Corbyn or Smith - lay your best!

[Brian Peacock]

Perhaps people voted for policies and in spite of personalities. The Tories traded heavily on Mrs May's character, but Labour focused on promoting policy (perhaps because Mr Corbyn was a troubled brand).

[pErvinalia]

Well that's Labour unelectable for ten years. Fucksakes.

Dragging up an old thread like this when you are palpably wrong - their vote chair does not make them electable - remotely??

You were wrong. Be graceful about it.

[Scot Dutchy]

May did her best to lose. Who wants to negotiate Brexit?

[Rum]

Well that's Labour unelectable for ten years. Fucksakes.

Dragging up an old thread like this when you are palpably wrong - their vote chair does not make them electable - remotely??

You were wrong. Be graceful about it.

Why the fuck should I when you drag up a two year old thread for the sake of saying Nah Nah you were wrooooong. So fucking childish.

[pErvinalia]

God, have a sook you baby.

[Brian Peacock]

Owen Smith yesterday: "I was clearly wrong in feeling that Jeremy was unable to do this well and I think he’s proved me wrong, and lots of people wrong, and I take my hat off to him."

[Rum]

Even Mandelson offered grudging admiration. I almost choked on my lunch!

[Scot Dutchy]

Corbyn did not win. He did better than most thought he would but it is still not a win and no where near it. He would need a coalition with four other parties to gain control of the HoC. Good luck with that.

Even Dutch politicians would not attempt that and we are used to coalitions.

[Rum]

I'm not sure if anyone is even suggesting that.

[Hermit]

Corbyn did not win. He did better than most thought he would but it is still not a win and no where near it. He would need a coalition with four other parties to gain control of the HoC. Good luck with that.

Even Dutch politicians would not attempt that and we are used to coalitions.

It is true that Labour has no chance of cobbling a workable coalition government together. Only 70 seats were won by neither the Tories nor Labour. Corbyn would have to get 64 of them to cooperate to govern with a majority of one, and four of them would have to come from the DUP. So, no way.

That said, it is not true that Labour did not get close to winning. Winning 40% of the popular vote compared to the Conservatives's 42.4% looks pretty close to me, especially in comparison to the previous election where Labour only attracted 30.4% of the vote with Miliband at the helm, and the one before, where it got 29 when Brown was leading the party.

[pErvinalia]

They actually got within a couple thousand votes according to an analysis of marginal seats that I saw.

[Scot Dutchy]

Corbyn did not win. He did better than most thought he would but it is still not a win and no where near it. He would need a coalition with four other parties to gain control of the HoC. Good luck with that.

Even Dutch politicians would not attempt that and we are used to coalitions.

It is true that Labour has no chance of cobbling a workable coalition government together. Only 70 seats were won by neither the Tories nor Labour. Corbyn would have to get 64 of them to cooperate to govern with a majority of one, and four of them would have to come from the DUP. So, no way.

That said, it is not true that Labour did not get close to winning. Winning 40% of the popular vote compared to the Conservatives's 42.4% looks pretty close to me, especially in comparison to the previous election where Labour only attracted 30.4% of the vote with Miliband at the helm, and the one before, where it got 29 when Brown was leading the party.

Look dont get me wrong his performance even amazed me. He was defeated by the lousy British electoral system. In PR tories would have 276 seats, Labour 260 with Lib Dem on 50. A completely different ball game. It amazed his own party when the exit poll was announced.

Corbyn team at Labour party HQ 'stunned' by exit polls on election night

[Hermit]

Corbyn did not win. He did better than most thought he would but it is still not a win and no where near it. He would need a coalition with four other parties to gain control of the HoC. Good luck with that.

Even Dutch politicians would not attempt that and we are used to coalitions.

It is true that Labour has no chance of cobbling a workable coalition government together. Only 70 seats were won by neither the Tories nor Labour. Corbyn would have to get 64 of them to cooperate to govern with a majority of one, and four of them would have to come from the DUP. So, no way.

That said, it is not true that Labour did not get close to winning. Winning 40% of the popular vote compared to the Conservatives's 42.4% looks pretty close to me, especially in comparison to the previous election where Labour only attracted 30.4% of the vote with Miliband at the helm, and the one before, where it got 29 when Brown was leading the party.

Look dont get me wrong...

No need. You got yourself wrong. Contrary to what you wrote, Corbyn did get close to winning. A 2.4 percentage points margin in the popular vote is a pretty small difference between winning and losing. Capiche?

[Brian Peacock]

May took a massive stake to the table and while she's left the game with more money than her opponents she's the poorer for it and they're the richer. If this was poker who would we have said had 'won' - the person who lost the most before closing time or the person who gained the most?

Her whole Brexit stance is a massive gamble on the future of Britain, and she's showed herself to be a rather incompetent player - even when she's already shuffled the cards in her favour.

[Scot Dutchy]

Still counts.