Forum menu
I love the arrogance in this statement. Of course you are the sensible ones who carefully think through everything.
Love it or not the majority of 'us' did not vote Leave. Go figure.
👍
Love it or not the majority of ‘us’ did not vote Leave. Go figure.
Which doesnt make you sensible but simply those who were benefiting nicely from the status quo and so happy for it to continue (as indeed was I).
Those in the red wall though had been ignored for years and were going for a change, any change, since sadly the last labour government had also chased those sensible middle class voters and ignored them.
Gambling on brexit improving things was a large gamble and I expect will fail for most but it has already paid off for some.
Gambling on brexit improving things was a large gamble and I expect will fail for most but it has already paid off for some.
What were the pay off's? (Genuine question as interested to see where those who were struggling before have gained from Brexit)
Gambling on brexit improving things was a large gamble and I expect will fail for most but it has already paid off for some.
The Brexit vote wasn't really a vote for something, it was a vote for "not this". There wasn't a pathway for leave so people could just paint whatever they wanted into their vision of the future. Or as you say just gamble that "not this" would be better
What were the pay off’s? (Genuine question as interested to see where those who were struggling before have gained from Brexit)
At the moment it's anyone in sectors formerly employing large numbers of EU workers. Seems that a lot are getting pay rises.
The Brexit vote wasn’t really a vote for something, it was a vote for “not this”.
Yes which is the issue I have with these sensible middle class not voting for leave. Well duhhh of course not since they were happy with "this". Whereas others who hadnt seen any gains and often saw things degrade were more liable to go for out especially since the different leave campaigns were able to claim different things to different groups.
and see whether you think Young Labour is really some kind of extreme leftist threat to the Labour Party.
Who has suggested that Young Labour is some kind of leftist threat to the Labour Party?
The only person I am aware of who has made that claim is a Murdoch journalist who is a known supporter of Tony Blair but isn't even in the Labour Party.
He claimed that Young Labour were similar to the German Nazis and wanted a second holocaust against the Jewish people. Young Labour are hoping to take legal action against him if they can get financial assistance.
I'm not sure that that extremist nonsense has ever been expressed on here, even by binners.
I not sure Starmsky’s main mission is to get elected and that would explain his apparent indifference to his poor ratings.
Well there is the theory that after a stint as Opposition Leader he could withdraw from politics and embark on a lucrative career built on established and important political connections. After all great personal rewards built on strong political connections isn't new.
However the most successful recent examples have been based on good election results, it provides at least an illusion of competence.
I'm not sure that losing an election to a bungling clown would look good in his CV.
I am convinced that he wants to win the next general election as much as he wanted to win the Leadership election. And his determination to win that election was so great that he was fully prepared to say whatever he felt needed to be said, and then shamelessly bin all his solemn pledges as soon as the election was over. You have to be pretty determined to carry out a scam like that.
I think his obvious inaction as Leader of the Opposition is simply down to his very limited capabilities.
He didn't become Leader of the Labour Party because of a long history as a highly effective Front Bench MP, or because at Conference "he could find the party's clitoris", as was famously said of Michael Heselstine.
He became Leader because he was insignificant, the complete opposite. People saw him as safe because he had been careful to do and say very little and not make enemies. So successful was he at being insignificant and appearing safe that even a large number of people who had twice voted Corbyn to be Leader voted for him.
I am sure that is Starmer's strategy for becoming PM - be insignificant, don't draw attention to yourself, and appear safe. Partly because it has worked for him in the past and partly it is the only thing he is good at.
Oh and of course come up with a whole lot of pledges just before the general election which he will then instantly bin should he win. I have no doubt that too is an important part of his strategy.
Which doesnt make you sensible but simply those who were benefiting nicely from the status quo and so happy for it to continue (as indeed was I).
Those in the red wall though had been ignored for years and were going for a change, any change, since sadly the last labour government had also chased those sensible middle class voters and ignored them.
