Forum menu
You could quite feasibly end up with four parties all with a similar share of the vote. Then what?
Same as always. Under FPTP labour and the tories will have the lions share with the other parties a few dozen each. That's why the libdems need to work with labour if they want to stop brexit. By not doing so they only make the opposite a certainty. Unless they change their tune and swallow their pride then the only way of stopping brexit could be a labour overrall majority.
I think scotroutes is suggesting the SNP will take virtually every Scottish seat, I wouldn't bet against them.
I think scotroutes is suggesting the SNP will take virtually every Scottish seat, I wouldn’t bet against them.
Ahhhh, I see sounds plausible. Plenty of remainers in Scotland, though, and the Brexit fiasco isn't the best advert for separatism. Lots of temptation to vote Libdem.
Same as always. Under FPTP labour and the tories will have the lions share with the other parties a few dozen each.
While that may well have been the case in the past, I doubt very much that'll be the case next time out, due to how seismic the changes have been in our politics over the last few years and how polarised this country now is
I know the leadership of both Labour and the Tory's both complacently assume that their former voters, who defected to the lib Dems and the Brexit party at the EU elections, will obediently return to the fold for a GE
I reckon they'll both be in for a bit of a shock this time out
I really hope youre right Binners, but I still think most people are scared to vote LibDem. I reckon most people just can't comprehend a government that isn't Tory or Labour....
I reckon they’ll both be in for a bit of a shock this time out
If you're right, which I don't think you are*, how do you see people voting with blinkered brexit based ideology as opposed to reasoned pragmatism working out? The only result I see is continued tory govt and a no deal brexit. That's a weird thing for a traditional labour voting remainer to wish for.
*The evidence of the last election, even despite the euro election red herring, and many general elections before that shows that voters invariably vote for their best interests, and what directly affects them. This essentially boils down to economic/fiscal policy, schools and health, and a bit of other stuff like public transport and employment rights. Even with brexit dominating the news these will still be the same things driving how most non-political (ie the vast majority) people vote. Sure, the 'more educated metropolitan people' (terrible description BTW!), will flounce off to Swinson and join in with her virtue signalling, but they're in a tiny minority and will only affect the results in a few seats, everywhere else will be mostly the same as it's always been.
Which of your “essentials” isn’t effected (negatively) by the big political hot potato that needs addressing now? RIGHT NOW.
If Labour needs a General Election fought on issues other than Brexit, then it needs to work with others to deliver a referendum followed by an election. Which is what Watson was arguing for. I didn’t agree with him before this week… but this whole “we’ll take a position after an election” line means Labour can not win an election dominated by an imminent Brexit.
Wow, he sounds even shitter than at PMQs.
Actually, to be fair, he’s warming up s bit now.
Bus Services!! Binners will be happy.
What soaring oratory!
Like a bored local council employee pointing out where the fire assembly points are in the car park.
Needs a hi-viz and a clipboard
I'm listening to the words not what they sound like.
What souring oratory!
Predictable comment from Binners is predictable.
There are at least 7 people outside the conference hall are too Daz.
He’s like the teacher off Charlie Brown...
According to Corbyn, the next GE will be a “once in a generation” chance to get a Labour Government. Given the FTPA does that mean a generation is 5 years?
Asking for a friend....
I’m listening to the words not what they sound like.
What was it one of you Corbynites said? “He’s an idea...” 💡
Some good policies in there amongst the poor delivery. A lot of national this service and national that service - that’ll get destroyed in the RW media so they'll have to be prepared to counter the constant & predictable “money tree” attacks.
Once whoever is keeping him in his position realise quite how toxic he is to a large part of the electorate, I’d love to see a Labour Party implement some of that stuff. Here’s hoping Johnson and Farage fall out.
What was it one of you Corbynites said? “He’s an idea…”
That's where you've got it all wrong. It's the policies and the principals that we're interested in, not the personalities. It's genuinely depressing to hear people say they won't vote labour even though the policies are in their clear best interests, because they've been conditioned to accept that's what they have now is all they will ever get. Or simply because they want someone else at the head of it who looks a bit more media friendly.
I find it completely baffling how in pretty much all other areas of life people are encouraged to think big and be optimistic, yet when it comes to politics it's 'be thankful it's not worse' and 'it's not possible'. I've always said people will get what they deserve, and this is more true in politics than anywhere else.
It’s the policies and the principals that we’re interested in, not the personalities
That's a lovely ideal world you have there.
However, what you can't help noticing is that some personalities are a better match for particular jobs, like being a leader, than other personalities.
And with a prime minister you can't help noticing that their personality might steer how they handle future situations. You know, like turning out to be such a cavalier retard that they decide they're going to I dunno, prorogue parliament at one the most crucial junctures in modern British history, on the instruction of their demented mekon puppeteer.
And other stuff. Personality matters as well as policy / manifesto.
We live in a democracy where to do anything, you first need to be elected.
It’s not just having ideas, you need to bring people with you, through effective and inspiring communication.
Corbyn doesn’t seem to have the remotest interest in that. He couldn’t even make a decent fist of preaching to the converted today. He’s no chance of inspiring a nation to believe he’s the answer at this time of national crisis. As the polls show.
He comes across as an over-promoted local council planning inspector.
The scary thing is that you’d think he’d have got better at it over the last 4 years. He’s actually got worse. So he just hides. Today have been trying to get him in for an interview for 3 years now, without success
Is that leadership?
