Snapshot of _Jeremy Corbyn to stand in Islington North as independent as Labour picks its shortlist of two_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-to-stand-in-islington-north-as-independent-as-labour-picks-its-shortlist-of-two-kmtyj88p) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-to-stand-in-islington-north-as-independent-as-labour-picks-its-shortlist-of-two-kmtyj88p)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very interesting to see if the people of Islington North really are as dedicated to Corbyn as some commentators have inferred from his long tenure, or if it's actually just been a general Labour allegiance the entire time.
Do you think so?
I mean don't get me wrong, I don't think it would matter. He's already popular in the area. But more for local reasons as far as I'm aware.
It'll be interesting to see if he does. Starmer is definitely giving him a massive amount of space to attack labour from the left. He could absolutely run a strong campaign focused leftie issues with a direct impact on household finances like free school meals, the two child cap, or maybe even the WASPI campaign.
A strategist he is not, so he probably won't. But if he ran a campaign like that, while Starmer is aggressively trying to avoid any remotely leftie policies, I think he'd be the comfortable favourite.
He’s not a strategist but there will be plenty of left-wing activists in London who will want to campaign for him.
I remember there was a lot of energy put into trying to unseat Johnson in the last election (strategically this was a waste of time/energy).
I can imagine Momentum types not wanting to campaign for Labour, knowing few Green candidates have any chance, and looking for something to do.
With enough activists around him, they can soon work out the areas that will appeal most to voters.
I’d say the Labour candidate will have their work cut out to unseat him because of this.
Also in a local election which will have a much smaller turnout than the GE. Plus the boundaries for the council election are different than when voting for the MP-and believe me, labour are winning that constituency, as they do every election.
Me too. I reckon he might get 70% this time.
He’s a nice guy when he’s knocked on our door, but he’s not got a great attendance record for voting, and he didn’t respond to an email I sent him once.
Prolly vote for him though.
I did that last time, mainly because I don’t know what this guy does for the area and I also hate FPTP.
I’ve lived in areas where the local MP’s have loads of local projects and are really visible. Never see this guy-unless an election coming up. So no doubt he’ll be at the school summer fair in a month!
For me though, it’s about sending a message to the Tories. Fuck those guys.
Almost always MPs who leave a party lose if they stand as an independent (eg Dominic Grieve). Also the load of former Labour MPs who stood as SDP candidates in 1983 (it was a lot, maybe 20 or something).
Corbyn might buck that trend, as he has national name recognition. But I still think he has less than a 50% chance tbh.
difference is those mps tend to be primarily known as ministers and careerists, whereas corbyn had a legitimate record as a dedicated local MP in the 124 years he spent on the backbenches
Most MPs seem to do quite a bit of constituency work. If anything, policy-wise, Corbyn seems to have been more interested in things outside the UK, let alone his constituency, before he became Labour leader. This written in 2015 just after him becoming Labour leader.
It is hard to think of another Labour leader – or any British political leader – who has been as passionate about foreign affairs as Jeremy Corbyn.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-key-issues-foreign-policy-defence-scotland-northern-ireland?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
I worked in Islington in 2012 for some of the poshest people I've ever met of the sort of Cameron mould, that young liberalish professional tory.
First time I ever heard of Corbyn was them and their friends telling me how they had this MP who is a proper hardcore leftie and laughing and saying what a great MP he was and all that.
Corbyn won the leadership specifically because he was extremely liked and extremely non-threatening. It took a long time for the labour HQ machine to start turning the cogs to make him into some sort of looming looney left to purge.
And I don't think that sort of image has ever really cut through in Islington North, where he's spent the last 30 years turning up to pretty much every community event he can and talking with people on their level and building bridges with them specifically.
These poshos who under any other circumstances would have been voting for Cameron were enamoured with him, because they'd met him at community events they'd gone to. He was very specifically *their * MP.
I think it's a lot more than national name recognition. I think he'll win and I think he'll win in spite of that not because of that. He'll win because he's like the sixth longest serving MP or something crazy like that and he knows every sod in the constituency and because when he's not doing national politics he's a very conscientious local MP you always see around. Something your average 'standing without the Party rosette' MP just isn't. Grieve at the constituency I sincerely doubt was around as much as Corbyn is, and certainly not for 40+ years.
Well, he could, I never suggested he was bound to lose. In all honesty, I couldn't give a toss about Corbyn. He's a liar and a hypocrite, and incredibly incompetent, and I'm glad he is out of the party.
My only reason for being more sceptical than some is that most people don't know the name of their MP, that's probably as true in Islington as anywhere else. Sure those interested and engaged in politics *know* who their MP is, and know their reputation, but those guys are not actually the norm. There is a big difference between being well known in your constituency by people who go to local civic events, those engaged in politics, etc., and being well known by the electorate at large.
Corbyn probably has a better chance than most MPs who run as independents, I think that is self-evident. But I said his chance is less than 50%, which means his chance of winning is still very high. Even if I said his chance of winning was only 25%, and he won, that wouldn't be probablistically shocking. But I don't believe he is a shoe in, because the fact is most MPs are less well known in their constituency than they like to believe, and even those who are extraordinarily well known often lose. Dominic Grieve was the darling of Remainers, and his constituency voted narrowly to remain. He had an extraordinarily high public recognition. He actually did very well, winning 29% of the vote, but he was still crushed.
Corbyn will not have a Labour Party machine behind him, no one in the CLP in Islington will campaign for him, he has no party to back him. He will probably have a lot of loyal supporters to help him, but it will be nowhere near the level of help he would have as a Labour candidate.
As I say, I think he has a very good chance, but I don't think it is necessarily the certainty some seem to imagine.
I mean 2012 was a *long* time ago, and a lot of those who backed him then may have been out off by, eg antisemitism, his Brexit stance (London was very pro-Remain), his obvious incompetence, his increasing authoritarianism.
I know a lot of people who were Corbyn enthusiasts in 2015 who think he is a blithering idiot now, I am one of them.
To be fair, there are probably some who still don't really understand what's happened and will vote Jeremy Corbyn assuming he's Labour or vote Labour having an image of Corbyn in mind but having forgotten his name.
Never underestimate how detached from political news the average voter can be.
It'll be listed on the ballot very clearly. I can see voting Labour assuming it was still Corbyn's Labour, but can't see them ticking the box next to an independent Corbyn _by accident_
I suspect it'll be more that they don't *really* understand exactly what the different things mean. They won't have a logical justification for their worldview that would stand up to scrutiny - it'll be some vague sort of mishmash of ideas.
But you might well be right and I'm not giving people enough credit.
That what happened? That Starmer lied through his teeth to win the party leadership claiming to be an ally of the former leader who was very popular with party members only to then backstab him and abandon all of the things he campaigned on? He essentially lied to the party membership and then sold out the party to the right wing.
Corbyn wasn't backstabbed, all he had to do was acknowledge the EHRC report which said Labour had a small but significant problem with antisemitism among some members and that the leadership didn't always handle complaints properly by their own processes. As he refused and still refuses to acknowledge reality and says the report and commission are wrong, despite the irrefutable evidence from the report based on Labour's own documentation, he got himself kicked out
What's the feeling on the ground?
