Channel 4 Dispatches - Momentum Party

whitewave, I cannot support Corbyn, I don't trust him so how can I believe which of his policies are truely his policies ,

trisher if you are interested in what anyone on what you class as the right thinks I suggest you ask them

There was a programme with interviews from Accrington earlier this evening. Those people interviewed didn't really know much about policies, but criticised Corbyn as a person. I don't know if that's typical, but I suspect it might be. Whitewave, policies might be important to you and me, but I suspect many people don't know much about them. They want the basic things - healthcare, decent schools, affordable housing, jobs and they resent people they see as not making an effort (thank Tory propaganda and the media for that one) and they're not keen on immigrants. Nobody mentioned defence or foreign policy. It wasn't mentioned, but it's obvious from comments on other sites that people don't understand the difference between a household and a national budget.

Sadly, I don't think the policies do matter to many people. They seem more concerned by having confidence in a leader. I think that's why Thatcher and Blair lasted as long as they did.

Policies matter greatly to me but I have to trust the person who promises to deliver them, I do not trust Corbyn

Never mind Joe Soap from Accrington...... Most Labour MP's don't want Corbyn and his policies either, and they are hardly ill-educated or ill-informed on politics.

Seems that is because they are all blairites , the fact he left the house in 2007 is conveniently forgotten , there have been two elections since then

I think you'll find most labour MPs do want his policies, roses.
In fact when the debates were on the sentence most often spoken by Owen Smith was, "I agree with Jeremy."

Even Annie agrees with his policies.

Not all his policies. And I do not want a Militant as party leader

I getting completely confused here.

I thought mandates were composed of policies and that was,what people voted for.
So Daphne I think that the ordinary punter can only get their opinions from the media and we know that is 78% hostile to Corbyn and largely hostile to any labour bod.
Policies however are absolutely essential because without them it all makes no sense.

What I am interested in is whether Corbyn developing policies are anathema to you and why or is it the person you object to?
I think many of us can agree that he is not the most charismatic of leaders, but given that so often people have verbalise that they dislike the cult of personality etc etc and that policies are what matters, then if the Plp got behind him andsupported the policies big time it would all flow from there and personality would be a minor factor.

I want to see a strong government, which overturns the damage the Tories have done, but my vote doesn't count. Therefore, it doesn't really matter what I think.

If there's going to be a Labour government (or even a left coalition), I won't have anything to do with it. It will be up to the voters in constituencies where Labour stands a chance. I look at the situation as a hands off, third party observer.

London is different from most of the rest of the country, but the Labour heartlands have been in the former industrial North. I keep seeing interviews and reports that these people feel alienated by Labour and are turning to Ukip. Arron Banks has repeatedly said that these constituencies are on his hitlist. If people who have voted Labour in the past are not happy, it's a concern to me.

Labour needs to gain just over 100 seats in the next election. If you look at the places they need to win, these are generally 'middle England' towns - ordinary people with ordinary jobs, etc, but crucially they distrust Labour. Many of them are the 'squeezed middle' who fear that extra spending will come out of their pockets, unless Labour is serious about cracking down on tax loopholes and raising taxes for the wealthiest. I don't believe that's as easy as waving a magic wand.

I do agree with most of Corbyn's policies. I don't have much time for the man himself. I wonder what he would have thought of Gordon Brown's 'bigoted woman' - I suspect he would have agreed and he can't afford to dismiss people whose views don't coincide with his own principles. I firmly believe that the Labour Party needs to win and it needs to represent the views of voters, rather than expecting voters to agree with its views. Corbyn needs to get a grip on some of his supporters, because they're doing a great deal of damage on social media with their naive and over-enthusiastic support.

Actually, Joe Soap from Accrington DOES matter - as do all the other Joe Soaps across the country, because they're the ones who will vote.

All votes count surely? We are all to a degree observers, but we are also directly affected by what governments choose to do, even if it simply means living in a culturally impoverished country. You may not personally be affected by governmental policies, but you will live in a country where its citizens may feel unequal or very satisfied with their life.

You have to ask yourself why they distrust Labour. Of course by far the largest reply will be the economy. I see this as largely down to two factors.
Labour has singularly failed to robustly defend its record and the 2008 banking debacle.
The second factor is of course the hostile press and media. Traditionally, There is little active political participation in this country, and we know fromwhere most people get their misinformation.
The phenomenon of Corbyn and the enlarged membership shows that there is indeed enthusiasm for political participation and this should be applauded rather than denigrated. It shows a level of healthy democracy.

Sorry posted too soon
You cannot objectively assume what is in any politicians mind. You only have what they say and in particular what they do as evidence.

Being naive and over enthusiastic is a by product of being young, all of us went through that stage, and it should as I suggested be encouraged. Maturity will come all too soon as we have all found out.

