Forum menu
Wes Streeting? Wow. Just hand the tories the next 3 or 4 general elections then.
Wes Streeting is going to save the day
Kill me now
Well, the student politics jokes would become even more rife! I can't see it happening though.
[ digs out old Clive Lewis tweet for amusement value ]
I'm not sure Owen Jones is the most reliable source
He's mage himself look silly a few times lately
Hopefully this is out of context tittle tattle…
Seems like it was, as he’s deleted the tweets.
He’s made himself look silly a few times lately
See above.
Has Streeting been lobbying?
Even The Grauniad can't find anyone with much positive to say about Starmer's 14,000 word nothingburger.
Two polar opposites that sum up the Labour 'predicament' perfectly.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/23/keir-starmer-labour-three-things-to-do
Strip away all the verbiage and one salient fact remains. Only one of them has been an integral part of getting a Labour government elected.
The other is a typical king of the common room, happy to snipe from the sidelines and enjoy the adoration of his acolytes.
Electability vs ideological 'purity'. If you extend the argument that a political party's function is to form a government, then sniping from the sidelines doesn't make you a party. It makes you a movement.
Even The Grauniad can’t find anyone with much positive to say about Starmer’s 14,000 word nothingburger.
They won't. He's still trying to walk both sides of the street. Keeping the nutters happy vs trying to get elected at the next GE.
Electability vs ideological 'purity'. Dress it up how you will. Go off down talking shop cul de sacs. The fundamental question remains - are Labour a serious political party wanting to be elected or are they a movement that is happy to form a permanent but irrelevant opposition?
Electability vs ideological ‘purity’.
This phrase is almost as tedious as binners sixth form shite.
Its just an attempt by most of those using it to imply that they are some sort of deep thinking pragmatists when in reality are just as much ideologues as anyone else.
Lets take the great winner Mandelson who was so ideologically opposed to anything left wing he announced he would spend at least part of every day trying to get Corbyn removed.
There is also the slight problem that you can see his great victory winning skills vanish from 1997 onwards as labour support plummets and thanks to corrupt arseholes like him helped create the "all politicians are the same".
So what, exactly, makes you think he has election winning tactics now? Those 15 years were won with coin that was rapidly spent.
Those 15 years were won with coin that was rapidly spent.
Maybe, but they were 13 years of Labour government. That is the fundamental point you insist on missing.
Mandelson is a PR creep, a thoroughly egotistical and cynical man. Personally I can't stand him.
But he played an integral part in getting a labour government elected after 18 years of Tory rule.
What do you want? A Labour Party that is electable in the UK in 22/23 or banners and Che T-shirts?
Unless you answer that fundamental question there is no point discussing this further. That is why the diehards will never answer it.
What do you want? A Labour Party that is electable in the UK in 22/23 or banners and Che T-shirts?
Puerile claptrap.
Fact is we don't know what would make a Labour party electable in 2022/3, but constantly harking back to 1997, seeing Peter Mandelson as a guru, and vilifying anyone to the left of David Cameron is highly unlikely to be it.
Can I just check btw, how did Gordon Brown get on in 2010?
So you don't want to answer the question, then. OK.
Luckily Corbyn and the true Labour supporters won the last election with an 80 seat majority. Oh no, they didn't.
They ceded ground to a right wing populist rabble headed by a serial liar and piss artist.
I must say that if there is one thing 'old fashioned' lefties excel at (even more that factionalism) it is rewriting the past. No sooner had Marx's pen left the paper before the usual suspects were rewriting 'what he really meant'. Old habits die hard, I guess.
Meanwhile the increasingly pissed off working age middle class scout around for an alternative to Johnson's shitshow, take one look at Labour with plonkers like Owen Jones waving a megaphone around and decide just to not bother voting at all.
👏
🤷♂️
I didn't answer your stupid insulting troll question? Oh I'm sorry.
TBH these days I'm not that fussed. I genuinely wanted SKS to do well at first and thought he would, and I didn't necessarily see that as keeping every shred of JCs manifesto. But he just keeps disappointing me and many others even further, and I'm no longer convinced he has much integrity at all. He certainly has no charm or charisma.
