Labour leadership

[Favelado]

 

[marty21]

a friend of mine has just posted on Facebook, that he registered to join the labour party, to vote for Jeremy Corbyn, but has just has an email from Labour saying they dont believe he is a labour supporter , im going to ask him to post up the email to prve its true, but has anyone else experienced this?

It's all very bizarre
Labour asking people who join if they are actually supporters? They set the system up, encouraged the 3 quidders and now are changing the goal posts.

 

[Sprocket.]

Another example of Labour knee jerk responses!

 

[Diamond]

No, a simple majority of people who voted in the UK wanted a Tory government. Not 'the' majority of voters in the UK. The majority of people who voted (i.e more than 50%) did not vote for a tory government. The only things you can say with certainty are these:

The Tories have a simple majority.
37% of people who voted voted for the Tories.
25% of the electorate voted for the Tories.

The only things you can infer from that would be along the lines of:

75% of the electorate did not vote for the Tories.
37% of those who voted are likely to have wanted a Tory government.

You cannot infer the following:

Only those that voted are 'political' (whatever the fuck you mean by that).
Those that voted are 'political' (whatever the fuck you mean by that).
Members of the electorate who did not vote 'didn't give two shits which government got in' (possibly unless you mean 'didn't give a shit which of the two main parties got in').

So, just to be clear, any electoral victory that does not lead to an absolute majority of the total electorate for one party is suspect?

 

[Diamond]

It's awful strange, this democracy stuff, isn't it?

Majority governments that aren't majority governments because the majority is all the people who voted for lots of other parties that form a majority...

e2a - and those that didn't vote at all.

 

[Diamond]

Oh, and, it's also worth adding - how does this line of reasoning lead to a Labour victory under Corbyn?

 

[agricola]

It's all very bizarre
Labour asking people who join if they are actually supporters? They set the system up, encouraged the 3 quidders and now are changing the goal posts.

Well exactly, and for all the talk of the legal challenge it will be interesting to see how they could ever defend taking £3 off people and not allowing them to vote based solely on data that is not that relevant and which they really shouldn't be keeping anyway.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Oh, and, it's also worth adding - how does this line of reasoning lead to a Labour victory under Corbyn?

The way I see it, a Corbyn leadership may lose votes from swing voters, but it will also pick votes up from people on the left of the spectrum who previously had given up on voting at all. The question is really which of those two groups of voters is largest. I don't know the answer to that.

 

[Cid]

So, just to be clear, any electoral victory that does not lead to an absolute majority of the total electorate for one party is suspect?

Ah, going by your post you think reindeer eat frogs.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

So, just to be clear, any electoral victory that does not lead to an absolute majority of the total electorate for one party is suspect?

No, in the circumstances you describe, any claim that the 'country want this that or the other' is suspect*.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

* i.e. wrong

 

[weltweit]

Labour supporters claim leadership vote 'purge'
http://www.channel4.com/news/labour-supporters-purged-from-leadership-vote

Labour supporters who have joined the party to vote in the leadership election are being barred from voting, accusing the party of "McCarthyite" purges, Channel 4 News has learned.
..

 

[Louis MacNeice]

The majority will of votes cast (the popular vote) voted in the Tories, ergo the majority will of the voters of the UK wanted a Tory government.

You can try and ignore that all you want with perverse arguments around those who did not care to vote, who effectively didn't give two shits about which government that got in, but to try and pretend that the Tory victory was somehow illegitimate or not indicative of the current spirit of the country is totally absurd.

Under our current electoral arrangements of course the Tory victory is legitimate. What you cannot do is jump from a factual result produced by a very particular set of electoral and constitutional arrangements, to a conjecture about 'the spirit of the country'. Judged on the votes cast and those not engaging, the spirit of the country (shouldn't that be countries?) is fragmented; interestingly this fragmentation is something you seem to recognise in another post but conveniently forget in your weird desire to pontificate on what the country wants.

I can only hope that you are more rigorous and coherent in your day job.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

p.s. why did you ignore the actual questions I asked about what constitutes the country you are so keen to divine the will of?

 

[Diamond]

The way I see it, a Corbyn leadership may lose votes from swing voters, but it will also pick votes up from people on the left of the spectrum who previously had given up on voting at all. The question is really which of those two groups of voters is largest. I don't know the answer to that.