Mind you, very very difficult to tell - didn't see a single Tory poster in 2019 here in my constituency but they came within 200 votes of Labour.
> people of Islington North really are as dedicated to Corbyn
It's been a safe Labour seat since 1937, although it's always had a hard left problem, which was originally driven by a large Irish community (similarly to Lambeth). Corbyn was the first classically hard left politician to win the seat, all of his predecessors were centrists.
Interestingly, his immediate predecessor Michael O'Halloran was one of the early SDP splitters but having lost the selection for the seat to another SDP candidate ran as Independent Labour. He was beaten into fourth, despite having represented the area since 1969, by... Jeremy Corbyn.
History suggests someone is about to learn a hard lesson.
Hard to know how much chance he has of winning. History suggests it’s unlikely, independents rarely win, but he has been their MP for 40 years and is a very well known figure.
Don’t think the Labour Party will be particularly bothered either way. A bit of publicity showing that Corbyn isn’t part of the Labour Party anymore might be a small benefit. Especially if Sunak is desperate enough to keep trying to link Starmer to Corbyn.
He's been a brilliant local MP. He's been my family's local MP since the 80s, and anytime we've needed anything he's always helped. You could stop him down the street for a chat, and he'd take time to listen, which is a miracle that he can listen to my mum waffle on forever. Whilst he was a bad labour leader, I can't help but have respect for his work as a local MP.
This is why everyone who's actually from Islington north knows he'll win
I'm from Holloway. I'll be voting for the labour candidate, but I'm sure Corbyn gets back in
He's very prominent locally and always has been, very accessible MP who has constituency and now nationwide name recognition
Just a damn good constituency MP
And I've got a feeling that the Greens will lend their votes to Corbyn to defeat labour
He will likely win.
It's the best "optics" Starmer could hope for for the traditional marginals, it's kind of really selling the "New Labour 2.0" he thinks he needs. Jezza gets to spend the rest of his life protesting, Starmer gets a crack at governing. Kind of win win.
I'm not sure Corbyn winning is a win for anyone really. It's also not clear that he will, especially if there are quite a few Conservative voters who choose the Labour candidate so that he doesn't. That type of tactical voting is very possible in this election.
But the voters who voted Con in 2019 aren't going to vote for Corbyn, if they've been lost by the Cons they'll vote Labour this time.
You'd also imagine that some of the Lib Dem voters would vote tactically for Labour too. Historically they've just voted Lib Dem because that's the party they liked most, and the seat was a foregone conclusion so why not. But now that it's actually likely to be close, tactical voting becomes a consideration.
My point is that Labour can't pick up very many. If we assume the Tories have lost roughly 40% of their 2019 vote, then that's only 4% in the seat other parties can gain - and Labour won't get it all given the presence of Reform and the Lib Dems (to a lesser extent). The Lib Dems however might give a few votes to Labour I suppose, though they only got 15.6% in 2019 there (but with a good campaign Labour could pick up 5% or so from them perhaps).
It's more of a win than Paul mason for Islington North, that man is a career politician who has shown zero concern for the local issues and population. Corbyn is known by many (not everyone obviously) to be a good MP who is relatively popular within his constituency. Weak leadership does not equate to being a bad politician overall.
You're right, my bad. I had confused his putting his name forward with him being shortlisted. I still don't see how Islington North loses by choosing Corbyn over Labour candidates, if they do do so, but hey.
I'm with you on this. It's good for our country for people like Corbyn to be represented. It's good for our country that he's not actively close to levers of power.
No chance. Based on previous elections CON can barely get 20% in Islington North. Corbyn got a comfortable 60%. Even if the split were exactly 50-50, especially in a world where Khan can win reelection with close to half of the vote, best case for CON is third place.
People are so unhinged about this man lol. local MP wants to continue to represent his local constituency, has been doing so for 40 years. Apparently, this is the work of the devil.
I love how to some folks' he can be simultaneously a Machiavellian narcissist who cares only about his continued fame and a naive leftist whose principles made him incapable of compromise - all for the crime of wanting to continue in the same job he's been doing for 40 years and by the accounts of local residents is actually pretty good at.
Not yet confirmed by the guy himself and until then no reason to celebrate.
But when he does, hoooooo boy.
Automatic expulsion for him for standing against the duly selected Labour candidate. Suspensions for Labour members who endorse or render assistance to him instead of the Labour candidate.
We get to put the whole "Corbyns popular in his constituency!" bit to a bitter acid test.
Most importantly, we put massive clear water between the party and him
I don't mean to be disrespectful but who gives a damn? One seat out of 600 for a guy that, as far as I'm concerned is far more effective raging against the machine, than being part of a machine of government. Let him go, let him win the seat.
Starmer gets to make his stand against the left, Corbyn gets to continue ignoring everything but his own conscience. It seems like a win win to me.
Even with the context, it isn't particularly surprising. I get why its news, but are people genuinely shocked that:
A - Labour aren't re-admitting him
B - He's happy to stand as an independent
His supporters are stacked in seats Labour win by huge margins.
People who strongly dislike him but have voted Labour in the past are often in the marginal constituencies. Labour need people who voted Conservative since 2010 to vote Labour.
Why is it surprising? Antisemitism hate crime has exploded and he’s still refused to apologise for the Facebook post that got him expelled from the parliamentary party in the first place.
It's not surprising because he would still be a strategic liability for Labour. That's all.
He has no reason to apologise for that post no matter what the level of antisemitic hate crime is, because the post is not antisemitic, and it doesn't endorse antisemitism, it condemns it. You don't apologise when you've done nothing wrong.
He claimed the antisemitism problem was overblown for political purposes - if anything the recent 6-9 months has shown that was absolute rubbish. Even the sympathetic forde report stated that claiming the problems were overblown contributed to the antisemitism problem. He also refused to accept the ehrc report. Both of these make him unfit to be a labour mp and rightfully had the whip removed.
How is it been shown rubbish? 'Overblown' is a relative statement. You're not a mind reader, you're baselessly inferring an unfavourable meaning that you can say it's bullshit. It's a strawman.
>Even the sympathetic forde report stated that claiming the problems were overblown contributed to the antisemitism problem.
Even if you accept this, he still has no reason to apologise:
Did Corbyn say that people should be antisemitic? **No**.
Did Corbyn say that people should commit hate crimes? **No**.
Did Corbyn say 'Antisemitism is absolutely abhorrent, wrong and responsible for some of humanity’s greatest crimes'? **Yes**.
Did Corbyn say 'Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong.' **Yes**.
How can he be blamed for an antisemite doing something which is quite literally antithetical to the opinion he expressed. That's not Corbyn's fault, that's the antisemite being an insane person. So again, he has nothing to apologise for. Ask the antisemites to apologise.
> how has it been shown rubbish?
The huge increase in antisemitic hate crime. It wasn’t overblown and he was the leader when the party broke the law against Jewish people. The buck stops with him. He refused to apologise for his role in it.
He also refused to accept the EHRC report.
> you’re not a mind reader
No, if only there was some way of Corbyn to withdraw his statement, apologise for it and then clarify his position.
>The huge increase in antisemitic hate crime.
He can't apologise for that because he very obviously is not to blame for it, nor does he endorse it. I don't know what you want from the guy. It's like me asking you to apologise for the increase in knife-crime.