Gambling on brexit improving things was a large gamble and I expect will fail for most but it has already paid off for some.
More concisely:
Blowing your own foot off might pay off if you are next over the top.
Well, **** me, I've been wrong all this time. What a sensible decision.
😅
Those in the red wall though had been ignored for years
Ignored on what topic? What topic emotive enough to respond to Vote Leave's campaign tactics?
Might it be along immigration/racial lines, perhaps?
Ignored on what topic?
By new Labour pretty much entirely. You can see the tories trying harder (or pretending to) with the crap about the northern powerhouse.
Nothing whatsoever to do with large Muslim populations in certain towns, then?
🙄
At the moment it’s anyone in sectors formerly employing large numbers of EU workers. Seems that a lot are getting pay rises
Apparently not. Byrons are reducing their waiting staff effective pay by diverting tips, as well as having them clean the bogs.
Apparently not. Byrons are reducing their waiting staff effective pay by diverting tips, as well as having them clean the bogs.
And staff will just vote with their feet
At the moment it’s anyone in sectors formerly employing large numbers of EU workers. Seems that a lot are getting pay rises.
Thanks, wasn't aware of that. So the migrant workers were keeping wages down then ultimately by oversupplying and accepting what they got paid.
1 point to the leave campaign...
And staff will just vote with their feet
Oh yeah of course, it's that easy.....if you don't like the terms of your employment or work conditions just walk out of the job and walk into the next job until you find one that you are happy with.
Byrons doesn't appear to be a very good example of anything other than how badly the covid pandemic has affected businesses of that type. They went into administration last year not because they couldn't get staff but because they couldn't get customers.
ultimately by oversupplying and accepting what they got paid
Which sector had an "oversupply" of staff?
In the short term a self imposed shortage of staff will mean some higher wages when poaching key staff. Longer term, when it all shakes down, don't expect the long term "fix" to look anything like staff having more rights, protection, real income or respect from employers.
Oh yeah of course, it’s that easy…..if you don’t like the terms of your employment or work conditions just walk out of the job and walk into the next job until you find one that you are happy with.
It's the waiting staff hit by tips being redistributed to the kitchen staff and manager. They are on zero or five hour contracts, the world and his dog seem to be short of experienced waiting staff......
And staff will just vote with their feet
Doesn't work if enough businesses go under, though. Particularly on a local level.
And don't forget that the inevitable higher retail prices will be eating into any specific pay rise.
And in the longer term they'll get screwed over as businesses have to restructure to offset increased costs for bugger all in terms of productivity gains.
It sure as hell won't be exec pay or dividends that will take the hit.
🤦♂️
You do wonder how the lumpen proles will interpret under the Tories a rise in non-European immigration and refugees, no £350m pw into the NHS, rising prices, evictions, PPE and SERCO ripoffs, rising taxes, empty shelves, possibly a spike in CV in schools etc etc. Some sort of mental acrobatics along the lines of 'at least we didn't get Corbyn/Labour' or whatever they've picked up from GBNews? It is sad to see people pissing on their own chips but I can't imagine Special K saying anything that would grab their attention.
or whatever they’ve picked up from GBNews?
There's probably more people lurking on this thread than watching GB News
There’s probably more people lurking on this thread than watching GB News
Probably more chance of Andrew Neil contributing as well.
You do wonder how the lumpen proles will interpret under the Tories a rise in non-European immigration and refugees
I suspect they will deal with it in the same way as they dealt with all the other post-war immigration from commonwealth countries, which has made the UK one of the most multicultural countries in the world, ie take it in their stride. It won't be "free movement".
Otherwise if not I think the BNP is still around for them to vote for.
The Guardian: Mark Drakeford – the anti-Boris Johnson who surprised us all.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/06/mark-drakeford-boris-johnson-covid-welsh-first-minister
.
I know it's a view not widely shared but here's an article which appears to back up my claim that the importance of the charisma of a party leader is greatly exaggerated.