So the argument is that Corbyn will magic votes from those who did not vote last time out while bleeding some of the more centre-left Labour supporters?

That seems a bit odd to be frank - lose votes, then dilute the weight of each vote by gaining those who did not vote before.

Then, on top of that, such a victory would rest on the assumption that the UK contains a left-wing "silent/so disaffected that they haven't been arsed to vote before" bloc.

 

[ruffneck23]

It's all very bizarre
Labour asking people who join if they are actually supporters? They set the system up, encouraged the 3 quidders and now are changing the goal posts.

this is the email he got :

Dear Applicant,

Thank you for your recent application to become a Supporter of the Labour Party.

As part of the process to sign up as a Supporter all applicants are asked to confirm the following statement; I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.

We have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party and therefore we are rejecting your application.

Although you may have received or may still receive a ballot paper, it will not work and if you do vote it will not be counted.

Should you wish to dispute rejection by the Labour Party you would have to submit and pursue an application to join Labour as a full member.

Kind Regards

The Labour Party

Sent by email from the Labour Party and promoted by Iain McNicol on behalf of The Labour Party, both at One Brewers Green, London SW1H 0RH.
Website: labour.org.uk. To join or renew call 0845 092 2299

its really bizarre, the new labour really dont want him to win do they... this is not what id call democarcy

 

[andysays]

Anyway, I assume this is the "mood music" for the eventual legal challenge (and stitch-up) that will follow a Corby win?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-ignored-legal-membership?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

Party lawyers had supported an extra stage of verification in order to protect Labour against a legal challenge by unsuccessful candidates, saying this would put the party in a good position to say its election process had been “robust”.

Under the legal advice, people known to have voted for other parties according to Labour canvass returns would have been asked to confirm again that they really did support its aims and values. But the party’s procedure committee voted to take no action.

It appears that the procedure committee's ruling is being ignored and they're doing this anyway.

Neither procedure nor democracy will be allowed to get in the way of the correct decision

 

[Diamond]

Under our current electoral arrangements of course the Tory victory is legitimate. What you cannot do is jump from a factual result produced by a very particular set of electoral and constitutional arrangements, to a conjecture about 'the spirit of the country'. Judged on the votes cast and those not engaging, the spirit of the country (shouldn't that be countries?) is fragmented; interestingly this fragmentation is something you seem to recognise in another post but conveniently forget in your weird desire to pontificate on what the country wants.

I can only hope that you are more rigorous and coherent in your day job.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

p.s. why did you ignore the actual questions I asked about what constitutes the country you are so keen to divine the will of?

Is the spirit of the country more aligned with the Tories or Labour?

Clue - we've recently had a vote on this...

 

[Lucy Fur]

Then, on top of that, such a victory would rest on the assumption that the UK contains a left-wing "silent/so disaffected that they haven't been arsed to vote before" bloc.

I dont know why you find that so hard to imagine, It definately applies to me, and many of my friends. I did vote last time, just not for Labour.

 

[Reg Folder]

It's awful strange, this democracy stuff, isn't it?

Majority governments that aren't majority governments because the majority is all the people who voted for lots of other parties that form a majority...

e2a - and those that didn't vote at all.

I think Diamond is actually right. Why does it matter when a relatively small minority of those who voted elected a government? It's still regarded as legitimate even by a majority of those who voted, and of those who didn't bother to vote at all. Or at least that is indicated by the fact that relatively few of the latter two categories shown any active sign of it being any different.

Has it ever been the case anywhere that a government has been elected by an overwhelming majority of the population, or even has the overt support of the majority?

 

[andysays]

this is the email he got :

Dear Applicant,

Thank you for your recent application to become a Supporter of the Labour Party.

As part of the process to sign up as a Supporter all applicants are asked to confirm the following statement; I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.

We have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party and therefore we are rejecting your application.

Although you may have received or may still receive a ballot paper, it will not work and if you do vote it will not be counted.

Should you wish to dispute rejection by the Labour Party you would have to submit and pursue an application to join Labour as a full member.

Kind Regards

The Labour Party

Sent by email from the Labour Party and promoted by Iain McNicol on behalf of The Labour Party, both at One Brewers Green, London SW1H 0RH.
Website: labour.org.uk. To join or renew call 0845 092 2299

its really bizarre, the new labour really dont want him to win do they... this is not what id call democarcy

And he's not the only one

 

[ruffneck23]

wow, just wow

 

[Santino]

Ooh, nasty.