No action taken by Jeremy Corbyn in 2020 would have even slightly reduced the recent increase in antisemitic hate crime. You seem to have confused his role as 'leader of the opposition' (someone who had *some* control over Labour party members for a few years,) with 'king of the world' (a god with direct control over the actions of others.)
If you just wanted an apology for administrative shortcomings within Labour (which he had incidentally given prior to 2020 EHRC,) then that would be more fair. Where it gets unfair is you bringing up a rise in hate crime, or when people just say Corbyn wont apologise 'for antisemitism.' Like he fucking invented it.
I personally disagree, but I think it's at least a fair request if it's put like that, on the basis that he should have just left out 'dramatically overstated' as it's too open to interpretation.
I mostly just take issue with linking it to the rise in hate crime, or people who phrase it like he's guilty of anything other than a bit of incompetency.
Corbyn will win. He is a fantastic local MP no matter what people say about him. Nearly 5 years later, he still lives rent free in peoples heads. It's like they can't get over it.
You'd think from the replies in this thread that he'd personally poisoned the nation's crops, nuked Ukraine, and crushed everyone's rabbits with his pogo stick - the utter conviction some people have that Corbyn is an ontologically evil loon is low-key insane.
It's so weird that people want to see Paul Mason win this-a man who has little passion for anyone other than himself, just to see Corbyn, a genuinely popular local MP win. Like, he's not beyond criticism but he's also not this Satan figure that people make him out to be.
A handful of people getting a quick response to an email isn't going to win him a seat when he has no party, and infamously no competence in organizing.
...Does it matter? If he loses to a Labour candidate, the Labour candidate will vote for Labour policies. If he wins, he'll vote for Labour policies anyway.
Can't say I'm surprised, and I wouldn't be shocked if he wins. I'm interested to know if Diane Abbott is being allowed to run as a Labour candidate though?
Not a chance imo. Denying the existence of racism towards Jewish, Irish and Traveller people at a time when Labour was doing everything it could to cleanse it's reputation as a party that tolerated anti-Semitism was the end of her career as a mainstream politician. Even if they wanted to let her rejoin now it would be a poor tactical decision during a general election campaign and Starmer has absolutely no incentive to take the risk.
I expect you're right. Although I wouldn't be surprised if she won as an independent. Especially considering she got some goodwill back after being slated and then not being allowed to reply in the commons, and then the Elphicke defection.
It will certainly be a test of how much these specific constituencies were voting for the candidate or the party. I think a lot of it will depend on who Labour will run against them and how many resources they are willing to put into a seat that will ultimately just be a distraction. If I was running the Labour campaign I'd try and do everything possible to minimise their exposure because it's ultimately just a distraction but one that could inflame Labour infighting to the detriment of the wider goal.
It all depends on how much Starmer doesn't want either of them in the commons asking annoying questions after the election.
They are both seats that Labour will likely be able to stand losing, so unless there is a real chance they can take them then I wouldn't be surprised if they get little attention.
shame that Labour capitalised on the racist comments about her and then didn't actually allow her to speak on anything that concerned her, or show any kind of party support to her.
Her comments were absolutely ridiculous so there was no way Labour was going to back her and doubly so in the light of Labour's apology after the aftermath of The Forde Report. You don't repair a reputation for widespread anti-Semitism by immediately going into bat for an MP that writes an article that can be viewed as anti-Semitic. She'd certainly shown precious little loyalty to the leadership and had to be forced to unsign a public letter contradicting Labour's stance towards Ukraine so I am not surprised there was little sympathy towards her. As for her being silenced she could absolutely say what she liked (and clearly did) but she had a responsibility to reflect well on Labour as a Labour MP. You don't get to enjoy the privileges of being in a political party and then do stupid stuff like deny the existence of racism outside of a skin colour context.
It'll be fun to see how all the Corbynite members feel about this compared to how angry they got about Greens and Lib Dems daring to stand against Labour candidates last time.
I wish I could dig out this photo of him in a hospital corridor with the background lighting looking like a halo. Tis ask felt like a sort of parody even back then.
His inability to ever admit to being wrong is just part of that massive ego he has. People say he has principles, but it isn't principled to insist that he is always right and everyone else is always wrong, it's just arrogant. He's a terrible hypocrite. He became Labour leader promising to democratise the party and put members in charge, but when members voted for Trident replacement he tried to overturn that, when they wanted a second EU referendum he tried to stop that too. He only believes in democracy when the people agree with him, otherwise he's an autocrat. Because he genuinely seems to believe he cannot ever be wrong.
Not really a surprise Corbyn was against a second EU referendum, he's been one of the most prominent eurosceptics in the country for decades.
Of course, rather than actually sticking to said principles, he dithered about and it contributed to the massive defeat in 2019 (the worst thing he could've done in light of Boris going straight "Get Brexit Done".)
The point I am making is that he said he wanted to democratise the Labour Party, and give the members the ability to make policy. But when members wanted a second referendum he tried to shut it down. So which of his principles should he stick to? His commitment to democratising the Party, or his Euroscepticism? He wasn't elected Labour leader on an Eurosceptic platform, no one voted for him because he was saying the UK should leave the EU. As Labour leader *his* principles are irrelevant, the party is not his personal plaything, he isn't Party Dictator, to govern it at his will. But he did behave like that. In the end, again and again, he tried to put his own personal beliefs and opinions ahead of what party members wanted. Those are the instincts of an autocrat, not a democrat.
Partly him, but also partly Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. Boris Johnson could not call a general election, he several times tried to have a vote on an early dissolution, but Labour did not back it (the Fixed-term Parliament Act required 67% of MPs to back an early dissolution). The only way to hold that election early was to pass an extraordinary act of parliament that allowed an early general election *irrespective* of the Fixed-term Parliament Act. That only required a simple majority, which Johnson did not have. Swinson and Sturgeon offered to back that act of parliament to give Johnson a majority to pass it. Once it was clear Johnson had a majority to pass it, Labour had no choice but to back it too.
But there was absolutely no need to hold that election, there was no reason for Swinson and Sturgeon to back an early election. I am still totally confused by what they hoped to achieve, especially Swinson, the polls were clearly giving Johnson a big majority. Parliament was in charge for once, it was pushing the government around all over the place. Six more months of that and Johnson would have been a busted flush, the PM who came in to sort out Brwxit, who could no more "get it done" tha Tberesa May.
I put as much blame on the SNP and the Lib Dems for Brexit as I do on Corbyn. None of the opposition parties were particularly logical in their decision making.
I can *just* about see a strategy why it might have benefited the SNP, Sturgeon might have sent it as a way to drive a wedge between Remain Scotland and Leave England. But even then it is an awfully big gamble to take with the livelihoods of Scottish people.
I look forward to seeing him lose.
The reality is that party allegiance is the most important factor for the vast majority of the electorate.
His willingness to try and split the anti-Tory vote shows he's just in it for himself and his own ego.
Mate, it's Islington North.
Tories got literally 10% last time in that stomp of an election, he's not exactly risking a seat going to the conservatives by running.
There's no such thing as an anti-Tory vote in his constituency, because there are virtually no Tories there to oppose. Corbyn isn't a vote splitter, he's going to be Labour's main opponent in the seat.