He'd be more competent than BJ, but who wouldn't.
Maybe, but they were 13 years of Labour government. That is the fundamental point you insist on missing.
Or perhaps I am disagreeing with your religious mantra?
The obvious starter for ten is are the circumstances the same? Since the answer is clearly no then the question is how much can be ported across and what was the damage done by the previous approach.
But he played an integral part in getting a labour government elected after 18 years of Tory rule.
This is also something repeated as a religious mantra by the true believers. However if you do something so boring as to look at the figures Labour was already doing well under Smith with the tories imploding completely.
What do you want? A Labour Party that is electable in the UK in 22/23 or banners and Che T-shirts?
Again we get binary options and absolute certainty preferred by ideologues.
The obvious answer would be what is the cost of that election?
Is it worth winning a battle to win the war?
What are you willing to sacrifice for your great victory.
What are the risks.
Will this "victory" shift the political ground?
But he played an integral part in getting a labour government elected after 18 years of Tory rule.
In 1997. About as relevant as 1945 or 1964.
You've got to win a general election before you can implement anything. Otherwise you are just pissing in the wind.
You’ve got to win a general election before you can implement anything. Otherwise you are just pissing in the wind.
Perhaps you could tell us what Starmer wants to implement: we're all dying to know.
You’ve got to win a general election before you can implement anything. Otherwise you are just pissing in the wind.
Wow such insight. What's the plan for doing that? How's it going?
It seems the subtext to this 'electability' idea is that the Tories have been in office more than Labour therefore to get elected you need to emulate them, dress like them, suck up to plutocrats, convince them you pose no threat, invite Murdoch in, spy, expel. I don't think the cynical working class Tories voters I know will be impressed by that at all, neither will anyone who considers themselves some sort of socialist. As the crisis deepens it will become very clear that Starmer's Labour has nothing to offer at all apart from side with the establishment.
Fact is we don’t know what would make a Labour party electable in 2022/3, but constantly harking back to 1997, seeing Peter Mandelson as a guru, and vilifying anyone to the left of David Cameron is highly unlikely to be it.
The point the country has moved on since 1997 is valid, as is the point the last time labour won an election Peter Mandelson was somewhere in the background.
If labour had a strong PLP it would be building a sense of a government in waiting, add in some consistency in policy and presentation of it then you have a strong base to build from. The reality is it doesn't, so you have a mediocre at best leader (subject to a conference barnstormer) and a PLP which is full of pensioners and journeymen/women who are happy being the local parliamentary social worker representing rather than legislating. The front bench is weak and mostly invisible. The PLP system that had Keith Vaz or Jared O'Mara is broken. There are the exceptions but they need to be the norm rather than the standout examples.
It still boils down to 326+, if Labour are going to form a government they need a plan that will get them there, that handily gives them an extra 100 MP's in the talent pool as a bonus
Lets take the great winner Mandelson who was so ideologically opposed to anything left wing he announced he would spend at least part of every day trying to get Corbyn removed.
Which unfortunately gives agency to the left wing to repeat the tactic
Eye for an eye just makes everyone blind
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir-starmer-approval-rating
Come on, please tell us how that's all the fault of old trots?
Which unfortunately gives agency to the left wing to repeat the tactic
Except that's not actually happening, as we've established.
Which unfortunately gives agency to the left wing to repeat the tactic
The left voted for Starmer, which shows a great deal more compromise than has ever been extended in the opposite direction.
Danny you should read the piece below. It completely nails the fact that the centrist/rightwing/neo-liberal new labour project has run out of ideas and is completely out of date. They have no answer to climate change, no answer to the changing economics we see in the wake of 2008 and covid, no answer to generational inequality, and no answer to identity politics. Centrism is a defunct, bankrupt project. There are signs that Starmer gets it, but he defers to the likes of Mandelson rather than listening to those who have new ideas. If he worked with those on the left as he said he would I'm certain he would be ahead in the polls now with significant momentum behind him, and it's tragic that he chose the other way.
and it’s tragic that he chose the other way.