Whatever his other qualities, Drakeford was not a charismatic leader in the mould of his immediate predecessors, Carwyn Jones and Rhodri Morgan.
Since then, however, Covid has changed everything. While Drakeford’s detail-oriented, carefully considered approach to policy may not excite, it turns out that, when the going got tough, this was exactly what most of the Welsh electorate wanted from their political leader.
Also worth noting :
Both Plaid Cymru and a generously resourced and initially very confident Welsh Conservative campaign were humbled – the latter in large part because of the way that leave-voting former Labour supporters were persuaded to return “home”.
Since then, however, Covid has changed everything. While Drakeford’s detail-oriented, carefully considered approach to policy may not excite, it turns out that, when the going got tough, this was exactly what most of the Welsh electorate wanted from their political leader.
You seem to be arguing that if Starmer gets into power and there's a handy crisis he's going to be good (detail focused, considered approach to policy etc), just rubbish in opposition, and a not to be trusted establishment stooge....
detail focused, considered approach to policy
I haven't noticed those qualities, he seems all over the place.
You seem to be arguing that if Starmer
Do I seem to be arguing that?
Am I'm suggesting that Starmer replicates the experiences of the Welsh Labour Leader?
Or am I in attempting to make a point about the importance, or lack of importance, of charisma in UK politics?
I'll let you decide.
You do wonder how the lumpen proles will interpret under the Tories a rise in non-European immigration and refugees, no £350m pw into the NHS, rising prices, evictions, PPE and SERCO ripoffs, rising taxes, empty shelves, possibly a spike in CV in schools etc etc. Some sort of mental acrobatics along the lines of ‘at least we didn’t get Corbyn/Labour’ or whatever they’ve picked up from GBNews? It is sad to see people pissing on their own chips but I can’t imagine Special K saying anything that would grab their attention.
Take big pile of shit.
Insert union jack.
Highlight a few places where Johnny Foreigner isn't coping well with parts of what is going on here.
Chuck in a bit of implicit racism/xenophobia.
"It may be a **** up, but it is our **** up".
Job jobbed.
^^^
Oh I forgot, three more possible measures.
Release a series of dead cat stories of your own, tunnels under the Irish Sea with the IoM as a vast underground roundabout, that kind of thing.
Pray that the Ingerland football team win a couple of games.
Scout around for an issue to push out some slightly derogatory/corrosive comments about - BLM, taking the knee etc.
It really is that simple if you've identified a target audience like the New Tory Party (ENP) have.
🏴🍆💦🏴
Or am I in attempting to make a point about the importance, or lack of importance, of charisma in UK politics?
Starmer has charisma?
I was getting quite enthusiastic about Mark Drakeford as I read through that article, then he said he was about to retire.
So now Starmer has the perfect opportunity to attack the tories as the party of tax the workers whilst letting the wealthy off.
Lets see him spring into action or will he be busy forensically analysing something or other setting his long term traps.
Lets see him spring into action or will he be busy forensically analysing something or other
That's Mark Drakeford not Starmer
I reckon at this point we may as well just disband the Labour Party - put the poor creature out of its misery - and just have Andy Burnham and Marcus Rashford taking it in turns to be HM official opposition on a rotating weekly basis
Seeing as that’s what appears to be happening anyway
I reckon at this point we may as well just disband the Labour Party
Yup, they consistently fail to deliver....anything.
I have said it before ,but I really think that Starmer/Labour don't want to govern the UK while it's in this state ,so they will wait until it hits rock bottom and people beg them to take over.
I reckon at this point we may as well just disband the Labour Party – put the poor creature out of its misery
Totally agree. In all my time following politics I don’t think I’ve ever felt as distant from the Labour Party as I do now. Even in the Blair days. It says a lot that labour front benchers say more about opposing previous leaders than they do the tories. The party machine seems more interested in a witch-hunt of members who might have attended a meeting with some obscure lefties 20 years ago than fighting the tories, and the leader is utterly silent on pretty much everything.
