The newest trend in politics? Losing to win.

September 12, 2015
The new leader of Britain's opposition Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn makes his inaugural speech at the Queen Elizabeth Centre in central London

The new leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn makes his inaugural speech at the Queen Elizabeth Centre in central London, September 12, 2015. REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth

LONDON — Americans who deem their presidential primary politics a bit wacky this year have a point.

The leading candidates include a loud-mouthed mogul who excels at the insult, two would-be heirs to modern political dynasties and an avowed socialist from one of America’s smallest states.

But America has nothing on its “mother country,” the United Kingdom. In the UK, over the past year, rejection at the polls has become, it seems, a necessary prelude to victory.  

A year ago, for example, Scotland’s independence referendum, the results of which the British government had vowed to honor, was rejected handily by Scottish voters.  The result?  In Britain’s national parliamentary election last May, the pro-independence Scottish Nationalist Party swept to an overwhelming victory, winning 56 of Scotland’s 59 seats in the Westminster Parliament and all but wiping out the once-dominant Scottish Labour Party. 

In that same national election, the Conservatives confounded the pollsters by winning an absolute majority in Parliament and routing a Labour party led by a candidate from the party’s left wing. So what happened?  

Just Saturday Labour elected a new leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who’s even further to the left. An avowed admirer of Marx (Karl, not Groucho), his ideas include nationalizing key industries, pulling out of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and discarding Britain’s nuclear arsenal unilaterally. That’s just for starters.    

Improbably, Corbyn barely made it into the leadership contest. He got just over the minimum number of votes from Labour’s MPs, just minutes before the nominating deadline. One MP who said she voted for him to add zest to the contest confessed that she never wanted him to win and now deems herself a “moron.” London bookies put the initial odds against him at 200-1.

Pundits have been scrambling to explain Corbyn’s improbable success. Having sat in Parliament for 32 years, he’s hardly a fresh political face. Some commentators say the 66-year-old Corbyn is nonetheless authentic and unscripted, in contrast to conventional politicians. Others say Britons are just fed up with politics as usual. Still others cite changes to the voting rules in Labour’s leadership contest. 

So what does the Corbyn victory in the wake of Labour’s loss really mean?

As a London-based American journalist, I have no special insight. But it’s clear that If this “losing to win” phenomenon spreads, it could become Britain’s hottest export since the Beatles.  

American presidential hopefuls could vie to lose next year’s first two state contests — the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary — to assure winning their party’s nomination for the White House.  Corporate managers will hope to be passed over for promotion to give their careers a boost.

Students will try to flunk tests and blow college-entrance exams to attend Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT.  Political pundits will make wrong predictions so they’ll eventually get one right. (Actually, that is happening already.)  Kim Kardashian will duck TV cameras to get more publicity. (Okay, that’s unlikely.)

There’s no end to where this might lead. Companies trying to lose money so their stock price will soar? Self-help books titled “The Art of Losing?” Hollywood directors hoping for box-office busts?

To be sure, the Scottish Nationalists and the Corbynistas haven’t yet won their ultimate goals. Scotland remains part of the United Kingdom, at least for now, and Corbyn is the opposition leader instead of Britain’s prime minister. Still, both the Nationalists and Corbyn already have won improbable victories.

I wish I could explain it, but there’s no time. I have to run out to buy a losing lottery ticket.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

Fact, not rumor or myth: he is the friend of prominent figures in Hamas and Hezbollah.

Fact, not rumor or myth: he hangs out with Holocaust deniers.

Fact, not rumor or myth: he socializes with radicals who promote the killing of British soldiers, and celebrate 9/11 as justice.

It’s much, much worse for Britain than the silly posturing of a socialist as you portray here. They’ve had plenty of those, but not (yet) plenty of terrorist sympathizers and anti-Semites.

Posted by MrSatyre | Report as abusive

We really shouldn’t be surprised by any of this. The Scottish independence referendum gave the Scottish Nationalist Party more publicity than they ever could have gotten otherwise. The Labor party electing a leader from the radical left guarantees free publicity from all of the would-be political analysts in the press, in other words from all of the press. All publicity is good publicity. That is the entire principle behind viral marketing.

Posted by Sewblon | Report as abusive

Never ceases to amaze me how pundits and writers don’t really understand politics and people. Corbyn has been elected by his party which allowed party activists to vote. As an ex member of the Labour party please let me explain. The rank and file of the party are far left wing and will always when given a choice elect a left wing leader. But the majority of labour voter are democratic socialists who will never vote for a left wing leader. I refer you to 1979 when the labour government controlled by the unions had the country massively in debt to the IMF. Then in 1983 got destroyed at the GE with a left wing leader, Michael Foot.

Posted by Moties001 | Report as abusive

Jeremy Corbyn is the least of your worries. The real worry is that Reuters has corralled all comments into this “Opinion” sector to protect the main topic writers from trolls. It’s nice that Reuters tries to diminish trolls; however, very few of Reuter’s opinion articles are on the top of my list of issues I care about. I do care about/have opinions about articles in their other sectors. I guess I’ll spend my time elsewhere, with other news sources. Good luck, Reuters, in your attempts to engage readers.

Posted by hometown | Report as abusive