It's a truism that elections are a choice between "more of the same", or "time for a change" It's a sad state of affairs that Labour's only hope of election victory currently is that folks just get sick and tired of Johnson. And let's be clear, that's a narrow opportunity, all it will take is a semi-competent Tory leader, and that chance will fade. I think Starmer will go down in history as the opposition leader who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory
^^^^^
In response to all the great words and theorising above.
Why is a fraud like Johnson sat on a 80 seat majority that he won? He didn't inherit it, he won it.
In response to all the great words and theorising above.
You need to get back to repeating your mantras and announcing your superiority to all.
He didn’t inherit it, he won it.
Actually it was mostly inherited but hey ho.
Labour have got to appear as a safe pair of hands to the masses & they must not scare the media barons. I can understand Starmers thinking up to a point.
But even if you look at it with this in mind there is a complete vacuum where ideas/vision should be and an unwillingness to go after the Tories hard on their mistakes.
Why is a fraud like Johnson sat on a 80 seat majority that he won?
Come on Danny, we all know from your rants in the brexit thread what you think the answer to this is. It's because the british public are all racist thickos obviously. When you talk about a 'serious political party', all you mean is a party which only cares about the cosseted remainer middle classes like yourself. How dare the oiks demand something different to the stagnant, low wage, rentier economy they've been served for the past 20 years! Obviously we all know Johnson won't give them what they want, but neither will labour centrists and rightwingers.
Keeping the nutters happy
Once again, right-wingers ascribing mental illness to those with whom they disagree. And doing it again, and again, and again, and again. Because it's classy, to use the notion of mental illness to abuse someone...
Mandelson is a PR creep, a thoroughly egotistical and cynical man. Personally I can’t stand him.
But he played an integral part in getting a labour government elected after 18 years of Tory rule.
And helped deliver another 13 years of soft tory rule, followed by 11 more years (and counting) of hard tory rule. Not to mention an illegal war in which hundreds of thousands of innocent people died, and millions more were left suffering trauma. And the demonisation of an entire culture, which gave succour to the far right, and has helped enable the likes of Farage to gain populist support.
What do you want?
A Labour party that truly represents the needs of all people in society, starting from the most vulnerable. A Labour party that is committed to fighting racism, not pandering to it. A Labour party that is committed to protecting the NHS, not selling it off piecemeal to private interests, in dodgy 'PFI' schemes. A Labour party that doesn't see genocide as a convenient means of boosting trade. And Labour party that actually gives a shit about people. The current Labour party are none of those things.
Labour have got to appear as a safe pair of hands to the masses & they must not scare the media barons. I can understand Starmers thinking up to a point.
But even if you look at it with this in mind there is a complete vacuum where ideas/vision should be and an unwillingness to go after the Tories hard on their mistakes.
This. All of this.
Looking forward to the Labour leadership run off thread late '22 into early '23.
13 years of soft tory rule,
Ahh... you sound like me 15 years ago. Since Labour were kicked out of office, we've seen the real difference between "soft tory" and actual Conservative rule though. I want rid of the ***** currently "running" the country, and would happily take a "soft labour" government over this lot. Yes, I want a truly left wing government, but the UK public really don't, and a truly left wing opposition is of no use to me or those I love.
Once again, right-wingers ascribing mental illness to those with whom they disagree.
I'd invite you to dismount from your horse, using these handy steps...One of the reasons I left campaigning and being an active Labour member was when my then partner and I were spat at by a Militant support for not taking his newspaper, He called us both "****ing Tory Scum"
There's enough sanctimony in the world already.
I’d invite you to dismount from your horse, using these handy steps…One of the reasons I left campaigning and being an active Labour member was when my then partner and I were spat at by a Militant support for not taking his newspaper, He called us both “**** Tory Scum”
Sorry; what does that have to do with me? Or this thread, at all?
Spotted an editorial in the Daily Heil yesterday commending Sir Kier for taking on the lefties in his party. That kind of endorsement should give you pause for thought, really.
Ahh… you sound like me 15 years ago.
But now you are old and wise eh? I do love this sort of condescending attitude.
