Being on the membership card was the "front and centre" I was referring to. Not that it was the front and centre OF the membership card. That would be overkill...
If the centre-left aren't currently SDP then we really have travelled so far right that there is no chance of a comeback in my lifetime.
But that again leads onto how far the Overton window has been allowed to shift and is the very reason why Starmer and Labour should be taking this opportunity to roll it back as far as possible (Blair had a similar opportunity and managed to mess it up (more conspiratorial people than me would suggest that Starmer was encouraged to stand for Labour to explicitly prevent this)).
Not having full support is a lot different to having MPs actively working against you. The Tories have spent the past decade in-fighting but they don't undermine in anything like the same damaging way (even with Truss, they knew there was a quick way out whilsy maintaining power).
As for the Lib Dems, in a functioning society people would be able to vote for the party that best represents them and then expect to see (even without PR) some of the proportional 'wants' of the population enacted by government. The fact we are practically in a party-dictatorship is one reason the country is so badly bent out of shape.
Clever people have done the maths. The numbers aren't open to debate. The possible ramifications and coalition problems are fair game though. It may have taken more than 3500 to get the right people in the right seats to form a government but the ~3500 was all that was mathematically required.
What didn't Corbyn offer that you wanted? What bone didn't he throw? (Or are you back to without winning there are no bones?)
Ok, I tend to take things literally
I think the manifesto will be largely centre left, we will see when it comes out. The problem isn't Labour, the problem is the makeup of all of the voters, it's a bad situation, so will ultimately end up in a non ideal situation for the labour left, or centre left (that's going to cover us both). But, what we end up with will be far better than the Tory alternative, or the last 15 years of Tory rule, I'm certain of that. If it's not then I'll be as miffed at that also.
I get your point about shifting left, I wouldn't have been against this in theory, if there was a vote today. But we're not voting today, the vote will be in two years' time, and things should have picked up a bit by then, even with these clowns. I don't really see how it can get much worse over that timeframe, but they Tories never fail to surprise me.
I disagree with actively working against the leader to the degree what you probably think at least, and against the party less than that. But even if not these case, if the leader does not suit the direction needed (or can't handle the press) and is going to lose by a landslide (and then lost by a landslide) then he had to go. Not ideal, but we've not been in an idea situation for a very long time.
Totally agree on the parties, most people don't vote for the party which reflects the reality of the position they're in, was the same with brexit too. I'd prefer a total reset on that, but it's not going to happen, we're going to be stuck in a two-party system as the winning party (Labour in this case) won't want to change things whilst they're winning, or expected to win. Tory's wont want it as they win most of the time, it's like a catch 22.
I'd be interested to read about the 3500, I'm not saying it isn't;'t the case but it doesn't seem a lot. Then you also have to factor that by getting those 3500, what are you going to lose, never mind what the coalition terms would be and how long that would last. Coalitions don't tend to last that long.
Corbyn didn't offer something which would win, which is a combination of policies, the party, how the media portray them, what the current situation is, who they're against etc. It's complex, but yes you get nothing for second.