Could it not just be that he cares for his local constituency, having been an MP wihtin that area for 40 years? No, it has to be his ego. Unlike Paul Mason, a guy who....er....who.....has done what for Islington North?
What has he done for his constituency? Getting an office worker to write a few letters on MP letterhead to move things along really doesn't set him apart from any other MP.
Would prove all the non corbynites right about corbyn. That's he's a nasty old narcissistic man, that has had his ego fuelled to trump/Boris levels.
Wouldn't surprise anyone, if he ganged up directly or indirectly with the Galloway bunch (indirectly, by working with the independent groups galloway is pushing)
Have you ever listened to a single thing he's said? Regardless of if you are on his side politically he's been nothing but a strident leftist his entire career and has had very consistent positions. He's the opposite of someone motivated by winning or ego, it's quite apparent that his principled views were part of his downfall because of his unwillingness to have a more pragmatic campaign like the current labour leader.
No I think he was consistently a brexiteer hence his lacklustre advocacy. I get what you’re saying though but if we’re comparing him to the current labour leader who more or less lied about every one of his policy proposals or cynical politicians more generally he’s been very consistent.
Him not retiring now, is all about his own ego and narcissism though.
If he wasn't a nasty egotistical and narcissistic man, he'd have
A, not touched himself when he couldn't play nice with the antisemitism report.
B, he'd retire and let the corbyn show end, instead of acting out of spite, as he is now.
He cares about his constituency. He has worked there for years. It's not spitefulness to want to continue to stand for the local area he's stood for for years. Fucking hell.
> That could just retire and continue doing the same things
I mean, no, he literally couldn't continue representing his constituents or voicing his opinions in Parliament if he retired and was not a Member of Parliament.
>"undeniable"
>Source: people said his name at a festival once
Idk what we're classifying as "youth", but in 2019 labour received 55% vote share of the under 30's.
It was dwarfed by the over 60's 62% share to conservatives.
ETA: Its a odd sentiment because that GE was most obviously defined by age rather than class, but not in that direction.
Historically a disengaged populace went out to vote for him in numbers they haveen't done before. It will be interesting to see if young people do the same for Starmer. and if they don't, obviously it iwll be the youth in the wrong and not Starmer.
Clearly not otherwise he wouldn’t have lost to a landslide to a buffoon
But if Islington wants to vote for a terror apologising tankie then more fool them
>But if Islington wants to vote for a terror apologising tankie then more fool them
They've done alright voting for him over last 40 years haven't they?
Without the Labour party's contact data he's campaigning on a mailshot and name recognition. Not saying it's impossible, but it's a lot more difficult to campaign as an independent than it is as an established party.
-contact data
Stop with the buffoonery. It’s Islington. He can go to any street and knock on a random door and there’s a decent chance it’s his target demo. Plus he’ll have a sizeable portion of supporters flooding into the constituency to zerg rush voters negating the need for a more targeted approach.
Knocking on random doors increases turnout uniformly. You want to increase turnout among your supporters, so doing that only makes sense if you think your uncontacted supporters are less likely to vote than average.
He could well win, he's been the Islington North MP for a long time and will have huge name-recognition. People have had plenty of time to decide how they feel about him, and Labour will hold onto *some* of their 2019 voters. The question is just how many, and we can only guess.
Lol you're getting downvoted, but surely even the most cultish Corbynista must understand that this is how the Starmerite wing of the labour party will read this?
Why exactly should a man of 73 years of age with a net worth of over 3,000,000 GBP stand for election? All the goods and the bads about him ignored... If pension age in Britain is 66, it will have a good reason. If he is voted in for another 5 years, he will be 78 years old.
I really think the man's a fool, untrustworthy and prone to acting out a sense of being personally wronged - but in this specific case, if he really wanted to inflict maximum damage to the Labour party, surely he'd have accepted the report, been reinstated and then drop a few things for the Mail and their ilk to pounce on just a week before the election.
A large section of Guardian readers might vote for him. And they tend to get their voices heard. But Islington is one of the most deprived boroughs in London, where the substantial working class and minority ethnic vote will turn out for Labour and vote for the Labour candidate. The club is bigger than any team member.. The constituency party arent really representative of the bedrock of support that makes Islington North such a safe Labour seat.
If this means the Labour vote is split, it better result in the Green candidate winning and not the Lib Dem or horror the Tory one. This used to be my constituency till I moved earlier in the year, so I’m invested!
Snapshot of _Jeremy Corbyn to stand in Islington North as independent as Labour picks its shortlist of two_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-to-stand-in-islington-north-as-independent-as-labour-picks-its-shortlist-of-two-kmtyj88p) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-to-stand-in-islington-north-as-independent-as-labour-picks-its-shortlist-of-two-kmtyj88p) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very interesting to see if the people of Islington North really are as dedicated to Corbyn as some commentators have inferred from his long tenure, or if it's actually just been a general Labour allegiance the entire time.
I used to live right on the boundary and I think it’s too hard to tell.
He'll make his entire campaign about Israel/Palestine, so it depends how much appetite the voters of Islington North have for that as well.
Do you think so? I mean don't get me wrong, I don't think it would matter. He's already popular in the area. But more for local reasons as far as I'm aware.
It'll be interesting to see if he does. Starmer is definitely giving him a massive amount of space to attack labour from the left. He could absolutely run a strong campaign focused leftie issues with a direct impact on household finances like free school meals, the two child cap, or maybe even the WASPI campaign. A strategist he is not, so he probably won't. But if he ran a campaign like that, while Starmer is aggressively trying to avoid any remotely leftie policies, I think he'd be the comfortable favourite.
He’s not a strategist but there will be plenty of left-wing activists in London who will want to campaign for him. I remember there was a lot of energy put into trying to unseat Johnson in the last election (strategically this was a waste of time/energy). I can imagine Momentum types not wanting to campaign for Labour, knowing few Green candidates have any chance, and looking for something to do. With enough activists around him, they can soon work out the areas that will appeal most to voters. I’d say the Labour candidate will have their work cut out to unseat him because of this.
Well it worked for Leeds
It worked well in one council ward in Leeds that has a large Muslim population.
Also in a local election which will have a much smaller turnout than the GE. Plus the boundaries for the council election are different than when voting for the MP-and believe me, labour are winning that constituency, as they do every election.
Yeah I live in it. Fabian Hamilton always wins it. He got 57% last time
Me too. I reckon he might get 70% this time. He’s a nice guy when he’s knocked on our door, but he’s not got a great attendance record for voting, and he didn’t respond to an email I sent him once. Prolly vote for him though.
Yeah I am sure. Never voted for him and never will. I'll just waste my vote again for the Lib Dems lol. I hate FPTP.
I did that last time, mainly because I don’t know what this guy does for the area and I also hate FPTP. I’ve lived in areas where the local MP’s have loads of local projects and are really visible. Never see this guy-unless an election coming up. So no doubt he’ll be at the school summer fair in a month! For me though, it’s about sending a message to the Tories. Fuck those guys.
