What exactly is Jeremy Corbyn's plan?

ToneControl

190k trade unionists last time:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/trade-union-members-did-not-shape-the-labour-leadership-result-as-much-as-in-past-elections/

ToneControl

Myranda said:

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?

are the two mutually exclusive?

Myranda

ToneControl said:

Myranda said:

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?

are the two mutually exclusive?

No.

No they're not.

ICBM

Myranda said:

So Momentum are liars or idiots?

Both, quite possibly.

Heartfeltdawn

Myranda said:

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 

It was a simple exercise in how stats can be rendered meaningless without context, not a direct comparison between the elective process of the general secretary of a trade union and our current Prime Minister. By quoting number of votes alone, that trade union official can say that he received more votes than Theresa May did in her last elective process, namely the Tory leadership campaign. By removing any further context (eg. size of electorate), you can reduce any argument to however you want it. 

Mark Wickham-Jones offered a breakdown of the 2015 leadership result:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/trade-union-members-did-not-shape-the-labour-leadership-result-as-much-as-in-past-elections/

As the link above states, in 2015 the affiliated member numbers dropped from the initial because a lot of the opt-ins (unions) were already individual members and received a ballot by that route. This is likely to be repeated so the idea that 3 million voters are going to come into play seems unlikely and is reminiscent of the sort of spin put out by his campaign over the by-election in Thanet. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-mocked-for-apparently-decrying-why-media-didnt-cover-parish-council-victory_uk_5793bd05e4b0796a0b5fc3fe

So are Momentum idiots and liars? At times they are. 

If three million trade unionists had been eligible to vote in 2015 and didn't, then I would say that would have been reported as a huge failure on Corbyn's part to energise and involve those voters. If they were eligible then his silence on their failure to be involved in 2015 compared to the current "C'mon, three million of you can vote!" approach smacks of a certain amount of skullduggery too. Corbyn may not involve himself in the dark arts in the manner of the 1922 Committee but he's no crystalline fairy. 

ICBM

Claiming that three million trade unionists were eligible to vote is no more accurate than claiming all 46 million people in the UK electorate were eligible to vote... since they could all have paid the £3 and joined the Labour Party.

ToneControl

now new members can vote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37009871

even more likely to get  Corbyn now then

UnclePsychosis

I'm a member of a large union and they told me I would be eligible to vote free of charge. There was some kind of registration process though.

I didn't bother, if anyone is wondering. I've no interest in being classed officially as a  Labour member!

Philly_Q

ToneControl said:

now new members can vote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37009871

even more likely to get  Corbyn now then

Was a Corbyn win ever really in doubt? 

Evilmags

The most incompetent de fenestration attempt in UK political history? 

randella

Evilmags said:

The most incompetent de fenestration attempt in UK political history? 

It's like watching a car crash in slow-motion.

My only remaining hope was that Corbyn's re-elected leader (pretty much a done deal), May calls a snap election, Labour gets pummelled into next week, Corbyn steps down and the rebuilding process starts there.  Now I read that he has no intention whatsoever of resigning in the face of a general election defeat (whether now or in 2020), despite McDonnell's assertions to the contrary, and despite the fact that every single indicator is suggesting sizeable defeat to be the most likely outcome.

So what does that say?  It tells me that he's either a narcissistic liar or is suffering industrial-scale delusions of his own popularity.  I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that either him or his ardent followers have any intention of Labour being elected to government, instead preferring the morally-pure and responsibility-free notion of permanent and ineffectual protest in 'opposition'.

ICBM

randella said:

My only remaining hope was that Corbyn's re-elected leader (pretty much a done deal), May calls a snap election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

randella

ICBM said:

randella said:

My only remaining hope was that Corbyn's re-elected leader (pretty much a done deal), May calls a snap election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

Oh I know about that, like I said it was a last remaining hope.  There would have to be a number of non-Conservative MPs voting for it, in which case it'd be gambling on those in the PLP disillusioned enough to risk their jobs, or it'd be down to a self-engineered vote of no confidence in the current party which would be a massive risk on May's part.  The FTPA is not set in stone, but seeing it circumvented is highly unlikely I agree.