I’m actually hoping for a massive collapse at the next election, it’s the only way things will change.
Starmer has charisma?
Well what do you reckon BnD? Since you asked this fascinating question.
I’m actually hoping for a massive collapse at the next election, it’s the only way things will change.
You don’t count 2019 as a ‘massive collapse’?
The worst defeat since 1935, a huge Tory majority with Labour losing loads of seats that it’d held since the Dawn of time? Ticks all the ‘massive collapse’ boxes for me
The trouble now is that there only appears to be one Labour politician who seems remotely interested in actually doing any opposing of the government, and he’s not even an MP
and he’s not even an MP
Well that's incredibly handy for you binners. You can now bang on endless about what a fantastic politician Burnham, or "Andy" as you like to fondly call him, is, and how he's the man to save Labour, secure in the knowledge that he's not in a position to do anything and therefore can't screwup and consequently prove you completely wrong.
Unlike Keir Starmer who you would really prefer never to talk about, even on a thread dedicated to him.
Afternoon comrade.
I don’t know why you think I don’t talk about Starmer, I’ve stated repeatedly how disappointed I am in the vacuum presently around him regarding policy and his timidity in failing to attack the government. The silence today is both mystifying and infuriating
As for Andy, me singing his praises is hardly anything new. The party would be in a very very different place now if we’d have had him instead of Grandad 6 years (which seems like an eternity) ago, very likely actually in power
Lol binners' go and look at one of the leadership hustings. Burnham was out of his depth and bereft of ideas. In fairness he acted well during and after the leadership election (unlike the spoilt Cooper).
As for Andy, me singing his praises is hardly anything new. The party would be in a very very different place now if we’d have had him instead of Grandad 6 years (which seems like an eternity) ago, very likely actually in power
Flipflop Burnham would have been Ed Miliband MK2. Any decent interviewer turned him inside out on his changing views. He's not even doing that well in Manchester, policing is a disaster under his watch. The spatial plan took ages, disappeared and then reappeared as a reduced effort. It's not all bad but he's not all that.
Well what do you reckon BnD? Since you asked this fascinating question.
He's average for me, not a snooze fest but not exciting, not energised by him, but no worse that the others that stood for leader.
Found this article with a quick Google and it sums up a lot of the issues Labour and Starmer have quite well
https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/labour-party-messiah
Now it’s Keir Starmer’s turn to face the heresy charges of the left. He takes his place in the lineage of Labour leaders who, upon assuming control of the party, find half of his own side loathe him. It’s all very confusing.
Burnham was out of his depth and bereft of ideas.
Agreed.
Any decent interviewer turned him inside out on his changing views.
Agreed.
He’s not even doing that well in Manchester
Don't agree. He's found his place, and is performing his role well, in Manchester, which I didn't expect at all. Glad to be wrong on that count.
Now it’s Keir Starmer’s turn to face the heresy charges of the left.
Importantly, any leader after Corbyn was going to face this. Even more than past leaders. But he absolutely should have been ready to deal with it, there's no surprises for him in that regards. To say he's not doing well, or that those attacking him from "the left" are being given an easy task, is to put it mildly.
He’s not even doing that well in Manchester
The 67% of voters in Greater Manchester who just re-elected him clearly don’t agree with you on that one
My point about Andy is that for the last god-know-how-long he’s the only Labour politician who looks like he’s in possession of a pair and is up for the fight.
Corbyn phoned-in the last election campaign and Starmer looks like he’d rather be doing anything else.
Now it’s Keir Starmer’s turn to face the heresy charges of the left. He takes his place in the lineage of Labour leaders who, upon assuming control of the party, find half of his own side loathe him.
They didn't at the start of his reign though, hence why loads of them voted for him.
Don’t agree. He’s found his place, and is performing his role well, in Manchester, which I didn’t expect at all. Glad to be wrong on that count.
What are the main mayoral roles?
