Who will be the new Labour leader?

[Beati Dogu]

And there's The Manchester Guardian (now just "The Grauniad"), which was created in the aftermath of the Peterloo massacre of 1819, when a large crowd of protesters were charged by cavalry, killing 15 and injuring hundreds.

[robinessex]

I think the whole thing is hilarious. And politics is still bks. 99% of politicians are useless.

[Alex]

I am loving every minute of the New Old Labour party self-destruction. It's even funnier than people were predicting!

[ralphrj]

Alex said:

I am loving every minute of the New Old Labour party self-destruction. It's even funnier than people were predicting!

I am more concerned than amused.

4 months ago 9.3m people thought that Ed Miliband would be the right man to lead Britain. A further 1.5m voted SNP and 1.2m voted Green. Corbyn would be happy to deal with all of these parties and I wouldn't be surprised to see a Labour-SNP-Green alliance in the future. Those parties combined would have won over 600k more votes than the Conservatives.

Logically the further left Labour go the more centrist voters they will lose but if they go to the Libdems rather than the Tories and Corbyn can form an alliance of the more radical left parties then he can win.

[turbobloke]

ralphrj said:

Alex said:

I am loving every minute of the New Old Labour party self-destruction. It's even funnier than people were predicting!

I am more concerned than amused.

4 months ago 9.3m people thought that Ed Miliband would be the right man to lead Britain. A further 1.5m voted SNP and 1.2m voted Green. Corbyn would be happy to deal with all of these parties and I wouldn't be surprised to see a Labour-SNP-Green alliance in the future. Those parties combined would have won over 600k more votes than the Conservatives.

Logically the further left Labour go the more centrist voters they will lose but if they go to the Libdems rather than the Tories and Corbyn can form an alliance of the more radical left parties then he can win.

On votes possibly, but 600,000 votes isn't enough and it must be doubtful he could win on seats - it's seats that count.

[Smollet]

turbobloke said:

On votes possibly, but 600,000 votes isn't enough and it must be doubtful he could win on seats - it's seats that count.

To get into power he first has to convert those who voted SNP back to Labour. Well that isn't going to happen with the Harpy now going for independence again. Also the new boundary changes will not be in his favour so best he enjoys himself whilst the can because his reign will be short lived once the Blairites realise it's going tits up on an industrial scale and plot his downfall.

[Alex]

With Corbyn's views on such topics as the IRA, the Army and the Falklands, he's going to lose former Labour voters to UKIP.

[Justayellowbadge]

S

ralphrj said:

I am more concerned than amused.

4 months ago 9.3m people thought that Ed Miliband would be the right man to lead Britain. A further 1.5m voted SNP and 1.2m voted Green. Corbyn would be happy to deal with all of these parties and I wouldn't be surprised to see a Labour-SNP-Green alliance in the future. Those parties combined would have won over 600k more votes than the Conservatives.

Logically the further left Labour go the more centrist voters they will lose but if they go to the Libdems rather than the Tories and Corbyn can form an alliance of the more radical left parties then he can win.

Labour complained, bitterly, about the vote labour get SNP message but it was no doubt effective.

As attractive as Corbyn is to some, he will be even more unattractive to moderates of all flavours. A coalition with Sturgeon and the greens even more so.

[ralphrj]

turbobloke said:

On votes possibly, but 600,000 votes isn't enough and it must be doubtful he could win on seats - it's seats that count.

Based on the boundaries in place in 2015 (I know they will be changed by 2020) Labour did not need to win the popular vote to win the most seats. Labour had an overall majority of 66 and 157 more MPs than the Tories in 2005 with less than 800k more votes.

Someone would have to analyse all the results to get a real picture. From memory the Tories picked up seats from the Libdems - those seats will be at risk if voters turn to the Libdems from Labour. The question mark is how many seats could a Labour-SNP-Green alliance win if they only stood a single candidate against the Tories.

[turbobloke]

ralphrj said:

turbobloke said:

On votes possibly, but 600,000 votes isn't enough and it must be doubtful he could win on seats - it's seats that count.