ICBM

randella said:

Oh I know about that, like I said it was a last remaining hope.  There would have to be a number of non-Conservative MPs voting for it, in which case it'd be gambling on those in the PLP disillusioned enough to risk their jobs, or it'd be down to a self-engineered vote of no confidence in the current party which would be a massive risk on May's part.  The FTPA is not set in stone, but seeing it circumvented is highly unlikely I agree.

No, it's just not possible.

May cannot call a vote of No Confidence in her own government because in order to trigger an election she would have to lose, in which case she would have no option other than to resign.

She also couldn't get a motion for early dissolution because it would need a majority of two-thirds.

In either case the opposition would abstain or actually vote for the government, because they don't want an election now, when the guaranteed result would be an increased Tory majority.

So the good news - and it is the only slight good news - is that Labour and the Lib Dems have a clear three and a half years to get their act together properly without worrying about having to fight an election in the mean time, so they can take their time to get it right rather than do it quickly.

Philly_Q

ICBM said:

So the good news - and it is the only slight good news - is that Labour and the Lib Dems have a clear three and a half years to get their act together properly without worrying about having to fight an election in the mean time, so they can take their time to get it right rather than do it quickly.

You're right, but neither of them are going to get it together.  Labour will limp along for another three and a half years of infighting under Corbyn, unless the party splits, which I can't see happening.  The Lib Dems will still have only eight MPs, so even with the best will in the world they're not going to pull up any trees.

ICBM

My remaining hope is that the right wing of the Labour Party will leave, then join and hijack the Lib Dems… possibly even renaming them as the Social Democrats in order to ditch the Clegg-era baggage. Then we may have a ready-made opposition… although even then, it's hard to see a credible leader from either.

It's a huge set of hoops to jump through for it to actually happen anyway. If it doesn't, we'll be left with either two or possibly three (if Labour splits but they form a new party instead) ineffective opposition parties.

Corbyn will remain as Labour leader and I now have (again) accepted, rightly so. There is no credible alternative and he has the support of the membership, for good or ill. But I'm disappointed in his leadership and I don't think he can lead them to an election win.

randella

ICBM said:

My remaining hope is that the right wing of the Labour Party will leave, then join and hijack the Lib Dems… possibly even renaming them as the Social Democrats in order to ditch the Clegg-era baggage. Then we may have a ready-made opposition… although even then, it's hard to see a credible leader from either.

I wonder if, after the EU referendum, there's starting to be more of a taste for proportional representation among the electorate - the Libs have that on their ticket, could do them a favour.  I'm certainly for it.  You're right about the LDs ditching the Clegg image, plus it could also do any defecting Labour MPs a favour to bin off the varied tarnishes and baggages.

Hmmm.

Philly_Q

ICBM said:

My remaining hope is that the right wing of the Labour Party will leave, then join and hijack the Lib Dems… possibly even renaming them as the Social Democrats in order to ditch the Clegg-era baggage. Then we may have a ready-made opposition… although even then, it's hard to see a credible leader from either.

I think that would drive Tim Farron out - he's often described himself as a Liberal rather than a Liberal Democrat.  Probably never quite got over the SDP gatecrashing the party.

LoFi

randella said:

I wonder if, after the EU referendum, there's starting to be more of a taste for proportional representation among the electorate - the Libs have that on their ticket, could do them a favour.  I'm certainly for it.

I wish you were right, but I'm afraid I don't think you are - the LDs bet hard on the PR/AV referendum as part of the coalition agreement, and lost massively; it's the reason they're in the mess they are at the moment, because to get the referendum, they surrendered the Top-Up fees fight, which destroyed their student vote

randella

LoFi said:

randella said:

I wonder if, after the EU referendum, there's starting to be more of a taste for proportional representation among the electorate - the Libs have that on their ticket, could do them a favour.  I'm certainly for it.

I wish you were right, but I'm afraid I don't think you are - the LDs bet hard on the PR/AV referendum as part of the coalition agreement, and lost massively; it's the reason they're in the mess they are at the moment, because to get the referendum, they surrendered the Top-Up fees fight, which destroyed their student vote

In fairness, they were stitched up royally over that one - I think maybe there could have been a different picture if proper PR was on the referendum, rather than the AV fudge that was offered.