Policing
The GMP is in special measures, Burnham extended the predecessor to the current CC. The new CC has dumped a core part of Burnham's policing message
Planning and housing
The spatial plan was ambitious but it's a mess, still to be resolved, leaves areas at high planning risk until it's in place. Manchester still building developments with no social housing.
Transport/Clean air
The metrolink is already at bursting point on some lines. Road charging is going to make that worse. Ordsall Chord not sorted. Northern Rail a joke. Buses aren't his fault. Good initiatives on Bee lines.
Waste
The GM waste PFI was a £500m disaster(not his fault) what's his strategy to replace it? Food waste has to be diverted from landfill from 2025 it has nowhere to go and not a lot of time to do it
Homelessness
Good work
Health
Not sure what he's done
https://twitter.com/harrytlambert/status/1435202833918439424
Ouch
the 25% mark is significant, whatever policies come out of conference will be make or break but theres a mountain to climb (Johnson is on about 35%)
still hopeful things can be turned around, but it will take strong & clear (simple) policies to do that
The 67% of voters in Greater Manchester who just re-elected him clearly don’t agree with you on that one
It's a city and most of the local authorities are labour strongholds, Manchester in particular
I suspect it's more to do with the lack of an alternative with a sufficient profile to challenge than anything else.
I voted for him or green (can't remember), it doesn't mean he can't be held to account for his deficiencies.
He's not a leader on a national stage, it doesn't mean some of the points he makes aren't valid and important, nor does the sun shine out of his posterior
It’s a city and most of the local authorities
areused to be labour strongholds, Manchester in particular
FTFY
We now have a load of new Tory MP’s in areas that have been Labour since dinosaurs walked through Miles Platting (last one spotted in 2018)
Local authorities and MPs are not the same thing
The presence of the latter maybe due to the secular Saint....
Ouch
Ouch indeed. And it mirrors what a lot of people on this thread feel. High hopes at the start for someone sensible and experienced enough to deal with Johnson BS but turned out to actually be crap month over month.
If he could be honest with himself he would be going if he really wants a Labour party to have a chance.
The presence of the latter maybe due to the secular Saint…
Despite ‘winning the argument’ I think we all know at who’s door the blame lies
If he could be honest with himself he would be going if he really wants a Labour party to have a chance.
Trying to do his job in covid would have been hard. I would say Christmas is the cut-off to make some impact, gives him conference and a bit of time to get the show moving from that relaunch
I think we all know at who’s door the blame lies
That's a bit harsh on Owen Jones
It's not all his fault...
Despite ‘winning the argument’ I think we all know at who’s door the blame lies
Rent-free in your head.
Thanks for the link to the GQ article BnD, I didn't read it but later I will have a look at their fashion and grooming tips. Cheers
As for Andy, me singing his praises is hardly anything new.
Binners very little of what you say is ever new. Repeating the same thing over and over again is your speciality.
Starmer is furstrating his response to Johnsons NI rise & care plan today was right on every point, but the delivery was lacking in gravitas/charisma & his problem is that he is up against the king of bombastic bullshitters
I still think a decent policy platform come conference season could do it, that gives him 2 years to turn that into a vote winning party b4 the GE, ill reserve judgemnet until xmas, by then we should know what starmerism is
Is it too much to ask for Labour to have a leader that isnt just a nice person, but someone smart, likeable & authentic? Im not sure I ever remember them having someone like that since pre-iraq blair!
I still think a decent policy platform come conference season could do it
I don’t. Policy isn’t the problem. Connection with voters is. He has failed to do so. He will always fail to do so. I predict that his first proper conference and its aftermath will make that plain.
Good policies would help him connect with voters
I know Johnson proves you dont need them at all, but in opposition it matters more, hes got to offer something better
Im not convinced May for example was able to connect with voters, she was just seen a s a steadying hand after years of upheaval, yet the much more 'authentic' corbyn was still unable to beat her
Policy isn’t the problem.
Policy is the very problem, all other problems pale into insignificance in comparison.
