UK General Discussion: 2019. Blackadder goes Brexit.

[CumbrianLefty]

Yes to all the above (and I made a point about it’s above before) but I’m still terrified by the prospect that these polls and are right and the short campaign won’t change them and we’ll look back at this period as the same way we look back at late ‘14-15- as a time when we ignored that our leader was a huge block for labour winning an election

I wish Corbyn could be unseated soon, there is the electability factor and also so many other reasons he should not be PM (but Labour is of course far better than the Tories and the other parties either aren't actually much better or have no chance of forming a government). The 2016 experience seems to have killed those hopes though, and even if the membership has changed their mind it would probably be too impractical to have a leadership contest at this stage distracting from stopping no-deal and probably too close to a potential election. Hopefully Corbyn does do well campaigning again, but he is even more unpopular than in 2017, and it's far from clear that the 2017 experience can be repeated in these significantly different conditions.

Its not guaranteed, sure.

But what were some of the factors that caused it last time?

1) a popular manifesto;

2) Corbyn actually being good at campaigning;

3) the GE (contrary to predictions then, too) not just being a referendum on Brexit after all;

4) the broadcast media (and even press, just a bit) having to give Labour more and fairer coverage;

5) linked to the above, anti-Corbyn MPs/officials being "out of town" and thus not so easy copy for hostile hacks;

6) the Tories fought a dreadful campaign (contrary to MSM myth after the fact, this was not the only thing that mattered tho!)

And Corbyn's ratings *were* almost as bad as now going into the campaign. Labour had just lost a seat it had held since 1935 to the Tories FFS!

Now, I appreciate things *are* different now in some respects - in particular, it will be harder to just push Brexit aside especially if the election is before we have left (though equally I wouldn't be totally shocked if Labour's approach actually goes down quite well during a campaign) and there is no guarantee the Tory campaign will be as dismal (though given BoJo's recent pratfalls in the public eye, who knows?) But equally, even the best polls for the Tories don't show them doing as well as in spring 2017 - and if those aren't the ones that are correct, what then?

So in short, yes the Tories *could* win a snap election. But some of the pessimism on my side is much overdone - its still all to play for

[Pericles]

Of course it's all to play for, there's a very wide range of possible scenarios-the electorate is very volatile and polling accuracy is unclear. I'm not sure whether the most likely of those possible scenarios is a hung parliament or a Tory majority though.

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/09/20/world/europe/boris-johnson-brexit-polls.amp.html


Because the voters have a feeling that parliament is trying to sabotage Brexit plain and simple . If they weren’t trying to sabotage it they would have voted for May’s deal

[Silent Hunter]

Some people felt May's deal wasn't "proper Brexit".

[Silent Hunter]

Another thing of interest: a motion has been tabled to the Labour NEC to abolish the position of Deputy Leader...

[Pericles]

And anyway, people could have also preferred a softer Brexit and thought May's deal was too economically damaging. Additionally, it was quite far from what the Leave campaign promised, and certainly didn't appear to be the 'will of the people', so MPs were right to vote their conscience and think that Remain is a better outcome and voters deserve a chance to revisit the issue.

[Blair]

And anyway, people could have also preferred a softer Brexit and thought May's deal was too economically damaging. Additionally, it was quite far from what the Leave campaign promised, and certainly didn't appear to be the 'will of the people', so MPs were right to vote their conscience and think that Remain is a better outcome and voters deserve a chance to revisit the issue.

In hindsight it really is criminal just how much the Leave Campaign got away with any scrutiny.

The Leave Campaign promised we'd keep all the benefits, without ever having to trigger Article 50. Of course the leave campaign was a campaign- it was never a coherent campaign for governing, and I reckon if you sat down the 10 or so MPs who lead it and asked 'ok you're going to win what happens now?' you'd get 8 people scratching their head, one person saying Norway and someone saying second referendum.

[CumbrianLefty]

Strong rumours that the Watson business is really about Corbyn being about to step down soon (he may even announce it in his big speech next week) and his "deputy" not then automatically stepping into his shoes even temporarily when he does. Not least because many genuinely fear that he would try to rig any leadership contest in his faction's favour.

And though not many in the media (who see very chummy with him now, what a contrast to the phone hacking days eh?) will report this, Watson p***ed off people well beyond the "usual suspects" with his recent gratuitously clumsy intervention on Brexit - his demand that a GE be delayed for several months in the (almost certainly chimerical, without one) pursuit of a referendum was greatly ill-judged, and supported by hardly anybody.

Add to that the undoubted fact (just ask any almost random CLP meeting) that most members who voted for him in 2015 would certainly not do so now (many thinking he won on a thoroughly cynical if not false prospectus) and things were always likely to come to a head at some point.

[Lumine]

I don't want to repeat the "Labour should be 20% ahead in the polls" trope, but the Watson situation is so absurd that (yet again) it defies satire. Perhaps the whole matter will be defused, but I can't believe they'd think this (out of all possible options) is the moment to attempt a purge which will cause huge backlash within the PLP... particularly after witnessing Johnson shooting himself in the foot by erasing his majority.

Do they even want to win the next election? They're making Milliband look like a strategic genius.

[Blair]

Strong rumours that the Watson business is really about Corbyn being about to step down soon (he may even announce it in his big speech next week) and his "deputy" not then automatically stepping into his shoes even temporarily when he does. Not least because many genuinely fear that he would try to rig any leadership contest in his faction's favour.

And though not many in the media (who see very chummy with him now, what a contrast to the phone hacking days eh?) will report this, Watson p***ed off people well beyond the "usual suspects" with his recent gratuitously clumsy intervention on Brexit - his demand that a GE be delayed for several months in the (almost certainly chimerical, without one) pursuit of a referendum was greatly ill-judged, and supported by hardly anybody.

Add to that the undoubted fact (just ask any almost random CLP meeting) that most members who voted for him in 2015 would certainly not do so now (many thinking he won on a thoroughly cynical if not false prospectus) and things were always likely to come to a head at some point.

But to do anything as Labour Leader you need an NEC majority; even as acting leader I can’t see what Tom could do to rig the next election, and they were passing rules to completely limit the power of a deputy.

This is no different to when they stopped Emily Thornberry from doing PMQs, when they changed Clive Lewis speech on trident in the TelePrompTer, when they changed the GS UNITE election or when introduced ridiculous new trigger rules; it’s all about punishing people who aren’t part of LOTO and the Unite Axis. Yes it’s politics, yes the New Labour Machine did it in the early years but it’s still vicious, and it’s still making the party miserable at times.

Seeing as most of the Tory press are baying for his blood over the Paedophile ring I don’t think it’s that true? Both sides within labour know how to text and brief journalists- it’s not 2015 and JCs team are more than able to do it when they want.

And to sound like a smug idiot I voted for Tom in 2015 knowing full well what he was- a trade union fixer on the right of the party who knew how to campaign well. If they wanted someone from the campaign group they should have ran someone.

[CumbrianLefty]

The vote to "abolish Watson" has been pulled - there will be an examination of the DL position (*) as part of a more general review aimed at "strengthening party democracy".

(*worth remembering here that the post - as we know it, at least - was created as a sop to the almost overweening vanity of Herbert Morrison, and there has for as long as I can remember been a section of opinion in the party who would like to see it scrapped)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

https://twitter.com/DanRebellato/status/1175311928299794433

[YL]

The vote to "abolish Watson" has been pulled - there will be an examination of the DL position (*) as part of a more general review aimed at "strengthening party democracy".

(*worth remembering here that the post - as we know it, at least - was created as a sop to the almost overweening vanity of Herbert Morrison, and there has for as long as I can remember been a section of opinion in the party who would like to see it scrapped)

Well, at least it was pulled, but again this incident suggests that too many people in the Labour Party, including those in key positions, are way too interested in internal factional vendettas and the like.  And for someone who wants the vile group of people currently passing as a government out, this is incredibly frustrating.

I do realise that you need two sides for a factional war and that the right wing of the Labour Party is not exactly innocent in all this, and Watson isn't really my cup of tea, though I think he's right on Brexit.  But why Lansman thought it was sensible to try this on at this time and why some more people apparently supported him really beats me.

[CumbrianLefty]

The vote to "abolish Watson" has been pulled - there will be an examination of the DL position (*) as part of a more general review aimed at "strengthening party democracy".

(*worth remembering here that the post - as we know it, at least - was created as a sop to the almost overweening vanity of Herbert Morrison, and there has for as long as I can remember been a section of opinion in the party who would like to see it scrapped)

Well, at least it was pulled, but again this incident suggests that too many people in the Labour Party, including those in key positions, are way too interested in internal factional vendettas and the like.  And for someone who wants the vile group of people currently passing as a government out, this is incredibly frustrating.

I do realise that you need two sides for a factional war and that the right wing of the Labour Party is not exactly innocent in all this, and Watson isn't really my cup of tea, though I think he's right on Brexit.  But why Lansman thought it was sensible to try this on at this time and why some more people apparently supported him really beats me.

Though he "believed" almost the diametric opposite immediately after the referendum. Just shows that he is basically a snake who should not be trusted by anybody - I have barely wavered in my own belief he is fundamentally a bad 'un ever since his 2006 antics (and who was the party leader then?)

[DaWN]

I think my views on Corbyn and Corbyn's Labour have been made very plain and I've never liked Watson. Make of that what you will.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

https://twitter.com/DanRebellato/status/1175311928299794433

This is kind of a problem that goes deeper than Corbyn, though, isn't it? Like, the idea that There Be Dragons morally and electorally speaking everywhere outside the Labour Party as such, seems to be an entrenched element of the party's culture and mindset. Or have I just not been following British politics closely for long enough to remember a time when that wasn't the case?

[Silent Hunter]

Mike Hill (Hartlepool) has been suspended from Labour over an allegation of sexual harrassment.

[CumbrianLefty]

Mike Hill (Hartlepool) has been suspended from Labour over an allegation of sexual harrassment.

Well that's him b***ered for any early GE given the speed (or rather, lack of) the party usually shows in dealing with these things <cough> Kelvin Hopkins <cough>

[Lechasseur]

https://news.yahoo.com/amphtml/labour-members-abolish-monarchy-queen-130240053.html

Apparently over 60% of Labour Party members want the monarchy abolished.

[RedPrometheus]

https://news.yahoo.com/amphtml/labour-members-abolish-monarchy-queen-130240053.html

Apparently over 60% of Labour Party members want the monarchy abolished.

Labour really have their priorities straight

[CumbrianLefty]

That finding does not mean that 60% have it as a top "priority". Though given both recent happenings and possible future developments, British republicanism could be due a bit of an upturn anyway?

[Silent Hunter]

Labour's policy is now to effectively abolish private schools.

[PSOL]

Labour's policy is now to effectively abolish private schools.

Eliminates the future generations of idiotic Etonians, nice.

[Silent Hunter]

Eton would likely survive; the smaller schools would likely go and you'd have to find places for them in the state sector.

[CumbrianLefty]

Labour's policy is now to effectively abolish private schools.

Passed on a show of hands, so no not actual "policy". But the direction of travel is clear, and polls indicate it is more popular than the "chattering classes" (so bound up with private schools themselves) are ever likely to give credit for.