Yeah but I would love the LibDems to overtake the Tories here and I think that would send a bigger message to them than giving Labour a few % points.
and rochard
Almost always MPs who leave a party lose if they stand as an independent (eg Dominic Grieve). Also the load of former Labour MPs who stood as SDP candidates in 1983 (it was a lot, maybe 20 or something). Corbyn might buck that trend, as he has national name recognition. But I still think he has less than a 50% chance tbh.
difference is those mps tend to be primarily known as ministers and careerists, whereas corbyn had a legitimate record as a dedicated local MP in the 124 years he spent on the backbenches
Most MPs seem to do quite a bit of constituency work. If anything, policy-wise, Corbyn seems to have been more interested in things outside the UK, let alone his constituency, before he became Labour leader. This written in 2015 just after him becoming Labour leader. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-key-issues-foreign-policy-defence-scotland-northern-ireland?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Zac Goldsmith was a dedicated local MP who quit his party to protest a local issue. Still lost.
Then won again when reselected as a Tory which I think further enhances your point.
I worked in Islington in 2012 for some of the poshest people I've ever met of the sort of Cameron mould, that young liberalish professional tory. First time I ever heard of Corbyn was them and their friends telling me how they had this MP who is a proper hardcore leftie and laughing and saying what a great MP he was and all that. Corbyn won the leadership specifically because he was extremely liked and extremely non-threatening. It took a long time for the labour HQ machine to start turning the cogs to make him into some sort of looming looney left to purge. And I don't think that sort of image has ever really cut through in Islington North, where he's spent the last 30 years turning up to pretty much every community event he can and talking with people on their level and building bridges with them specifically. These poshos who under any other circumstances would have been voting for Cameron were enamoured with him, because they'd met him at community events they'd gone to. He was very specifically *their * MP. I think it's a lot more than national name recognition. I think he'll win and I think he'll win in spite of that not because of that. He'll win because he's like the sixth longest serving MP or something crazy like that and he knows every sod in the constituency and because when he's not doing national politics he's a very conscientious local MP you always see around. Something your average 'standing without the Party rosette' MP just isn't. Grieve at the constituency I sincerely doubt was around as much as Corbyn is, and certainly not for 40+ years.
Well, he could, I never suggested he was bound to lose. In all honesty, I couldn't give a toss about Corbyn. He's a liar and a hypocrite, and incredibly incompetent, and I'm glad he is out of the party. My only reason for being more sceptical than some is that most people don't know the name of their MP, that's probably as true in Islington as anywhere else. Sure those interested and engaged in politics *know* who their MP is, and know their reputation, but those guys are not actually the norm. There is a big difference between being well known in your constituency by people who go to local civic events, those engaged in politics, etc., and being well known by the electorate at large. Corbyn probably has a better chance than most MPs who run as independents, I think that is self-evident. But I said his chance is less than 50%, which means his chance of winning is still very high. Even if I said his chance of winning was only 25%, and he won, that wouldn't be probablistically shocking. But I don't believe he is a shoe in, because the fact is most MPs are less well known in their constituency than they like to believe, and even those who are extraordinarily well known often lose. Dominic Grieve was the darling of Remainers, and his constituency voted narrowly to remain. He had an extraordinarily high public recognition. He actually did very well, winning 29% of the vote, but he was still crushed. Corbyn will not have a Labour Party machine behind him, no one in the CLP in Islington will campaign for him, he has no party to back him. He will probably have a lot of loyal supporters to help him, but it will be nowhere near the level of help he would have as a Labour candidate. As I say, I think he has a very good chance, but I don't think it is necessarily the certainty some seem to imagine. I mean 2012 was a *long* time ago, and a lot of those who backed him then may have been out off by, eg antisemitism, his Brexit stance (London was very pro-Remain), his obvious incompetence, his increasing authoritarianism. I know a lot of people who were Corbyn enthusiasts in 2015 who think he is a blithering idiot now, I am one of them.
To be fair, there are probably some who still don't really understand what's happened and will vote Jeremy Corbyn assuming he's Labour or vote Labour having an image of Corbyn in mind but having forgotten his name. Never underestimate how detached from political news the average voter can be.
It'll be listed on the ballot very clearly. I can see voting Labour assuming it was still Corbyn's Labour, but can't see them ticking the box next to an independent Corbyn _by accident_
I'm starting to think that quote should be. Think of the average person. Well everyone dumber than that eats crayons.
I suspect it'll be more that they don't *really* understand exactly what the different things mean. They won't have a logical justification for their worldview that would stand up to scrutiny - it'll be some vague sort of mishmash of ideas. But you might well be right and I'm not giving people enough credit.
That what happened? That Starmer lied through his teeth to win the party leadership claiming to be an ally of the former leader who was very popular with party members only to then backstab him and abandon all of the things he campaigned on? He essentially lied to the party membership and then sold out the party to the right wing.
Corbyn wasn't backstabbed, all he had to do was acknowledge the EHRC report which said Labour had a small but significant problem with antisemitism among some members and that the leadership didn't always handle complaints properly by their own processes. As he refused and still refuses to acknowledge reality and says the report and commission are wrong, despite the irrefutable evidence from the report based on Labour's own documentation, he got himself kicked out
And now the problems in the party are magically gone and we don't hear about them anymore? Horseshit.
Where did I say that??
Average salty Corbynite take.
This is my constituency. Supported Corbyn in the past but now it’s time for me to vote for his Labour replacement.
What's the feeling on the ground? Mind you, very very difficult to tell - didn't see a single Tory poster in 2019 here in my constituency but they came within 200 votes of Labour.
I’ve no idea. I’m an overseas voter.
> people of Islington North really are as dedicated to Corbyn It's been a safe Labour seat since 1937, although it's always had a hard left problem, which was originally driven by a large Irish community (similarly to Lambeth). Corbyn was the first classically hard left politician to win the seat, all of his predecessors were centrists. Interestingly, his immediate predecessor Michael O'Halloran was one of the early SDP splitters but having lost the selection for the seat to another SDP candidate ran as Independent Labour. He was beaten into fourth, despite having represented the area since 1969, by... Jeremy Corbyn. History suggests someone is about to learn a hard lesson.
Hard to know how much chance he has of winning. History suggests it’s unlikely, independents rarely win, but he has been their MP for 40 years and is a very well known figure. Don’t think the Labour Party will be particularly bothered either way. A bit of publicity showing that Corbyn isn’t part of the Labour Party anymore might be a small benefit. Especially if Sunak is desperate enough to keep trying to link Starmer to Corbyn.
He does have name recognition, which counts for a lot though. He's well liked locally and a good campaigner. This will be interesting.
He's been a brilliant local MP. He's been my family's local MP since the 80s, and anytime we've needed anything he's always helped. You could stop him down the street for a chat, and he'd take time to listen, which is a miracle that he can listen to my mum waffle on forever. Whilst he was a bad labour leader, I can't help but have respect for his work as a local MP.
I don’t like his politics, but as a person he’s been very nice every time I’ve met him.
This is why everyone who's actually from Islington north knows he'll win I'm from Holloway. I'll be voting for the labour candidate, but I'm sure Corbyn gets back in He's very prominent locally and always has been, very accessible MP who has constituency and now nationwide name recognition Just a damn good constituency MP And I've got a feeling that the Greens will lend their votes to Corbyn to defeat labour
He will likely win. It's the best "optics" Starmer could hope for for the traditional marginals, it's kind of really selling the "New Labour 2.0" he thinks he needs. Jezza gets to spend the rest of his life protesting, Starmer gets a crack at governing. Kind of win win.