In the 2017 general election Labour won 40% of the vote and robbed the Tories of their majority forcing them to form a minority government.
Two years later in 2019 Labour won just 32% of the vote and gave the Tories a thumping great majority of 80.
Same leader with the same personality and the same charisma or lack of charisma, so why the huge difference?
Well putting aside the fact that the Blairite faction had another couple of years to sabotage the party and attack its leader there was one big policy difference between 2017 and 2019. And it was of the most talked about and important issue of the day.
In 2017 Labour had a crystal-clear unambiguous policy of respecting the 2016 referendum result and delivering brexit. Two years later that policy had changed to 'constructive ambiguity' and a firm commitment to a second referendum in which the original question would be asked all over again.
The result of that policy shift was devastating for Labour, and the level of collapse of the Labour vote can be directly connected to how areas voted in the referendum.
Not so say the deniers, nothing to with Labour changing its position on brexit, appointing a utterly commited Remainer as Shadow Brexit Secretary and demanding a second referendum.
The difference, they will claim, between 2017 and 2019 was that in 2017 the Tories had a Leader who had absolutely no charisma and everyone thought was useless, obviously totally ignoring the fact that the only reason she called a completely unnecessary general election in the first place was because every single opinion poll right up to the day she called it predicted that she would win a staggering huge landslide.
In comparison, they will claim, in 2019 the Tories had as leader a great big bundle of blonde loveliness who the voters adored.
The reason the Tories did badly in 2017 was because no one liked May, the reason they did well in 2019 was because everyone loved Johnson and it had nothing to do with Labour except for the fact that it was all Corbyn's fault.
If you believe that binners has a Nigerian uncle who would like to have a word with you.
In 2017 the Tories received 42.4% two years later in 2019 that had only increased by 1.2%.
The Tories didn't go from minority government to massive majority government because of a huge increase in their share of the vote, they instead benefited from a collapse in the Labour vote.
The Tories gained 1.2% Labour lost 7.9%
So corbyn losing the election was not his fault it was the fault of labour not backing Brexit
If only we could find out who was in charge of labour when this policy shift occurred?
In 2017 Labour had a crystal-clear unambiguous policy of respecting the 2016 referendum result and delivering brexit. Two years later that policy had changed to ‘constructive ambiguity’ and a firm commitment to a second referendum in which the original question would be asked all over again
That's quite the rewriting of history
constructive ambiguity on brexit was Labours position precisely because no one had any idea of what brexit meant, into that vacuum we had endless indicative votes, eventually Labour had to take a position, they came down on the remain side, presumably because 60% of labour voters backed it.
A crystal clear ambiguous policy of respecting something as nebulous and ill defined as brexit was then was impossible.
'Respecting the result of the referendum' was as empty a phrase as May's 'Brexit Means Brexit'
At some point corbyn had to come off the fence, alienate the red wall voters (who'd really already left Labour) or the younger remain voters momentum had swept up in 2017
So corbyn losing the election was not his fault it was the fault of labour not backing Brexit
Absolutely it was his fault. He proved to be weak and easily bullied and manipulated. The policy of a second referendum was an electoral disaster for Labour. I hold Corbyn personally responsible for that, and John McDonnell.
Is it is you Kimbers who is attempting to rewrite history by pretending that Labour did not shift its policy on brexit and that it wasn't at the heart of the 2017-19 Labour vote collapse.
Your claim that the "red wall voters" had already left Labour is nonsense, but you know that anyway. In 2017 they remained loyal to Labour.
Corbyn due to his ineptitude and total lack of understanding of traditional Labour voters alienated people whose families had voted Labour for a hundred years. He chose to listen to Guardian reading liberals like yourself rather than them, hence his complete disconnection with the very people that Labour once represented.
Labour insulted the electorate by giving them the same leader to vote for again. Corbyn did well in 2017, and yes, that manifesto helped win voters over (myself included). He never should have stood at a second election, it was total folly obvious to everyone. He was a total personal turn off for voters by 2019.