Since Labour were kicked out of office, we’ve seen the real difference between “soft tory” and actual Conservative rule though
Here is the problem though. Was the "soft tory" an enabling option for the hard tory? Was shifting the ground rightwards by surrendering the battleground to the tories and removing choices beneficial.
Once again, right-wingers ascribing mental illness to those with whom they disagree.
For what it is worth, calling someone a nutter is not the same as saying someone has mental health issues.
I want rid of the ***** currently “running” the country, and would happily take a “soft labour” government over this lot.
So you'd happily see the demonisation of an entire culture, an illegal war killing hundreds of thousands and traumatising millions of others, the piecemeal privatisation of public services via dodgy 'PFI' schemes, and the far right strengthen, then?
What you have now, is as a direct result of what happened then. Why do you think moving further in the same direction, will change anything?
For what it is worth, calling someone a nutter is not the same as saying someone has mental health issues.
Well, it literally is, but then you're not one for really understanding such things, evidently.
I take it a 'nutter' is someone with whom you disagree aka trot, sixth former, tin foil helmet, Citizen Smith. Deary me.
But now you are old and wise eh?
No. I just have my opinion of the political options in the UK changed by events. They idea that "they're all the same", just because "they" are all to the right of my ideal position no longer holds up, in my mind anyway.
an illegal war killing hundreds of thousands and traumatising millions of others
Ah, yes, because I don't want a Conservative government I supported the war in Iraq. Of course.
Amusing how nothing gets the Old Labour diehards going like a few suggestions about how to be elected - ones that could actually do that rather than fantasies about a revolution.
Priti Patel sending vulnerable immigrants back across the Channel in breach of international law - barely a mention.
Suggest that Labour could become (oh my god) a bit more centrist - fire up the personal messages, get on the thread, one of the centrist is being sensible again.
When you talk about a ‘serious political party’, all you mean is a party which only cares about the cosseted remainer middle classes like yourself.
If Labour alienate 'us' with banner politics and renditions of The Red Flag, then they might as well disband.
The Red Wall Racists are gone. They drank Farage's Kool Aid and they ain't coming back. If the Tories let them down they'll go for something further to the right. Once you've indulged your inner 'nasty' in the polling booth (twice) and felt a momentary surge of satisfaction you ain't going back.
It’s because the british public are all racist thickos obviously.
Nope. But if Labour refuses to engage with those who aren't then they might as well pack up and piss off.
I mean, even me, who would take pretty much anything other than the Tories or whatever Farage's current plaything is, voted Labour last time (but I had to think twice about it). I tried to convince colleagues of the time to do the same, but they were repelled by Corbyn and his haplessness.
As I've said before, it isn't me you've got to convince.
🤷♂️
Ah, yes, because I don’t want a Conservative government I supported the war in Iraq. Of course.
But you just said you'd be happy with a'soft tory' government? You do know that 'tory' is shorthand for Conservative, don't you? So you would be happy with a conservative government?
No... "soft tory" was some other tool's description of the only Labour government I can remember, I jokingly suggested "soft labour" as an alternative description of a Labour government to the right of what I'd ideally want. I'd rather have a Labour government to the right of my ideals than let the Conservatives continue to govern for the rest of my life, which is looking like a strong possibility right now. The 2017 Labour manifesto wasn't as left wing as the 2019, but would I have rather had Corbyn as PM than May? Hell yes. There is plenty of room for the party to be (or at least appeal to those voters who are) less left wing than the 2019 offering, without going anywhere near where the Conservative party are now.
They idea that “they’re all the same”, just because “they” are all to the right of my ideal position no longer holds up, in my mind anyway.
I think you are overly simplifying the arguments there.
The "all the same" seems to be mostly used by those who werent overly politically engaged and is a real problem. Its what helped lead to brexit when people voted for a change, any change since they had tried labour and didnt see sufficient.
It is one thing the tories are good at mind, pretending they have changed and so ticking the not the same box.
Amusing how nothing gets the Old Labour diehards going like a few suggestions about how to be elected – ones that could actually do that rather than fantasies about a revolution.
Assuming you're going to achieve this without all the 'Lefties', please; do explain how?
No.