Doesn’t look like it to me
However, what you can’t help noticing is that some personalities are a better match for particular jobs, like being a leader, than other personalities.
And what traits do you think are of benefit in a leader? Narcissism, egotism, ambition, vanity, entitlement, dishonesty, a posh accent, nice haircut and shiny suit? Pretty much all PMs since '97 have been test cases in all or many of these. Which ones apply to Corbyn? Time for something different I think.
We’ve had 4 years of him. Doesn’t seem to be many takers outside the bunker.
You imply that all other options are ego-fuelled, entitled, narcissistic lunatics.
That’s about as cynical as it gets. There’s literally a whole world between that (of which Boris is the living embodiment) and a terminally uninspiring dullard.
The whole problem with our present politics is that it’s dived off to the extremes.
I want to go back to when politics was boring
You imply that all other options are ego-fuelled narcissistic lunatics.
Not at all. There are loads I could get behind. The like of Rayner, Lewis, Lammy, Long-Bailey, Pidcock, and even the likes of Cooper and Benn have present or future potential. But they have to come with policies which challenge the status quo and redress the balance. The same old frilling round the edges and pandering to the oligarchs is not enough. We have massive and deep seated problems, and only radical policies and someone with the bravery to propose and implement them will work.
We live in a democracy where to do anything, you first need to be elected.
I guess that's why you advocate doing anything in order to be elected.
Anything? No.
You simply have to do things that are appealing enough for a majority of the voters to put their cross in your box. You have to communicate your vision effectively and take the voters with you
Permanent opposition may be all very virtuous in its ideological purity, but it achieves nothing. In fact, it’s destructive in its present form as it is allowing s far right government off the hook. So it’s counter-productive to your aims.
So some pragmatism and realism is what’s required. The people at the top of the Labour Party don’t appear too big on either of those things
There are millions of us in this country crying out for both
You simply have to do things that are appealing enough for a majority of the voters to put their cross in your box
Such as leaving the EU.
In 2016.
Politicians have to stay aware of where the voters are now, not back then.
Politicians have to stay aware of where the voters are now, not back then.
So it should've been Labour policy in 2016. Gotcha.
As a lifelong Labour voter, watching the conference this week has just been head-in-hands stuff. Dismal. Shami Chakribatti is on channel 4 news now. She can barely seem to string a coherent sentence together, never mind inspire support in Labour policy
Is that it? Seriously? Is this the best they can do?
It’s pathetic!
In the week that Boris Johnson and his shower of far right half-wits should be on the ropes, the collection of non-entities and incompetents at the helm of the Labour Party manage to make it look like they’re at a parish council meeting, rather than offer an alternative government
And every time Len McClusky opens his gob the Tory vote goes up 10%
What about the woman they got in to do a bit of stand up, Binners?
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1176132483999514624?s=19
So it should’ve been Labour policy in 2016.
Do you mean 2015 or 2017?
It was policy in 2017.
They still lost the general election.
Why?
Partly because most people wanting to leave the EU voted UKIP or Conservative.
The same is true now (swap UKIP for Brexit Party).
They still lost the general election.
So picking a popular policy doesn't win you a general election? Make your mind up!
Such as leaving the EU.
or bring some passion as to why it is a bad idea, why it will take from the majority to serve just a select few, how it will wreck havoc on the lives of those who can least afford it, and damage our country for generations. Confront the lies and hatred instead of trying to win the racists and mislead back by pretending it will be all just fine as long as it just isn't a tory brexit.
Confront the lies and hatred instead of trying to win the racists ...
And lose the hard won antsemitic vote?
or bring some passion as to why it is a bad idea, why it will take from the majority to serve just a select few, how it will wreck havoc on the lives of those who can least afford it, and damage our country for generations.
So you're arguing that Labour should try to gain support for minority opinions?
The Labour Party presently looks like the last thing it could deliver is passionate anything.
A front bench consisting of union administrative staff
I’ve been waiting for someone to take to the conference podium and announce the raffle numbers.
It’d be more interesting than anything else they’ve got to say
We’re in the middle of a national crisis and John McDonall is the the only one who actually turned up
Talk about missing an open goal...
Meandering along on the allotment with Jeremy, totally devoid of leadership...
So you’re arguing that Labour should try to gain support for minority opinions?
Given that only 3-4 million labour voters voted for leave, that is effectually a minority within the party You don't think Labour should try to convince those voters they were wrong?
So picking a popular policy doesn’t win you a general election?
By 2017, the “popular” policy of leaving the EU was already opposed by more than half of voters. Picking a policy that is already on the wain, and which is overwhelmingly unpopular with those people inclined to otherwise vote for you, isn’t a sure fire route into government… judging by that election, no.
You don’t think Labour should try to convince those voters they were wrong?
I think Labour is giving them a democratic choice, which is absolutely the right thing to do in the circumstances.
Anyway, advocating for minority opinions or populism. Labour's route to success is perhaps not as simple as some would like to pretend.
Define “success”.
By 2017, the “popular” policy of leaving the EU was already opposed by more than half of voters.
I must've missed the second referendum. When was it?
Define “success”.
Winning the next GE. Binners thinks it's a simple matter of choosing policies popular with the public.
There are other ways to measure the popularity of policies. Obviously.
Success?
Most popular in the common room
Winning the next GE.
Do you mean forming a majority government, or just being the largest party?
If the former, you are right, no easy route. It can’t happen without changing the leader, and there’s no time for that. If the later, then mobilising the vote with a clear message on Brexit is key.