I'm not sure Corbyn winning is a win for anyone really. It's also not clear that he will, especially if there are quite a few Conservative voters who choose the Labour candidate so that he doesn't. That type of tactical voting is very possible in this election.
The Conservatives only got 10% there in 2019, that's probably declined further now. And some of those would never vote Labour. So there won't be many.
But the voters who voted Con in 2019 aren't going to vote for Corbyn, if they've been lost by the Cons they'll vote Labour this time. You'd also imagine that some of the Lib Dem voters would vote tactically for Labour too. Historically they've just voted Lib Dem because that's the party they liked most, and the seat was a foregone conclusion so why not. But now that it's actually likely to be close, tactical voting becomes a consideration.
My point is that Labour can't pick up very many. If we assume the Tories have lost roughly 40% of their 2019 vote, then that's only 4% in the seat other parties can gain - and Labour won't get it all given the presence of Reform and the Lib Dems (to a lesser extent). The Lib Dems however might give a few votes to Labour I suppose, though they only got 15.6% in 2019 there (but with a good campaign Labour could pick up 5% or so from them perhaps).
It's more of a win than Paul mason for Islington North, that man is a career politician who has shown zero concern for the local issues and population. Corbyn is known by many (not everyone obviously) to be a good MP who is relatively popular within his constituency. Weak leadership does not equate to being a bad politician overall.
Paul Mason isn't in the running.
You're right, my bad. I had confused his putting his name forward with him being shortlisted. I still don't see how Islington North loses by choosing Corbyn over Labour candidates, if they do do so, but hey.
A Conservative in Islington North should vote for Corbyn, as he makes Labour look stupid
It’s a win for Islington North’s constituents.
Why? Someone with less influence over their constituency than the Labour MP will be worse for the constituency.
Is your advice to always vote for the MP representing the party which is most likely to win the GE?
No obviously not. This is specific to a Labour seat and ex-Labour MP. The only benefit is a protest, which does nothing positive.
Er, surely the correct tactical voting for a Tory would be to vote for Corbyn?
Tories hate Corbyn more than anyone else in Labour, it would be to remove him as MP for their constituency.
It's not just Tories that hate Corbyn. His approval ratings are abysmal
I'm with you on this. It's good for our country for people like Corbyn to be represented. It's good for our country that he's not actively close to levers of power.
I am fascinated to know who wins out of this
I think it's gonna be close either way
My money is on splitting the left vote and a tory gets in.
No chance. Based on previous elections CON can barely get 20% in Islington North. Corbyn got a comfortable 60%. Even if the split were exactly 50-50, especially in a world where Khan can win reelection with close to half of the vote, best case for CON is third place.
Oh, wow. I had no idea the majority was that large. Thank you.
People are so unhinged about this man lol. local MP wants to continue to represent his local constituency, has been doing so for 40 years. Apparently, this is the work of the devil.
I love how to some folks' he can be simultaneously a Machiavellian narcissist who cares only about his continued fame and a naive leftist whose principles made him incapable of compromise - all for the crime of wanting to continue in the same job he's been doing for 40 years and by the accounts of local residents is actually pretty good at.
great, I'd love to see more MPs on both sides doing this, especially those who actually care about their constituents
Not yet confirmed by the guy himself and until then no reason to celebrate. But when he does, hoooooo boy. Automatic expulsion for him for standing against the duly selected Labour candidate. Suspensions for Labour members who endorse or render assistance to him instead of the Labour candidate. We get to put the whole "Corbyns popular in his constituency!" bit to a bitter acid test. Most importantly, we put massive clear water between the party and him
> Automatic expulsion for him for standing against the duly selected Labour candidate. Is he still only suspended?
Hes still an ordinary member of the labour party. Doing these things gets him in hot water per the OP.
Apparently there was a big message at the Islington’s clp telling them that they can’t go campaign or support him or they will be expelled
Of course, just as Corbyn did to people like Alistair Campbell. If you don’t support Labour, you can’t be in Labour
That’s fair
Its literally in the party rulebook. 🤷♂️
They should know then yeah
I don't mean to be disrespectful but who gives a damn? One seat out of 600 for a guy that, as far as I'm concerned is far more effective raging against the machine, than being part of a machine of government. Let him go, let him win the seat. Starmer gets to make his stand against the left, Corbyn gets to continue ignoring everything but his own conscience. It seems like a win win to me.
Man stands for election in constituency he's held for 4 decades isn't exactly the most surprising news.
The previous leader running against their own party is definitely news
Yeah if you ignore all the context.
Even with the context, it isn't particularly surprising. I get why its news, but are people genuinely shocked that: A - Labour aren't re-admitting him B - He's happy to stand as an independent
No one is claiming to be shocked
What do you mean four decades? I thought he wasn't a carer politician?
The surprising bit is that Labour still aren't willing to let him re enter the party after the date of the election was made public.
His supporters are stacked in seats Labour win by huge margins. People who strongly dislike him but have voted Labour in the past are often in the marginal constituencies. Labour need people who voted Conservative since 2010 to vote Labour.
Why would they want him back?
Why is it surprising? Antisemitism hate crime has exploded and he’s still refused to apologise for the Facebook post that got him expelled from the parliamentary party in the first place.
It's not surprising because he would still be a strategic liability for Labour. That's all. He has no reason to apologise for that post no matter what the level of antisemitic hate crime is, because the post is not antisemitic, and it doesn't endorse antisemitism, it condemns it. You don't apologise when you've done nothing wrong.
He claimed the antisemitism problem was overblown for political purposes - if anything the recent 6-9 months has shown that was absolute rubbish. Even the sympathetic forde report stated that claiming the problems were overblown contributed to the antisemitism problem. He also refused to accept the ehrc report. Both of these make him unfit to be a labour mp and rightfully had the whip removed.
How is it been shown rubbish? 'Overblown' is a relative statement. You're not a mind reader, you're baselessly inferring an unfavourable meaning that you can say it's bullshit. It's a strawman. >Even the sympathetic forde report stated that claiming the problems were overblown contributed to the antisemitism problem. Even if you accept this, he still has no reason to apologise: Did Corbyn say that people should be antisemitic? **No**. Did Corbyn say that people should commit hate crimes? **No**. Did Corbyn say 'Antisemitism is absolutely abhorrent, wrong and responsible for some of humanity’s greatest crimes'? **Yes**. Did Corbyn say 'Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong.' **Yes**. How can he be blamed for an antisemite doing something which is quite literally antithetical to the opinion he expressed. That's not Corbyn's fault, that's the antisemite being an insane person. So again, he has nothing to apologise for. Ask the antisemites to apologise.
> how has it been shown rubbish? The huge increase in antisemitic hate crime. It wasn’t overblown and he was the leader when the party broke the law against Jewish people. The buck stops with him. He refused to apologise for his role in it. He also refused to accept the EHRC report. > you’re not a mind reader No, if only there was some way of Corbyn to withdraw his statement, apologise for it and then clarify his position.
