Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership: it wasn’t supposed to be like this
When Jeremy Corbyn was elected overwhelmingly as the new leader of the Labour Party, his supporters told us that people would flock to join the Party (which they have) and voters would get behind a radical new Labour (which they haven’t).
Already, as this “Observer” article explains, Corbyn’s supporters are offering excuses for why Labour will do poorly in the elections in May.
Labour may win the London Mayor election, but in Scotland the party could fall to 25 seats or below, far behind the SNP, who could claim up to 70, and only a little way ahead of the Conservatives, who could take 20 or more. In English councils, Labour is down on average by 8% on its 2012 polling levels, suggesting the loss of control of 20 councils, while in Wales a 7% fall in support since 2011 suggests that Labour would lose effective control of the Welsh Assembly and could suffer its worst ever result there.
You can’t blame Corbyn for all of this; any Labour leader would have a huge mountain to climb. But, earlier this week, an “Independent” commentator offered nine simple, salient observations about the current state of the Labour Party. In a succinct and sad analysis, one fact stands out:
“Labour lost the election because its leader was not liked and it wasn’t trusted on the economy. Today, it has a leader whose approval ratings are lower than Ed Miliband’s, and is less trusted on the economy.”
Don’t shoot the messenger!
January 26th, 2016 at 9:25 am
I’ve recently joined the Labour Party after a lifetime of being a supporter but not a member. My action wasn’t to support Jeremy Corbyn per se, but to give myself a voice in the party in the event that his left-wing cronies try to ambush the party. the article in the Independent has it about right. It’s going to be a long road back for the party, maybe 10 years unless the Tories cock it up. If Ken Livingston makes a comeback, it will be longer.