Well, To The People On This Site That Give J.c. Some Stick.

[TWR]

Who's now running with their tail between their legs, ha ha ha ha ha

[scooping]

He didn't win or come anywhere near.

[hc4361]

I haven't changed my opinion of him nor been proved wrong.

[jlcm]

check all the votes the Tories share went up

[Mamyalynne]

The Election continues to bring out the best in ABers.

[hellywelly4]

I haven't got a tail and I'm certainly not running. He didn't win, end of.

[Lie-in King]

Oh, *that* JC...

[Mamyalynne]

'End of' - so soon?

[naomi24]

TWR, calm down. He lost.

[EDDIE51]

He got more votes for Labour than in any election since the end of WW2!!
That is NOT a failure! If there is another election within the year , as seems likely, Labour will get a landslide victory.
But the most important thing is that he has proved that a 'True Socialist Labour Party ' is viable.

[Tilly2]

Is it Groundhog Day today?

[kvalidir]

Just the beginning HellyWelly I'd say :)

[naomi24]

Eddie, //he has proved that a 'True Socialist Labour Party ' is viable.//

No he hasn't. He lost.

[hellywelly4]

How,can it be the beginning. He was defeated.

[jim360]

With more votes than, as I say, four previous Labour "winners". The system is odd like that.

I think at least one thing you're missing is that the Tories "won" because they had so far to fall from the heights they were clearly enjoying. Well, they don't have any more room to fall now, do they?

So maybe you lot should get your act together rather than trying to rubbish Corbyn so much.

[Mamyalynne]

It's groundhog day everyday somewhere.

[kvalidir]

Because TM's position is untenable and won't last five minutes then we;re into another election, that's why.

[EDDIE51]

^ yes he lost, but by a far smaller number of seats than even the most devoted Labour supporters dared hope!

[vulcan42]

It doesn't matter how you want to wrap it up, he lost.

[jim360]

Fair enough. But one more victory like that and May is finished.

[naomi24]

Jim, //With more votes than, as I say, four previous Labour "winners". The system is odd like that.//

There hasn’t been a Labour winner since 2005. I’ve already given you, elsewhere, the statistics for the huge increase in population since then. Can’t help wondering if the number of votes might, just might, have been affected by that. It stands to reason that if Corbyn got more votes than winner Blair, but lost, there’s something awry in your thinking.

I don't 'try' to rubbish Corbyn. 'Trying' is surplus to requirements.