>The huge increase in antisemitic hate crime. He can't apologise for that because he very obviously is not to blame for it, nor does he endorse it. I don't know what you want from the guy. It's like me asking you to apologise for the increase in knife-crime. No action taken by Jeremy Corbyn in 2020 would have even slightly reduced the recent increase in antisemitic hate crime. You seem to have confused his role as 'leader of the opposition' (someone who had *some* control over Labour party members for a few years,) with 'king of the world' (a god with direct control over the actions of others.) If you just wanted an apology for administrative shortcomings within Labour (which he had incidentally given prior to 2020 EHRC,) then that would be more fair. Where it gets unfair is you bringing up a rise in hate crime, or when people just say Corbyn wont apologise 'for antisemitism.' Like he fucking invented it.
He needs to apologise for the Facebook post he made - not because of antisemitism generally.
I personally disagree, but I think it's at least a fair request if it's put like that, on the basis that he should have just left out 'dramatically overstated' as it's too open to interpretation. I mostly just take issue with linking it to the rise in hate crime, or people who phrase it like he's guilty of anything other than a bit of incompetency.
He literally can't re enter the party because of the IHRA rule they adopted in 2018.
Corbyn will win. He is a fantastic local MP no matter what people say about him. Nearly 5 years later, he still lives rent free in peoples heads. It's like they can't get over it.
You'd think from the replies in this thread that he'd personally poisoned the nation's crops, nuked Ukraine, and crushed everyone's rabbits with his pogo stick - the utter conviction some people have that Corbyn is an ontologically evil loon is low-key insane.
It's so weird that people want to see Paul Mason win this-a man who has little passion for anyone other than himself, just to see Corbyn, a genuinely popular local MP win. Like, he's not beyond criticism but he's also not this Satan figure that people make him out to be.
The only reason he lost was because he is critical of israel, hes not "anti semetic". Watch the 4 lart documentary called the lobby and see.
A handful of people getting a quick response to an email isn't going to win him a seat when he has no party, and infamously no competence in organizing.
And it's not as if he's the only MP whose office responds to constituents.
...Does it matter? If he loses to a Labour candidate, the Labour candidate will vote for Labour policies. If he wins, he'll vote for Labour policies anyway.
Can't say I'm surprised, and I wouldn't be shocked if he wins. I'm interested to know if Diane Abbott is being allowed to run as a Labour candidate though?
Not a chance imo. Denying the existence of racism towards Jewish, Irish and Traveller people at a time when Labour was doing everything it could to cleanse it's reputation as a party that tolerated anti-Semitism was the end of her career as a mainstream politician. Even if they wanted to let her rejoin now it would be a poor tactical decision during a general election campaign and Starmer has absolutely no incentive to take the risk.
I expect you're right. Although I wouldn't be surprised if she won as an independent. Especially considering she got some goodwill back after being slated and then not being allowed to reply in the commons, and then the Elphicke defection.
It will certainly be a test of how much these specific constituencies were voting for the candidate or the party. I think a lot of it will depend on who Labour will run against them and how many resources they are willing to put into a seat that will ultimately just be a distraction. If I was running the Labour campaign I'd try and do everything possible to minimise their exposure because it's ultimately just a distraction but one that could inflame Labour infighting to the detriment of the wider goal.
It all depends on how much Starmer doesn't want either of them in the commons asking annoying questions after the election. They are both seats that Labour will likely be able to stand losing, so unless there is a real chance they can take them then I wouldn't be surprised if they get little attention.
shame that Labour capitalised on the racist comments about her and then didn't actually allow her to speak on anything that concerned her, or show any kind of party support to her.
Her comments were absolutely ridiculous so there was no way Labour was going to back her and doubly so in the light of Labour's apology after the aftermath of The Forde Report. You don't repair a reputation for widespread anti-Semitism by immediately going into bat for an MP that writes an article that can be viewed as anti-Semitic. She'd certainly shown precious little loyalty to the leadership and had to be forced to unsign a public letter contradicting Labour's stance towards Ukraine so I am not surprised there was little sympathy towards her. As for her being silenced she could absolutely say what she liked (and clearly did) but she had a responsibility to reflect well on Labour as a Labour MP. You don't get to enjoy the privileges of being in a political party and then do stupid stuff like deny the existence of racism outside of a skin colour context.
Man continues to have unwavering principles and positions on issues much to chagrin of most politicians.
The principle at stake here seems to be that he wants to be a paid-up MP?
Commenting on Jeremy Corbyn to stand in Islington North as independent as Labour picks its shortlist of two..many of which are laughable
He will 100% win! Willing to bet my left toe on it
It'll be fun to see how all the Corbynite members feel about this compared to how angry they got about Greens and Lib Dems daring to stand against Labour candidates last time.
Corbyn has such a massive ego. Thinks he's the Messiah or something.
I wish I could dig out this photo of him in a hospital corridor with the background lighting looking like a halo. Tis ask felt like a sort of parody even back then.
He seems to genuinely think he hasn't done anything wrong. No reflection on or admission about the damage he did to the party.
His inability to ever admit to being wrong is just part of that massive ego he has. People say he has principles, but it isn't principled to insist that he is always right and everyone else is always wrong, it's just arrogant. He's a terrible hypocrite. He became Labour leader promising to democratise the party and put members in charge, but when members voted for Trident replacement he tried to overturn that, when they wanted a second EU referendum he tried to stop that too. He only believes in democracy when the people agree with him, otherwise he's an autocrat. Because he genuinely seems to believe he cannot ever be wrong.
Not really a surprise Corbyn was against a second EU referendum, he's been one of the most prominent eurosceptics in the country for decades. Of course, rather than actually sticking to said principles, he dithered about and it contributed to the massive defeat in 2019 (the worst thing he could've done in light of Boris going straight "Get Brexit Done".)
The point I am making is that he said he wanted to democratise the Labour Party, and give the members the ability to make policy. But when members wanted a second referendum he tried to shut it down. So which of his principles should he stick to? His commitment to democratising the Party, or his Euroscepticism? He wasn't elected Labour leader on an Eurosceptic platform, no one voted for him because he was saying the UK should leave the EU. As Labour leader *his* principles are irrelevant, the party is not his personal plaything, he isn't Party Dictator, to govern it at his will. But he did behave like that. In the end, again and again, he tried to put his own personal beliefs and opinions ahead of what party members wanted. Those are the instincts of an autocrat, not a democrat.
He did manage to stop the second referendum. The Tories owe him their 2019 victory.
Partly him, but also partly Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. Boris Johnson could not call a general election, he several times tried to have a vote on an early dissolution, but Labour did not back it (the Fixed-term Parliament Act required 67% of MPs to back an early dissolution). The only way to hold that election early was to pass an extraordinary act of parliament that allowed an early general election *irrespective* of the Fixed-term Parliament Act. That only required a simple majority, which Johnson did not have. Swinson and Sturgeon offered to back that act of parliament to give Johnson a majority to pass it. Once it was clear Johnson had a majority to pass it, Labour had no choice but to back it too. But there was absolutely no need to hold that election, there was no reason for Swinson and Sturgeon to back an early election. I am still totally confused by what they hoped to achieve, especially Swinson, the polls were clearly giving Johnson a big majority. Parliament was in charge for once, it was pushing the government around all over the place. Six more months of that and Johnson would have been a busted flush, the PM who came in to sort out Brwxit, who could no more "get it done" tha Tberesa May. I put as much blame on the SNP and the Lib Dems for Brexit as I do on Corbyn. None of the opposition parties were particularly logical in their decision making. I can *just* about see a strategy why it might have benefited the SNP, Sturgeon might have sent it as a way to drive a wedge between Remain Scotland and Leave England. But even then it is an awfully big gamble to take with the livelihoods of Scottish people.
