Originally Posted by
KerrAvon
I think your memory may be playing tricks.
New Labour should have been trounced in 2010 – after 13 years of government and with the 2008 crash hanging over the economy it should have been a walkover for the Tories. Instead they were left needing to go into coalition with the Lib Dems.
In 2015 with New Labour under Miliband, the Tories managed a working majority of just 12.
Fast forward to 2017 for the result under Corbyn and consider the circumstances of the election: Seven years of austerity, the Tories running what must be one of the most ill-conceived and badly judged election campaigns in British Political history and with Labour springing the tuition fee bribe to the middle classes. Labour should have romped home. Instead, they lost, which suggests that their ‘much stronger and popular manifesto’ wasn’t actually very popular.
If you are happy with Labour ‘performing better’ instead of actually winning anything then I am sure that many Tories up and down the country will share your happiness.
If you want to see examples of Labour losing heavily, go back to the 80s to see Foot running on a radical left wing ticket (and Foot was streets ahead of Corbyn as a politician).
On Brexit, Corbyn has been rendered ineffective by trying to lead two parties at once. He has to be a Leaver for the purposes of the Northern Labour Party and a Remainer for the purposes of London Labour Party. His refusal to speak to May after the defeat of her deal was forced upon him by that; he picked on the only thing that might go some to appeasing both parties – that no deal should be ruled out – and then used that as a pretext to refuse to talk, for fear that he might have to say what he was for rather than what he was against. To be fair, in the absence of a willingness to upset one of his parties, it was the only course he could adopt, but it just made him look silly to all but dyed-in-the- wool Labour supporters - hence the ribbing that upset Abbott on Question Time.
Hall Of Fame
Reply With Quote