 

[Diamond]

I dont know why you find that so hard to imagine, It definately applies to me, and many of my friends. I did vote last time, just not for Labour.

I think this is part of the problem - with the development of social media, online fora, and the general disintermediation of media, allowing people to discriminate more particularly in what they see and hear, one's social universe becomes increasingly smaller and more polarised.

To think that there are lots of leftwing folk that didn't vote last time around and that's why Labour lost and that if Labour would only just become more leftwing then they would flock to the polling booths and disrupt the next election to carry Corbyn to victory - maybe that makes sense if you spend most of your time talking to likeminded people and ignore, even shout down (as seems to be happening here) people who might hold a marginally different view, that's fine but it just is not very convincing.

 

[agricola]

its really bizarre, the new labour really dont want him to win do they... this is not what id call democarcy

"The resistance" probably think they can't lose by doing this - either they remove enough of his vote that he doesn't win, or that he puts in a legal challenge to stop this and the contest is delayed anyway (which is what the useful idiots like Mann and Danczuk have been calling for). In fact I'd bet there are a load of wonks going around calling this their Death Star moment right now.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

So the argument is that Corbyn will magic votes from those who did not vote last time out while bleeding some of the more centre-left Labour supporters?

That seems a bit odd to be frank - lose votes, then dilute the weight of each vote by gaining those who did not vote before.

Then, on top of that, such a victory would rest on the assumption that the UK contains a left-wing "silent/so disaffected that they haven't been arsed to vote before" bloc.

Well it's not the argument, it's just my own view about what would need to happen for a Corbyn leadership to translate into electoral success. I don't see how it is odd or 'magic' either. All policy positions will alter the composition of the vote that a party gets, and yes, I do think there is a fairly significant "silent/so disaffected that they haven't been arsed to vote before" bloc. But like I say, it all depends on how the numbers play out.

 

[SpookyFrank]

this is the email he got :

Dear Applicant,

Thank you for your recent application to become a Supporter of the Labour Party.

As part of the process to sign up as a Supporter all applicants are asked to confirm the following statement; I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.

We have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party and therefore we are rejecting your application.

Although you may have received or may still receive a ballot paper, it will not work and if you do vote it will not be counted.

Should you wish to dispute rejection by the Labour Party you would have to submit and pursue an application to join Labour as a full member.

Kind Regards

The Labour Party

Sent by email from the Labour Party and promoted by Iain McNicol on behalf of The Labour Party, both at One Brewers Green, London SW1H 0RH.
Website: labour.org.uk. To join or renew call 0845 092 2299

its really bizarre, the new labour really dont want him to win do they... this is not what id call democarcy

And they'll keep your three quid. Hard to see how that's legal.

 

[gosub]

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1q9JNK5YkqVYEys8IADhanWJuUlX7I-8BeiciMGQZeiA/viewform

this bloke is trying to compile stats on rejected applications

 

[SpookyFrank]

I think Diamond is actually right. Why does it matter when a relatively small minority of those who voted elected a government?

Because it's not democratic for a party chosen by a minority of voters to have complete control over the government.

 

[Reg Folder]

Well it's not the argument, it's just my own view about what would need to happen for a Corbyn leadership to translate into electoral success. I don't see how it is odd or 'magic' either. All policy positions will alter the composition of the vote that a party gets, and yes, I do think there is a fairly significant "silent/so disaffected that they haven't been arsed to vote before" bloc. But like I say, it all depends on how the numbers play out.

There would be no chance of Labour being elected with Corbyn as leader, for the simple reason that a majority of the working class, let alone the electorate does not support what he stands for (as opposed to supporting selected bits of what he stands for), and the inevitable media campaign against him.

I'm still enjoying him pissing off the Blairites, though.

 

[Reg Folder]

Because it's not democratic for a party chosen by a minority of voters to have complete control over the government.

I know it isn't. But not enough people give a toss, and, as I said, it's nearly always the case that everybody accepts governments elected by a minority as legitimate.

 

[Rob Ray]

this is not what id call democarcy

That standard letter's actively misleading as well - you don't have to be a party member to find out what information it holds on you or to query the reason for being blocked. Subject access requests can go to leadership2015@labour.org.uk or local CLPs