That aside, what did you think of the launch this morning and in particular, Corbyn's performance?
Corbyn is strong when he gets the chance to talk about policy which is where his passion lies. He's a great activist politician, just not a great leading one. I've always liked the man and many of his policies, I just think they won't chime with the electorate or are a good idea but not thought through with care. And the Labour Party is in such disunity at the moment that I wouldn't trust them to renationalise the Parliament cleaners, let alone the £66bn water industry. Although if Corbyn did turn it round and win then it would be a seismic shift that nobody could fail to back - it could change British political landscape for generations. I'm just not confident that he can do that without appealing to the aspirational middle classes, and I don't see many aspirational middle class policies there.
There's a problem with his election strategy also. He seems to be visiting mostly echo chambers - Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool; they already are going to vote Labour. What he isn't doing is attacking marginals which can win him seats, which you'd imagine he'd want to be doing. There's a rumour in the Party that he's trying to up his popular vote numbers in order to show that his policies are popular which will give us either a post election Corbyn (doubtful) or a Corbyn ally (possible) as next leader. Energising current Labour voters to turnout at the polls rather than winning Labour any new voters.
Excuse the wording of this, as am not fully clear on it myself. I agree with you on the choice of the word radical in this context. Though, strangely, one definition of radical is "of or going to the root or origin*" - which might imply truly essential/grounded in that which brings balance. But then again if a state of imbalance (instability) is seen as 'normal,' then that which brings balance (stability) may well be seen as abnormal and/or the 'radical' that is associated with "favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms*" Is there a case for the idea that Labour's desire for a more balanced society may be laudable but that they are going about it in a way (perhaps too fast, too soon, that unbalances the mind of the electorate?) that makes the party effectively unelectable?Nah, PR machine still staffed by monkeys.
"Radical" should be nowhere near this. Radical says Communist, Che Guervera, Islamic terrorism and California surfers - nothing that inspires confidence in the governability. Students are radical, adults are sensible.
They should have used the word either "transformative change" which is a popular buzz word at the moment and appeals to Mondeo Man or "foundational change" which sounds like something a primary school or hospital might do.
People dont like radical. They like stable. Even the angry ones.
I remember posters on here we won't vote brexit, we did ,Jeremy Corbin,100 to 1 outsider to lead the party he did, now apparently 20 points behind the twats sorry mean Tories according to the latest figures, anyone see a pattern come on LABOUR
Regardless of the result we definitely need a strong oppersition, it will be no good for the country if labour are anialated, I think it will be closer than many thinkLabour will not win the general election but the massacre may not be as high as predicted. The problem for them will be afterwards
Regardless of the result we definitely need a strong oppersition, it will be no good for the country if labour are anialated, I think it will be closer than many think