Crafty edit... 😉
I take it a ‘nutter’ is someone with whom you disagree aka trot, sixth former, tin foil helmet, Citizen Smith. Deary me.
Well, spending all your time professing your idealism then refusing to countenance any compromise that might allow you to actually implement that idealism....
Seems a bit absurd to me. But then my party number isn't <100, so I guess I'm not wanted.
Oh well, Lib Dem or Greens it is then.... 🤷♂️
The “all the same” seems to be mostly used by those who werent overly politically engaged and is a real problem.
It's used a lot by people who claim to be very politically engaged as well. Read recent pages of this thread.
It is one thing the tories are good at mind, pretending they have changed and so ticking the not the same box.
Very true. Which is why pointing out the failures of this government isn't enough... they will simply stand on a platform of fixing the things things that they broke themselves, and the public will lap it up.
they will simply stand on a platform of fixing the things things that they broke themselves, and the public will lap it up
That's dangerously close to calling the public stupid. Careful or Daz will have you in a show trial before your feet hit the floor. 🤭
It’s used a lot by people who claim to be very politically engaged as well
I used it in two specific scenarios.
It is a problem though when you have the parties triangulating to try and claim the swing voters and does lead to large portions of the population feeling left out. Incidently not just something which effects the left if you look on conservative home and other sites you will see people complaining about the tories abandoning them to go left (which admittedly raises questions about what coloured glasses the people are wearing but the perception is still there).
Once again, right-wingers ascribing mental illness to those with whom they disagree. And doing it again, and again, and again, and again. Because it’s classy, to use the notion of mental illness to abuse someone…
The ironing....
As classy as
"Gutless"
"Bedwetters"
Etc?
Incidently not just something which effects the left if you look on conservative home and other sites you will see people complaining about the tories abandoning them to go left
Indeed. The Tory's lost the last by-election in a traditionally safe Chesham and Amersham seat to the Lib Dems because of it. They've now effectively scrapped all the proposed changes to planning laws because the rich, tory-voting, NIMBY boomers of the South East let it be known they'd vote for somebody else instead if they didn't.
I’ve heard Tory MPs ascribing the “levelling up” agenda to now mean focussing on the needs of their Southern stockbroker belt seats instead of the North. That’s the beauty of campaigning with slogans that can mean whatever the listener wants it to mean. I don’t think Labour can get away with the same though, as it requires media repetition of the slogans. It also requires someone who can imbue the slogans with emotion. Make them resonate while avoiding any real explanation of what they mean. Starmer can not do that.
Danny, you might benefit from understanding the difference between idealism and materialism. I profess the latter.
You just need to get 40% of the population to want the same... and here's the trick... make sure they're distributed appropriately across the UK to get 50% of the seats. Good luck...
If Keir Starmer was popular and winning, a lot of this discussion about centrism/war on the left/lack of vision etc would just fade away.
But he's not, and there's no one impressive/charismatic waiting in the wings. Labour are screwed.
A fair summary.
As classy as
“Gutless”
“Bedwetters”
Etc?
Bless... 😀
Well, spending all your time professing your idealism then refusing to countenance any compromise that might allow you to actually implement that idealism….
Tories don't compromise on their rotten destructive path and they manage to get elected.
We can only overturn years of damage by moving away from the current system of market-led economics.
*Also* the centrism way is not gaining popular traction so why so convinced that this special form of compromise is doing any good in terms electability?
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1441374055379050502?s=19
I'm not interested any more. I'm going to spunk my vote on the Libdems. As will millions of other centrists. Then Johnson will get another term.
As you were, folks.
Libdems love their Tory pacts so what's the difference?
Nothing short of revolution, apparently
Libdems love their Tory pacts so what’s the difference?
You tell me, it is clearly what you want.
🤷♂️
I’ve heard Tory MPs ascribing the “levelling up” agenda to now mean focussing on the needs of their Southern stockbroker belt seats instead of the North
They are going to have difficulty balancing the different groups against each other. Its something which Labour should be attacking.
It also requires someone who can imbue the slogans with emotion. Make them resonate while avoiding any real explanation of what they mean.
