The absurd way that Cameron has shot himself in the foot and destroyed his own Administration and legacy ought to be a great opportunity for Labour. Instead they are totally divided over Jeremy Corbyn.
Corbyn is sort of like the UK Bernie Sanders, the difference being, there Bernie actually won.
Maybe this is something to do with the deficit of minority voters in Britain.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/06/thank-god-for-minority-voters.html
Anyway, Corbyn won, and mostly Blairite Labour hates him. But unlike with Bernie, he has a mandate.
Prior to Brexit, Labour mostly bit the bullet. With the success of Brexit the knives are coming out.
The reason is that Corbyn never supported the EU. He had reluctantly taken up the EU cause as leader of Labour but his heart wasn't in it. Now Labour is blaming him for not mobilizing a strong Brexit vote.
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/27/12040056/brexit-corbyn-labour-coup-benn
In breaking news, Labour is now giving him a vote of no confidence.
"Lawmakers from Britain's opposition Labour Party have backed a motion of no confidence in their leader Jeremy Corbyn, the party said on Tuesday."
"The motion was tabled in the wake of Britain's vote to leave the European Union and backed by many who felt he had not campaigned hard enough to keep the country inside the EU, and would not be able to win a future election."
"The result, which was expected after days of heavy criticism from within his party, has no formal consequence and does not automatically trigger a leadership election. Corbyn has previously said he will not resign and would stand again if the party did call a leadership contest."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/28/uk-opposition-labour-party-says-lawmakers-pass-motion-of-no-confidence-in-leader-jeremy-corbyn.html
This is a big reason I was so negative about a Bernie candidacy. There were several reasons.
1. I think he was less electable once he was vetted.
2. But I also thought if elected he'd not be up to the job. He's not Presidential, he's sectarian in outlook.
3. He would have totally divided the Democrats as Corbyn has Labour.
Labour should have a great opportunity now to take back Downing Street. The Conservatives are a divided mess between Remain and Brexit.
It should be easy to demand an early election and give Labour a shot at winning again. But this whole fight over Corbyn will make this hard to impossible.
So a golden opportunity is being squandered.
"Simon Wren-Lewis' advice to Labour is to fight heard for the pro EU vote. Try to win over some who voted Brexit not for xenophobic reasons but because they believe it creates more competition for public services and worse working conditions."
"Interestingly, he thinks that should Boris Johnson win, he won't mind putting Article 50 off and off. Which is probably true. It's quite arguable that Johnson never intended there to be Brexit in the first place, he was just trying to manipulate it for his own political gain."
Corbyn is sort of like the UK Bernie Sanders, the difference being, there Bernie actually won.
Maybe this is something to do with the deficit of minority voters in Britain.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/06/thank-god-for-minority-voters.html
Anyway, Corbyn won, and mostly Blairite Labour hates him. But unlike with Bernie, he has a mandate.
Prior to Brexit, Labour mostly bit the bullet. With the success of Brexit the knives are coming out.
The reason is that Corbyn never supported the EU. He had reluctantly taken up the EU cause as leader of Labour but his heart wasn't in it. Now Labour is blaming him for not mobilizing a strong Brexit vote.
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/27/12040056/brexit-corbyn-labour-coup-benn
In breaking news, Labour is now giving him a vote of no confidence.
"Lawmakers from Britain's opposition Labour Party have backed a motion of no confidence in their leader Jeremy Corbyn, the party said on Tuesday."
"The motion was tabled in the wake of Britain's vote to leave the European Union and backed by many who felt he had not campaigned hard enough to keep the country inside the EU, and would not be able to win a future election."
"The result, which was expected after days of heavy criticism from within his party, has no formal consequence and does not automatically trigger a leadership election. Corbyn has previously said he will not resign and would stand again if the party did call a leadership contest."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/28/uk-opposition-labour-party-says-lawmakers-pass-motion-of-no-confidence-in-leader-jeremy-corbyn.html
This is a big reason I was so negative about a Bernie candidacy. There were several reasons.
1. I think he was less electable once he was vetted.
2. But I also thought if elected he'd not be up to the job. He's not Presidential, he's sectarian in outlook.
3. He would have totally divided the Democrats as Corbyn has Labour.
Labour should have a great opportunity now to take back Downing Street. The Conservatives are a divided mess between Remain and Brexit.
It should be easy to demand an early election and give Labour a shot at winning again. But this whole fight over Corbyn will make this hard to impossible.
So a golden opportunity is being squandered.
"Simon Wren-Lewis' advice to Labour is to fight heard for the pro EU vote. Try to win over some who voted Brexit not for xenophobic reasons but because they believe it creates more competition for public services and worse working conditions."
"Interestingly, he thinks that should Boris Johnson win, he won't mind putting Article 50 off and off. Which is probably true. It's quite arguable that Johnson never intended there to be Brexit in the first place, he was just trying to manipulate it for his own political gain."