Based on the boundaries in place in 2015 (I know they will be changed by 2020) Labour did not need to win the popular vote to win the most seats. Labour had an overall majority of 66 and 157 more MPs than the Tories in 2005 with less than 800k more votes.

Someone would have to analyse all the results to get a real picture. From memory the Tories picked up seats from the Libdems - those seats will be at risk if voters turn to the Libdems from Labour. The question mark is how many seats could a Labour-SNP-Green alliance win if they only stood a single candidate against the Tories.

Also shifting apart from the (imminent) bioundary changes is the Conservative share of the vote in those pesky opinion polls, 42% from ComRes in August, shy Tories not so shy perhaps. With Mr Corbyn at the Labour helm there has to be a basis for this number increasing further. Some disenchanted Labour voters will vote Tory not LibDem. How many remains to be seen.

[Blib]

On LBC this morning, Hilary Benn was challenged on the Falklands. He stated the party's official position, which is that is the settled will of the Islanders to remain British. He "politiced" himself out of commenting on Mr Corbyn's slightly differnt take on things Malvinas.

[Vaud]

Alex said:

With Corbyn's views on such topics as the IRA, the Army and the Falklands, he's going to lose former Labour voters to UKIP.

And some centre-left people who would just stay at home rather than vote for an IRA sympathisers as PM and Chancellor.

For the gains they make on one side, they will lose many on the other.

The theory of "creating a new electoral support base" is, even in the view of the Fabian Society, flawed.

Quite a well considered and balanced analysis here:

http://www.fabians.org.uk/under-corbyns-electoral-...

[Vaud]

Blib said:

On LBC this morning, Hilary Benn was challenged on the Falklands. He stated the party's official position, which is that is the settled will of the Islanders to remain British. He "politiced" himself out of commenting on Mr Corbyn's slightly differnt take on things Malvinas.

Benn is about the best asset that Corbyn has.

[otolith]

Vaud said:

Quite a well considered and balanced analysis here:

http://www.fabians.org.uk/under-corbyns-electoral-...

There's a lot of long African river in the comments.

[Vaud]

otolith said:

There's a lot of long African river in the comments.

Took me a moment, but yes, there is.

[tim0409]

There is a rumour on twitter that Caroline Lucas may be offered a position in the shadow cabinet with responsibility for energy. Now that would be interesting....

[turbobloke]

tim0409 said:

There is a rumour on twitter that Caroline Lucas may be offered a position in the shadow cabinet with responsibility for energy. Now that would be interesting....

If so and fortunately for everyone else she'd actually have no responsibility at all for energy, but those that have it are little better.

But yes, interesting! He needs more non-London women apparently.

[tim0409]

turbobloke said:

If so and fortunately for everyone else she'd actually have no responsibility at all for energy, but those that have it are little better.

Should have said responsibility for Labour energy policy, but your wider point is entirely correct.

[turbobloke]

tim0409 said:

turbobloke said:

If so and fortunately for everyone else she'd actually have no responsibility at all for energy, but those that have it are little better.

Should have said responsibility for Labour energy policy, but your wider point is entirely correct.

Totally understood, it was an opportunity to mention that Lucas has not and will not have any responsibility for energy, which is quite reassuring even in the typing of it!

[Pan Pan Pan]

Vaud said:

Alex said:

With Corbyn's views on such topics as the IRA, the Army and the Falklands, he's going to lose former Labour voters to UKIP.

And some centre-left people who would just stay at home rather than vote for an IRA sympathisers as PM and Chancellor.

For the gains they make on one side, they will lose many on the other.

The theory of "creating a new electoral support base" is, even in the view of the Fabian Society, flawed.

Quite a well considered and balanced analysis here:

http://www.fabians.org.uk/under-corbyns-electoral-...

Perhaps another factor affecting voters would be how well (or not) the UK will be doing by 2020?
If the country is doing well, many might conclude that this is down to the way in which the government has handled the economy, amongst other matters, including our membership of the EU, immigration, power supplies etc etc. From experience they will know that labour trashes the UK economy every time they get into number 10, more comprehensively than the tories ever have.
With Corbyn at the helm, the destruction of the UK would seem many, many times more likely.
Interesting times lay ahead.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Monday 14th September 11:59