I am not sure that you are entirely correct when you say that parties should reflect the views of voters. Impossible!! What does happen is that they the parties set out their stall in the manifesto. This will chime with many people to a lesser or greater degree, and will attract votes accordingly.

UKIP may have won some votes but it has singularly failed to attract any active or extra political attention with new members signing up in their droves. It is politics by headline, and the media is willing to aid this.

How does my vote count, whitewave? I live in a constituency where the incumbent Conservative polled over 51% of the votes and that really isn't going to change. Apart from a couple of local elections, I have never in my life voted for the winner. The FPTP system means that my views are swept aside and I can only win by proxy, if other people outside my constituency vote for a party I want.

If a party doesn't reflect the views of voters, whose views should it represent? Surely that's the way to autocracy. There's a dilemma here. I agree that government shouldn't become the tool of some kind of mob rule, which is why I hope there is never a referendum on contentious issues such as hanging, especially just after a serial killer has been prosecuted.

Somehow there needs to be a balance between a representative and a delegated government. I don't think the Labour Party has got to grips with that, especially on immigration.

Ukip doesn't need to sign up a mass membership. All it needs to do is target the seats where it has a chance of winning. It already has made made a difference with tactical voting in marginal seats. Ukip didn't win, but (in some cases) it prevented others from winning and a significant number of voters do agree with its values. Fortunately, it's experiencing its own internal problems.

England has not had an election, Wales did in May. UKIP took seven seats , not wise to dismiss them so lightly , Wales has always been a labour stronghold .

I don't want a leader regarded as a phenomenon and I don't want a leader who needs to be protected from the public and the media . We hear much more from McDonald than Corbyn and it is fact that there is a fear that McDonald is preparing to be party leader . Too much going on in dark places .

Corbyn refuses to consider controlled immigration yet the public want it , wise?

In relation to UKIP " when naive politicians ignore their people, they will turn to someone who will listen" Not my words, but something I read.

I think Daphne was right when she said Joe Soap matters .

Also is it wise to think the young will carry the Labour Party to victory, look what happened to Clegg . The Tories went for the grey vote and won the young are idealistic , make one crack in their ideals and they turn away.

Daphne didn't delegated government land us with Brexit? I think UKIP's success has been due to people thinking that Nigel Farage represented their own views.
If we want a grown-up government, we need politicians who have the intelligence and integrity to identify correctly the problems we face as a society, devise solutions and policies to address those issues and the courage and honesty to present them to the electorate in a way that they can understand.
I realise that probably sounds very naive but I'm sick of sound bites and the cult of personality in politics.

No, representative government landed us with Brexit. Delegated government would have left the decision to MPs, most of whom were in favour of Remain (quite correctly, in my opinion).

I agree with you, by the way. We need a government with intelligence and integrity. People have begun to distrust the integrity of MPs.

Like most social liberals who isn't affected much by immigration, it isn't high on my agenda. I challenge bigotry and have witnessed real fascism first-hand. Nevertheless, it troubles me that my virulent anti-racism/xenophobia is possibly in itself a form of bigotry.

I read on a blog about a Labour MP who was knocking on doors in an ex-mill town Northern constituency (can't remember which). The MP knocked on the door of a staunch Labour voter in her 80s and got talking to her. She said she was lonely. She'd lived in the same street all her life and used to have friends nearby and could pop into the local shop for a chat, but gradually the street had been taken over by Bangladeshis, as had the shop. Who am I to tell this lady that she should just put up with her new neighbours? Immigration control wouldn't help the situation, but it's understandable that this lady thought it would.

There are pockets of the country where high a number of skilled immigrants have driven down wages. There's no point telling people that it's the survival of the fittest and unskilled workers need to up their game if they're going to compete with the newcomers.

These are real people and their concerns are real. The unions were initially hostile to the new wave of immigrants with the Windrush. Multi-cuturalism is being challenged and the old prejudices have never entirely gone away. It's not enough for social liberals, like me, to say it doesn't matter and preach equality, because people are angry that it's not being addressed. Unfortunately, they're vulnerable to exploitation by real racists.

Well, I'm confused now Daphne.
I thought that a representative democracy meant that MPs took a decision on our behalf (as would have happened if they had voted over EU membership) and that holding a referendum and bypassing the views of MPs, and forcing them to carry out the wishes of the electorate meant that the MPs became mere delegates.

ddil I was agreeing with your posts, saying never mind Joe Soap in Accrington etc, didn't mean that the ordinary voter didn't matter ( matters more than anything!) but I was pointing out that it isn't just the man in the street ( in Accrington) but that most of the PLP didn't want ( a lot of) the policies and don't want Corbyn either.

You are also correct to say that people are angry that their concerns were not addressed ( about immigration) and haven't been for the last 30 years,which of course gives out and out racists an 'in'. Governments have just ridden rough shod over the views of people in various parts of the country for quite a while.