"When I suggested after the vote a possible way that Brexit might be avoided, I was conscious that I might simply be in denial. I have subsequently been encouraged by others suggesting similar things -first Jolyon Maugham, then Nick Pearce and Gideon Rachman in the FT - but of course they may also be in denial. If you ask a Conservative or Labour politician right now they will say that the referendum result must be respected: to do otherwise appears to disrespect voters. Equally European politicians want to make it clear as quickly as possible that there will be no extra concessions to avoid encouraging other exit movements."
"That is why delaying Article 50 for at least a month or two is so important. It allows the immediate passion of the vote to die down, and its immediate economic consequences to sink in. Hopefully that will also discourage other EU countries from going down the same route. By September it will also become obvious to people in the UK that as part of bargaining with the EU it might be a good idea to keep delaying implementing Article 50, and this may also encourage European governments to think about concessions. Maybe."
"I don’t think Boris Johnson would have any problems going down that path, once he was elected leader. (In the meantime he will continue to imagine we can have the impossible, because it allows him to get the votes of MPs in his party who are hardline Leavers.) But what about Labour - assuming it still exists of course. Will it worry about losing its ‘heartlands’, and so be tempted to insist that the referendum means free movement is no longer an option?"
"I think this would be a disastrous political error. Whatever they might propose in the form of controlling EU immigration, they will be outdone by UKIP. That part of the heartlands that really dislikes foreigners are lost to Labour and will not return. (Of course many Conservative voters share similar views.) But if Labour appear to block free movement (and therefore continued EU membership) they will lose a large section of the electorate who voted to Remain. (Remember most Labour voters did vote Remain.) If Labour rejects free movement in any substantive sense, and therefore denies the possibility of remaining, many of these voters will go to the LibDems or elsewhere."
"The best Labour can hope for, when it comes to the heartlands, is to capture the many voters who dislike immigration not for itself, but because of what they believe it creates: more competition for public services, and worse working conditions. (For the majority of Leavers immigration is a fear rather than a direct experience.) Labour can target those voters in two ways: by promising more money for public services across the board, but also by proposing a substantial and very visible scheme by which money follows people."
"This is also a critical point for anyone aspiring to be Labour leader. Labour heartlands are now the cosmopolitan cities like London, Manchester and Bristol. They see the personal benefits of migration and being part of the EU. They have no problem with, and many happily embrace, policies that divert more resources to public services and the lower paid. But they are highly mobile in the political as well as the geographical sense. If a Labour leader tries to appeal to both this group and voters that want above all else to control EU migration by leaving the EU, then they will fail."
https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/
Heck, Wren-Lewis' piece is very good and not so long so I figured I'd quote the whole thing.
"That is why delaying Article 50 for at least a month or two is so important. It allows the immediate passion of the vote to die down, and its immediate economic consequences to sink in. Hopefully that will also discourage other EU countries from going down the same route. By September it will also become obvious to people in the UK that as part of bargaining with the EU it might be a good idea to keep delaying implementing Article 50, and this may also encourage European governments to think about concessions. Maybe."
"I don’t think Boris Johnson would have any problems going down that path, once he was elected leader. (In the meantime he will continue to imagine we can have the impossible, because it allows him to get the votes of MPs in his party who are hardline Leavers.) But what about Labour - assuming it still exists of course. Will it worry about losing its ‘heartlands’, and so be tempted to insist that the referendum means free movement is no longer an option?"
"I think this would be a disastrous political error. Whatever they might propose in the form of controlling EU immigration, they will be outdone by UKIP. That part of the heartlands that really dislikes foreigners are lost to Labour and will not return. (Of course many Conservative voters share similar views.) But if Labour appear to block free movement (and therefore continued EU membership) they will lose a large section of the electorate who voted to Remain. (Remember most Labour voters did vote Remain.) If Labour rejects free movement in any substantive sense, and therefore denies the possibility of remaining, many of these voters will go to the LibDems or elsewhere."
"The best Labour can hope for, when it comes to the heartlands, is to capture the many voters who dislike immigration not for itself, but because of what they believe it creates: more competition for public services, and worse working conditions. (For the majority of Leavers immigration is a fear rather than a direct experience.) Labour can target those voters in two ways: by promising more money for public services across the board, but also by proposing a substantial and very visible scheme by which money follows people."
"This is also a critical point for anyone aspiring to be Labour leader. Labour heartlands are now the cosmopolitan cities like London, Manchester and Bristol. They see the personal benefits of migration and being part of the EU. They have no problem with, and many happily embrace, policies that divert more resources to public services and the lower paid. But they are highly mobile in the political as well as the geographical sense. If a Labour leader tries to appeal to both this group and voters that want above all else to control EU migration by leaving the EU, then they will fail."
https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/
Heck, Wren-Lewis' piece is very good and not so long so I figured I'd quote the whole thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment