

Heartfeltdawn

He's speaking in Bristol tomorrow. I shall be there wearing a large Jews for Corbyn badge. Let's see what happens.  

ICBM

Myranda said:

Have just seen a momentum video on Facebook saying how Trade Union members should vote Corbyn...

It mentions that of 3,000,000 only 70,000 voted in the last leadership election. Presumably the point is to get more people out voting for Corbyn...

But as a result of mentioning this is realised something...

The majority of the PLP members didn't vote Corbyn in. The majority of a little over 2% voted him in.

He's been clinging to power based on his mandate from the people... but 97 and a pit per cent didn't even turn up to vote for him ... he had no mandate ... so is he insane or desperate? 

And those are figures from Momentum... not the opposite team.

Wow

You're confusing several different things.

The 3 million is *trade union* membership, not Labour Party membership.

The PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party, ie just the MPs) certainly did not vote Corbyn in - the Labour Party membership did. Of those, 251,417 out of a total of 554,272 voted for Corbyn - not quite half, although still 59.5% of the 76.3% turnout.

How many of those are also trade union members is not clear, but of those who are, 70,000 voted. It's not known how they voted, I don't think.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_2015

He is not 'clinging to power', he has a mandate from the party membership as he correctly states. Where he's almost certainly wrong is that it makes him the most suitable person to lead the Labour Party to a General Election victory.

Myranda

ICBM said:

Myranda said:

Have just seen a momentum video on Facebook saying how Trade Union members should vote Corbyn...

It mentions that of 3,000,000 only 70,000 voted in the last leadership election. Presumably the point is to get more people out voting for Corbyn...

But as a result of mentioning this is realised something...

The majority of the PLP members didn't vote Corbyn in. The majority of a little over 2% voted him in.

He's been clinging to power based on his mandate from the people... but 97 and a pit per cent didn't even turn up to vote for him ... he had no mandate ... so is he insane or desperate? 

And those are figures from Momentum... not the opposite team.

Wow

You're confusing several different things.

The 3 million is *trade union* membership, not Labour Party membership.

The PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party, ie just the MPs) certainly did not vote Corbyn in - the Labour Party membership did. Of those, 251,417 out of a total of 554,272 voted for Corbyn - not quite half, although still 59.5% of the 76.3% turnout.

How many of those are also trade union members is not clear, but of those who are, 70,000 voted. It's not known how they voted, I don't think.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_2015

He is not 'clinging to power', he has a mandate from the party membership as he correctly states. Where he's almost certainly wrong is that it makes him the most suitable person to lead the Labour Party to a General Election victory.

But if all the trade union members (all eligible to vote) add up to 3 million... then the PLP membership of 554,272 (of whom it's fair to say some will be in the 3 million... ) Is only about 1/6th the number eligible to vote (assuming all at trade union members it would be about 1/7th if none are...) ...

If a little over half of 1/6th the eligible voters voted for him then that's not a clear mandate. It's less than 1/10th of those who had a voice using that voice... so his mandate had only been handed to him by less that 10% of those who can vote

That is far from a clear mandate handed down by the people - its a handful of people who bothered to vote.

If only 10% of those eligible to elect you say you can have the job and then 75% of your staff tell you to naff off you shouldn't sit there smugly claiming that the majority of the labour voters want him to stay.

Aside from anything else his supporters voted for him before he buggered up every single chance he had to fight the tories... no one knows how many still want him now...

ToneControl

The GMB leader was just elected with 2.4% of eligible voters

Heartfeltdawn

The PLP is the body that represents Labour MPs in Parliament.

https://www.britishonlinearchives.co.uk/collection.php?cid=9781851171330&sid=&keywords=

Membership therefore wasn't 554,272. 

PolarityMan

I saw a little bit of the leadership husting last night and it was like something out of the 70s. It looked a bit like one of Monty Python's sketch setups. They even managed to have that slightly old fashioned "film like" colour quality to the picture.

Heartfeltdawn

ToneControl said:

The GMB leader was just elected with 2.4% of eligible voters

Uh huh. 26,658 votes. Which is still 26,459 more votes than our current Prime Minister received in her last election. Aren't stats fun? 

Myranda

Heartfeltdawn said:

ToneControl said:

The GMB leader was just elected with 2.4% of eligible voters

Uh huh. 26,658 votes. Which is still 26,459 more votes than our current Prime Minister received in her last election. Aren't stats fun? 

I think you've forgotten how Prime Ministers are chosen...

We don't vote for prime ministers so she's exactly as elected as all the others 

ICBM

Myranda said:

But if all the trade union members (all eligible to vote) add up to 3 million... then the PLP membership of 554,272 (of whom it's fair to say some will be in the 3 million... ) Is only about 1/6th the number eligible to vote (assuming all at trade union members it would be about 1/7th if none are...) ...

If a little over half of 1/6th the eligible voters voted for him then that's not a clear mandate. It's less than 1/10th of those who had a voice using that voice... so his mandate had only been handed to him by less that 10% of those who can vote

That is far from a clear mandate handed down by the people - its a handful of people who bothered to vote.

If only 10% of those eligible to elect you say you can have the job and then 75% of your staff tell you to naff off you shouldn't sit there smugly claiming that the majority of the labour voters want him to stay.

Aside from anything else his supporters voted for him before he buggered up every single chance he had to fight the tories... no one knows how many still want him now…

You really are confusing at least two things here.

First: the PLP - the Parliamentary Labour Party - is the Labour MPs in Parliament, no more than that. It is different from the Labour Party - the whole membership.

Second: the membership of the Labour Party and the membership of the trade unions could actually be entirely unrelated. They probably aren't, but it has absolutely no relevance either way. Only Labour Party members are eligible to vote, not trade unionists.

Of those eligible to vote for him, 45% did in the first round - 59.5% of those who actually voted. I wouldn't be at all surprised if when the second choice votes were added as well - even though probably most of the second choices were distributed between the other three candidates - he got over 50%. That is an absolutely clear mandate to lead the party.

Whether he still has that support remains to be seen. If he does, the PLP have two choices - accept it, or leave and form a new party.

The Labour Party membership are far more representative than the PLP are - over half a million, compared to 230. It still doesn't mean they are representative of the electorate though, and therein lies the problem if you want to see a credible Labour Party who can form a government.

The serious problem is that I don't see any other potential candidates who can make it so either, apart from at least one who has already ruled himself out.

Myranda

ICBM said:

Myranda said:

But if all the trade union members (all eligible to vote) add up to 3 million... then the PLP membership of 554,272 (of whom it's fair to say some will be in the 3 million... ) Is only about 1/6th the number eligible to vote (assuming all at trade union members it would be about 1/7th if none are...) ...

If a little over half of 1/6th the eligible voters voted for him then that's not a clear mandate. It's less than 1/10th of those who had a voice using that voice... so his mandate had only been handed to him by less that 10% of those who can vote

That is far from a clear mandate handed down by the people - its a handful of people who bothered to vote.

If only 10% of those eligible to elect you say you can have the job and then 75% of your staff tell you to naff off you shouldn't sit there smugly claiming that the majority of the labour voters want him to stay.

Aside from anything else his supporters voted for him before he buggered up every single chance he had to fight the tories... no one knows how many still want him now…

You really are confusing at least two things here.

First: the PLP - the Parliamentary Labour Party - is the Labour MPs in Parliament, no more than that. It is different from the Labour Party - the whole membership.

Second: the membership of the Labour Party and the membership of the trade unions could actually be entirely unrelated. They probably aren't, but it has absolutely no relevance either way. Only Labour Party members are eligible to vote, not trade unionists.

Of those eligible to vote for him, 45% did in the first round - 59.5% of those who actually voted. I wouldn't be at all surprised if when the second choice votes were added as well - even though probably most of the second choices were distributed between the other three candidates - he got over 50%. That is an absolutely clear mandate to lead the party.

Whether he still has that support remains to be seen. If he does, the PLP have two choices - accept it, or leave and form a new party.

The Labour Party membership are far more representative than the PLP are - over half a million, compared to 230. It still doesn't mean they are representative of the electorate though, and therein lies the problem if you want to see a credible Labour Party who can form a government.

The serious problem is that I don't see any other potential candidates who can make it so either, apart from at least one who has already ruled himself out.

OK forget the names of things...

Momentum said in their video 3 million people were eligible to vote (from the trade unioins)...

He got a quarter of a million votes...

No matter how you add it up a quarter million isn't as high as 3 million... 

They were eligible to vote but didn't. So he's at the highest estimate about 15% ish of people eligible to vote for him doing so.

ToneControl

• Who can vote in Labour leadership contest?

  Affiliated trade union or socialist society supporters can sign up for less than £25, with rates depending on the organisation they belong to, but they have to have joined an affiliated organisation before 12 January, and then need to register before 8 August

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36654418

so unlikely to be many voters from the unions I suspect

ICBM

Myranda said:

OK forget the names of things...

Momentum said in their video 3 million people were eligible to vote (from the trade unioins)...

He got a quarter of a million votes...

No matter how you add it up a quarter million isn't as high as 3 million... 

They were eligible to vote but didn't. So he's at the highest estimate about 15% ish of people eligible to vote for him doing so.

Three million were not eligible to vote.

554,272 were.

Myranda

ICBM said:

Myranda said:

OK forget the names of things...

Momentum said in their video 3 million people were eligible to vote (from the trade unioins)...

He got a quarter of a million votes...

No matter how you add it up a quarter million isn't as high as 3 million... 

They were eligible to vote but didn't. So he's at the highest estimate about 15% ish of people eligible to vote for him doing so.

Three million were not eligible to vote.

554,272 were.

So Momentum are liars or idiots?