Yes, Brexit was also a mess for Labour. They tried (and failed) to keep people onside. Any Brexit they proposed derided as “not real Brexit” by some, and “vague fantasy” by others… and eventually moved to a promise to return to the voters after any Brexit reality deviated further and further from the 2016 promises. That’s why the front bench tend to stay well away from it now, even though it’s pushing up taxes on working people, delivering chaos in many industries and services, and creating a mountain of red tape for small business that is only go to grow as grace periods come to an end.
Corbyn due to his ineptitude and total lack of understanding of traditional Labour voters alienated people whose families had voted Labour for a hundred years
Red wall voters had been leaving Labour for a generation, corbyns constructive ambiguity helped bring them back in 2017 (actually Blair also reversed the decline there in 2007)
I'd also argue clear policies: renationalising rail, ending austerity helped massivel
by 2019 election labour had announced over 200 policies 😳
The majority of labour’s voters now reside in cities, not the towns of the red wall, you can hark after the demographics of 200 years ago but they ain't coming back
What actually happened is that in 2017 when the UKIP vote collapsed the majority went to the tories, not Labour in the red wall, the rot was set
Brexit broke labours last grip on those seats, but support there had been wavering for years
So corbyn losing the election was not his fault it was the fault of labour not backing Brexit
If the stupid old Brexiteer dinosaur had actually reflected the views of the the vast majority of Labour Party members, MP’s and voters, and not decided to take a sabbatical for two months on his allotment during the referendum campaign, leaving the pitch free for Boris and Farage then Brexit wouldn’t have been an issue because it would never have happened
But no…. Jeremy was/is only ever interested in reflecting Jeremys view on an issue, as he seems to regard himself as omnipotent
Jus’ sayin’
He chose to listen to Guardian reading liberals like yourself rather than them,
If you think Corbyn represented the views of Guardian readers you must have been smoking crack.
Labour insulted the electorate by giving them the same leader to vote for again.
LOL! That's the first time I have heard that explanation for why Labour did unexpectedly well in 2017 and denied the Tories a majority, and then 2 years later were humiliated by a huge Tory majority!
Did you think that one up yourself, or did you pinch it from someone else?
LOL @ the thought that the first time they weren't too fussed but two years later they felt insulted!
Yeah that's how politics works. But only a truly analytical mind could have worked that out. Forensic even.
I’ve mentioned it many times. I’ve bored people with it. Corbyn got me voting Labour. He should have stood aside after the 2017 election. He stuck around too long and become the bogeyman. Most of what stuck to him was unfair, but the more the public saw of him, the more people didn’t want him as PM.
Timing matters. It’s why I want Labour to replace Starmer about a year out from an election (even though they don’t control the timing or replace their leader in a timely fashion, so would find it very hard to do so). Any new leader will be turned into the wrong man/women within 2 years.
Red wall voters had been leaving Labour for a generation, corbyns constructive ambiguity helped bring them back in 2017 (actually Blair also reversed the decline there in 2007)
Honestly I don't wish to be rude (unless it's binners) but that is so much nonsense that frankly I can't be arsed, I can't see any basis for a constructive discussion.
There's a reason you people call it a "red wall", think about it.
Ah yes binners' great insight that Corbyn should have ignored the red wall voters more and sided whole-heartedly with the urban remainers, but also that he was completely out of touch with the red wall voters, despite actually being in line with them on the issue that was most important to them. Makes a lot of sense 🥴
"You People" 😳
Anyway, yes it was assumed to be an unassailable wall? I didn't name it though
That was a false assumption and the red wall 😏 was crumbling in 2017, when
NE Derbyshire,
Walsall North,
Mansfield,Stoke-on-Trent South, Middlesbrough South
East Cleveland and Copeland
All flipped blue for the first time in 100 years....
Let's be honest at this point I can't see those seats coming back for some time
Yeah you people, I don't generally use the term, but it a very popular term used by people who aren't working-class.