To a degree. It also requires the media to show someone spewing the slogans without stopping and asking them to explain what it means.
*Also* the centrism way is not gaining popular traction so why so convinced that this special form of compromise is doing any good in terms electability?
Any of you centrists care to actually answer this? Without just saying 'well it's obvious' or talking about Tony Blair.
What are the polices of the labour right wing? - and please stop calling them centrists.
So much going for him and yet we are where we are.
Any of you centrists care to actually answer this?
Because centrists (moderates) don't go out of their way to reply to opinion polls, phone in to media shows, and generally shove their oar in whenever possible*. They are more likely to be quietly living their lives, doing the best they can and waiting for the next opportunity to actually have a say that matters - and getting increasingly exasperated by this current shambles of a government.
It's OK, though, you've made it abundantly clear that centrist swing voters aren't welcome in Labour, so you don't have to worry about the dilution of your ideological purity.
👍
*Apart from ranting on the odd forum and even then, most of us don't do that.
...
Ego unbound Danny. ROFL
Can anyone tell me the policies and philosophy of the labour right wing please?
In other words Danny
I don't give a shit who is in charge unless I'm materially affected.
& I'm not going to vote Labour to spite some people on a MTB forum.
😂
Because centrists (moderates) don’t go out of their way to reply to opinion polls
You have gone in for full blown silent majority here. So are you saying the polls consistently underestimate the centrists? I am not sure the last few elections bear that out with, if anything, them being overrepresented in the polls. Hence several upsets.
It’s OK, though, you’ve made it abundantly clear that centrist swing voters aren’t welcome in Labour
Really? People have just been asking you to explain your position and been pointing out that what seems to be your desire, namely that the swing voters are prioritised over all else, is a trick which only really works once.
For someone ranting on about ideological purity you really do display the symptoms.
In other words Danny
I don’t give a shit who is in charge unless I’m materially affected.
I voted Labour in the last GE because I am fundamentally opposed to the kind of petty nativism and nationalism that is currently running this country. I have not been materially affected by anything that has gone on in the last 5 years - at least not enough to be massively bothered by it.
As I keep saying, though, it isn't me you need to convince. I would have taken Corbyn ahead of Johnson, but as Corbyn is also a brexiteer, it didn't feel a great choice. But I would have preferred it. I lost count of people who said to me (when I tried to convince them to vote Labour) that "I can't vote for that terrorist sympathising relic" or similar. Not my words.
Amusingly, the diehards still insist that this current 'government' is 'Conservative'. It isn't, it is a cash-spunking kleptocracy with a nationalist-populist edge for the morons. Starmer can't out-bullshit Johnson to win back the Red Wall (they're gone), so he needs to appeal to people who actually see what is going on.
Ego unbound Danny. ROFL
Laugh away. It won't be funny when Johnson gets another term and maybe loses a seat or two to the Libdems. Johnson and his mob of braying twerps will be rolling in the aisles, though. And it'll be you they're laughing at. Again.
👏
trick which only really works once
Are you on the verge of suggesting that Labour shouldn't try to win once because that might compromise their ability to win twice?
🤭
Are you on the verge of suggesting that Labour shouldn’t try to win once because that might compromise their ability to win twice?
No but it is fascinating that is the path your ideological beliefs drive you down.
Can anyone tell me the policies and philosophy of the labour right wing please?
And it’ll be you they’re laughing at. Again.
👏
Laughing at me but not you? How so?
I voted Labour in the last GE because I am fundamentally opposed to the kind of petty nativism and nationalism that is currently running this country. I have not been materially affected by anything that has gone on in the last 5 years – at least not enough to be massively bothered by it.
Same goes for me. If I have been materially affected by a Tory government it is probably in a positive way. But as I am not a selfish greedy tory ****er I vote Green (although did vote Corbyn on his first attempt) as I am more interested in a fairer society than what is good for me in my privileged position.
The question is who are the voters that Labour can appeal to and what are they voting now. I work and live amongst a lot of Tories and they will simply never vote Labour, ever. They all vote tory despite have two of the worst tory MPs (Chope, Swayne) as they don't care as long as they have a party that will ensure they are better off.