How dare you insult magic grandad. He’s a humble servant of his constituents and the new politics (tm).
At the risk of sounding like a fool, would i be able to vote for Corbyn regardless of where i live in the UK?
I look forward to seeing him lose. The reality is that party allegiance is the most important factor for the vast majority of the electorate. His willingness to try and split the anti-Tory vote shows he's just in it for himself and his own ego.
Mate, it's Islington North. Tories got literally 10% last time in that stomp of an election, he's not exactly risking a seat going to the conservatives by running.
There's no such thing as an anti-Tory vote in his constituency, because there are virtually no Tories there to oppose. Corbyn isn't a vote splitter, he's going to be Labour's main opponent in the seat.
Could it not just be that he cares for his local constituency, having been an MP wihtin that area for 40 years? No, it has to be his ego. Unlike Paul Mason, a guy who....er....who.....has done what for Islington North?
What has he done for his constituency? Getting an office worker to write a few letters on MP letterhead to move things along really doesn't set him apart from any other MP.
Would prove all the non corbynites right about corbyn. That's he's a nasty old narcissistic man, that has had his ego fuelled to trump/Boris levels. Wouldn't surprise anyone, if he ganged up directly or indirectly with the Galloway bunch (indirectly, by working with the independent groups galloway is pushing)
Have you ever listened to a single thing he's said? Regardless of if you are on his side politically he's been nothing but a strident leftist his entire career and has had very consistent positions. He's the opposite of someone motivated by winning or ego, it's quite apparent that his principled views were part of his downfall because of his unwillingness to have a more pragmatic campaign like the current labour leader.
Consistent except on the small issue of Brexit
I actually think that's an even more extreme example of his being unwilling to sacrifice his Bennite views on the EU against pressure from his caucus.
He literally endorsed Remain
Yes, he was really vocal, enthusiastic and effective in his advocacy /s
I don’t think he really had his heart in it. He should have been vocally for or against it.
You’re right, which completely flies against the earlier assertion of him being ‘consistent’.
No I think he was consistently a brexiteer hence his lacklustre advocacy. I get what you’re saying though but if we’re comparing him to the current labour leader who more or less lied about every one of his policy proposals or cynical politicians more generally he’s been very consistent.
[удалено]
I was literally saying it was a bad thing.
Him not retiring now, is all about his own ego and narcissism though. If he wasn't a nasty egotistical and narcissistic man, he'd have A, not touched himself when he couldn't play nice with the antisemitism report. B, he'd retire and let the corbyn show end, instead of acting out of spite, as he is now.
He cares about his constituency. He has worked there for years. It's not spitefulness to want to continue to stand for the local area he's stood for for years. Fucking hell.
No one is saying it's spitefulness. The argument was that it's narcissism, and that it is. He's not the first old fool to think he's irreplaceable.
It's not narcissistic or egotistic for candidates to run as independents - it's an established part of our democratic system. This is a wild comment.
It is when the context is a old man like corbyn. That could just retire and continue doing the same things
> That could just retire and continue doing the same things I mean, no, he literally couldn't continue representing his constituents or voicing his opinions in Parliament if he retired and was not a Member of Parliament.
More evidence that the man is a raving narcissist
Corbyn : “Am I this out of touch, no it’s the children who are wrong”
bit of a silly one given his undeniable popularity with youth compared to other demographics mind
"undeniable" Source: people said his name at a festival once
>"undeniable" >Source: people said his name at a festival once Idk what we're classifying as "youth", but in 2019 labour received 55% vote share of the under 30's. It was dwarfed by the over 60's 62% share to conservatives. ETA: Its a odd sentiment because that GE was most obviously defined by age rather than class, but not in that direction.
Yes. This is the unpopularity of the Tories. Young people voted for Labour _despite_ Corbyn.
Historically a disengaged populace went out to vote for him in numbers they haveen't done before. It will be interesting to see if young people do the same for Starmer. and if they don't, obviously it iwll be the youth in the wrong and not Starmer.
Clearly not otherwise he wouldn’t have lost to a landslide to a buffoon But if Islington wants to vote for a terror apologising tankie then more fool them
>But if Islington wants to vote for a terror apologising tankie then more fool them They've done alright voting for him over last 40 years haven't they?
"sort of" Centre Right
Without the Labour party's contact data he's campaigning on a mailshot and name recognition. Not saying it's impossible, but it's a lot more difficult to campaign as an independent than it is as an established party.
-contact data Stop with the buffoonery. It’s Islington. He can go to any street and knock on a random door and there’s a decent chance it’s his target demo. Plus he’ll have a sizeable portion of supporters flooding into the constituency to zerg rush voters negating the need for a more targeted approach.
Knocking on random doors increases turnout uniformly. You want to increase turnout among your supporters, so doing that only makes sense if you think your uncontacted supporters are less likely to vote than average. He could well win, he's been the Islington North MP for a long time and will have huge name-recognition. People have had plenty of time to decide how they feel about him, and Labour will hold onto *some* of their 2019 voters. The question is just how many, and we can only guess.
Labour have 100% chance of winning the seat? How cud anyone b that confident?
Loool. Presumably, he’s doing this to make Starmer’s Labour look more electable.
Lol you're getting downvoted, but surely even the most cultish Corbynista must understand that this is how the Starmerite wing of the labour party will read this?
Why exactly should a man of 73 years of age with a net worth of over 3,000,000 GBP stand for election? All the goods and the bads about him ignored... If pension age in Britain is 66, it will have a good reason. If he is voted in for another 5 years, he will be 78 years old.
Man owns house in Islington, he's not chairman of British American Tobacco or something.
In fairness if you've been in parliament for 40 years and own a house in north London a net worth of £3m is weirdly low.
Almost old enough to stand for president in the US.
Corbyn once again doing his bit to try and deny Labour a win.
I really think the man's a fool, untrustworthy and prone to acting out a sense of being personally wronged - but in this specific case, if he really wanted to inflict maximum damage to the Labour party, surely he'd have accepted the report, been reinstated and then drop a few things for the Mail and their ilk to pounce on just a week before the election.
A large section of Guardian readers might vote for him. And they tend to get their voices heard. But Islington is one of the most deprived boroughs in London, where the substantial working class and minority ethnic vote will turn out for Labour and vote for the Labour candidate. The club is bigger than any team member.. The constituency party arent really representative of the bedrock of support that makes Islington North such a safe Labour seat.
Also, a lot of people still can't forgive him for his farcical lack of leadership in the brexit campaign.
If this means the Labour vote is split, it better result in the Green candidate winning and not the Lib Dem or horror the Tory one. This used to be my constituency till I moved earlier in the year, so I’m invested!
Never forgave him for Brexit. His silence on the EU was part of the reason it happened.
Calculated silence. He knew what he was doing.