I wasn't hearing of Labour losing "red wall" seats 5 years ago, or 10 years ago, or 20 years ago. It seems a completely new phenomenon which started 2 years ago. Tbh I hadn't even heard the term "red wall" until 2 years ago, at least I don't recall doing so. Despite shamefully reading the Guardian on numerous occasions.
it is you Kimbers who is attempting to rewrite history by pretending that Labour did not shift its policy on brexit and that it wasn’t at the heart of the 2017-19 Labour vote collapse.
Pretty much on the button whether you like it or not! TBF appeasing his younger (got trolleyed at a festival the night before and didn't bother) and older voters who actually turn up to vote was an impossible task.
The “Red Wall” is a 2019 political construct, it never existed as a term before then, so you wouldn’t have heard about it being lost before then. But the Conservatives have been taking votes of Labour in the towns and surrounding areas for decades, and Labour support has become more and more city focused. It’s only going to get more difficult for Labour with aging demographics in those areas Labour have lost ground.
It's just a now-commonly used shortcut for 'traditionally safe Labour seats in the north of England' isn't it? And there have been warnings that people in those areas have been taken for granted for years by Labour eg the discussion around Mandelson saying they had 'nowhere else to go'.
Brexit was the straw that broke the camel's back that drove people to UKIP then the Tories/ENP
Ah yes binners’ great insight that Corbyn should have ignored the red wall voters more and sided whole-heartedly with the urban remainers, but also that he was completely out of touch with the red wall voters,
Just about every Labour MP, bar Kate Hoey (who belongs in UKIP), 70% of Labour members and an overwhelming majority of Labour voters were all remain. So as party leader Corbyns job was to reflect that
But he was never going to do that as he’s a lifelong Brexiteer who couldn’t give a toss about anyone’s opinion other than his own, so he went AWOL for the duration of the referendum campaign instead
Once Brexit was a reality, The Red Wall racists who’s side he took would never give him any credit for this as rather than regarding him as a fellow traveller they regarded him as a traitorous, terrorist-sympathising communist, as the Sun had constantly informed them
So he got no credit for what he’d delivered, whereas Boris got the lot
Not a bright lad, politically, was he?
You’re not in Islington now Dorothy
Yeah you people, I don’t generally use the term, but it a very popular term used by people who aren’t working-class.
Oh Ernie you're gonna burst a blood vessel when you hear about the tungsten carbide drillbits were using down the mine now
You don’t count 2019 as a ‘massive collapse’?
2019 was a loss, a bad one, but not a collapse. I’m talking about something like has happened in Scotland, leaving them with with a few tens of MPs rather than a couple of hundred. Because that’s where they’re heading with their principle free, self-obsessed, morally bankrupt, cowardly, cynical machine politics.
Where’s Binners? 😀
https://twitter.com/andyburnhamgm/status/1435132513777750018?s=21
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1435213519671209984?s=21
Are they both just reading over Sturgeon’s shoulder?
[ you can’t blame them, I would be if I was I was in either of their positions ]
For those with longer memories…
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-the-national-care-service
Burnham helped write that. In 2010. And then the country kicked them out.
It’s just a now-commonly used shortcut for ‘traditionally safe Labour seats in the north of England’ isn’t it?
And according to Yougov it provides a false analysis.
"Our survey shows that rather than being a bastion of social conservativism within Britain, these constituencies up and down the North and Midlands contain a great diversity of opinions, and indeed widespread support for a range of what we might consider progressive policies and views.
Furthermore, where Red Wall voters do exhibit socially conservative attitudes, they are not significant stronger (or no more common) than the level of social conservativism which we see among the British public in general.
In other words, the Red Wall is no more socially conservative than Britain as a whole, and characterisation of voters in these areas as predominantly “small c” conservatives concerned about social liberalisation or culture wars is not supported by polling evidence."
There is some evidence that the whole "red wall" is latest political-speak created by the Tories and their supporters to undermine and demoralise the Labour Party. Think about that before you willingly parrot it.