Devastating, but SO accurate :
https://capx.co/where-does-corbyn-leave ... ft-voters/
Theresa May’s decision to break yet another promise and force Britain into a general election is less about bringing forward the 2020 vote and more about delaying the first post-Brexit poll.
She knows she needs time at the other end of the final Brexit outcome to implement the transition deals and re-stabilise the economy. Why? Because she cannot meet the high expectations of the UKIP-lite tendency in her party and will not be able to get a deal that does not harm working people in Britain.
Labour must use this election not to “change the question” but to make that point. Yes, May calls the election from a polling advantage – both the party and her personally are ahead in the polls – but on policy, it is from a point of weakness. The country needs an opposition to point this out and a plan about what could reasonably done instead. The leadership must make this their focus, and ensure it does not slip into hard-Brexit and give May a blank cheque. She certainly does not deserve one.
The result does however increase the chances that Jeremy Corbyn will be able to stay on after a defeat. Removing Corbyn would mean handing control back to Tom Watson, with whom McCluskey's relations are now at an all time low. “I think there’s a feeling of: you came for me, you bastard, now I’m coming for you,” a trade union official says. That means that the chances that Corbyn will be able to weather a defeat on 8 June – provided Labour retain close to what one figure dubbed the “magic number” of 200 seats – have now considerably increased.
David Blanchflower wasn't endorsing this!STATE assets sold off on the cheap by Tories could be renationalised “without compensation,” Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign said at the weekend.
The warning to big business profiteers came as the leftwinger’s economic plan was endorsed by 41 leading economists, including former Bank of England monetary policy committee member David Blanchflower.
At which point do the NEC quietly step in and say "Sorry Jeremy, but enough is enough"?Tubby Isaacs wrote:Another "symbolic" vote of no confidence then.
My thoughts exactly. I assume the NEC could say "Okay Jeremy, you've had your fun but now it's time to go for the good of the party."Tubby Isaacs wrote:Absolutely.
Yes because two thirds of the members place their own ideological purity over that of winning an election.Boiler wrote:My thoughts exactly. I assume the NEC could say "Okay Jeremy, you've had your fun but now it's time to go for the good of the party."Tubby Isaacs wrote:Absolutely.
But I also assume the backlash from the members would be horrific and it could set a precedent.
Yay! Top Trumps!
Ah, I dunno that it's even that limited. I've neve[…]
Would appreciate any Twitterers getting this out, […]
It's a hard time of year for anyone to find a spar[…]