So why did most of the UKIP votes in Hartlepool go to Labour in 2017?
What’s that all about?
I buy that.
But doesn't help in 2021 when Labour can't campaign for Brexit 'cos it's already happened.
Truth is, that the middle class neoliberal elite that run Labour today, couldn’t give a toss about the folk in Hartlepool either.
Nah mate, that's not true. Labour and Tory are different ideologies. Labour's principles are to stick up for the poor and disadvantaged; Tory principles are to let the rich screw the poor over. That's the bottom line. All this 'identity' stuff about where people are from is a smokescreen. You don't sign up to be a Labour politician if you don't care about working class people wherever they're from. Why would you?
Most people just want to feel safe and protected
Right, and Tories don't give a shit about protecting anyone - small government, austerity, remember? - and even if they did they're grossly incompetent. And somehow the people who are affected by it manage to miss this point.
I stayed at home this time. Or rather my postal vote is still in a pile of unopened junk mail. I know plenty of others who did the same.
Then sorry to say this, but if you don't at least participate in the (so-called) democratic process, then you can't expect your opinions to be acknowledged or respected. You could at least have just spoiled your ballot papers. I know, it's probably not really 'worth' the effort, but if you can't be bothered to vote, then why should anyone bother to listen to you?
So far, the Tories have gained 54 council seats and Labour has lost 56. All to do with Brexit and Corbyn, I'm sure.
Had Blair been committed to even vaguely left-wing principles, and not facilitated the political shift towards the right, Boris wouldn’t be enjoying the success he is.
If Blair had been left wing he wouldn't have been elected in the first place.
What’s that all about?
Because I think Brexit is having a wildly massive impact on how folk vote and what they they think the parties they're voting for actually stand for. It's why Staunchly leave Labour voters could vote for the same party that Remain voters voted for in 2017
Right, and Tories don’t give a shit about protecting anyone
But people believe they do. This is the thing; many people believe Boris will protect them from the marauding hordes of immigrants, coming here to take 'their' jobs, infect 'their' society and communities with alien ideologies, and murder them. That's why Blair took the UK into an illegal war.
You don’t sign up to be a Labour politician if you don’t care about working class people wherever they’re from. Why would you?
Money? Power? Influence? Hasn't done Blair etc, any harm.
Labour’s principles are to stick up for the poor and disadvantaged
They may well be. The elite who run the party aren't abiding by those principles though. This much is clear.
If Blair had been left wing he wouldn’t have been elected in the first place
He pretended to be 'left wing'. He went round calling himself a 'socialist'.
"I am a socialist not through reading a textbook that has caught my intellectual fancy, nor through unthinking tradition, but because I believe that, at its best, socialism corresponds most closely to an existence that is both rational and moral."
So...
Had Blair been committed to even vaguely left-wing principles, and not facilitated the political shift towards the right, Boris wouldn’t be enjoying the success he is.
True, because John Major would still be PM at the age of 78. 🙂
I'd be happy with that, I rated Major. (He could never prove his ability with a Majority of 19. Our last state educated PM.)
Just out of interest; what do people on here think 'left wing' really means?
Money? Power? Influence? Hasn’t done Blair etc, any harm.
So equally true also of your tweet from Lloyd Russel-Moyle then? If, like you say, he's in it for the money and power, he's clearly fooled you.
Kier needs to resign this is no place for an honest, principled human being.
Leave the Labour Party to return to the left...
Yes. They once marginally voted for one left leaning party. No other parties of note and no other labour majority since Blair
When more than half of voters in Hartlepool voted for Labour's radical 2017 manifesto they were only marginally voting for a left leaning party?
Every day is a school day on here.
Just out of interest; what do people on here think ‘left wing’ really means?
Depends. Since the memewarz it just became a generalised insult/redsunderthebed scare.
Marxist innit. Wants to gulag you and force you to use pronouns.
Source: Internet culture.
You don’t sign up to be a Labour politician if you don’t care about working class people wherever they’re from. Why would you?
Money? Power? Influence? Hasn’t done Blair etc, any harm.
+1. Blair destroyed any trust and it’s been shit since.
I suspect the kippers didn't switch to Tory in 2017 because they didn't like May. Personality seems to be everything. Unfortunately Bozo has personality which appeals widely. Maybot didn't really connect.
But I find it baffling that someone could vote farage one year and corbs the next 😂
I keep seeing people on facebook moaning about labour councils because they haven't done anything - so why are labour so silent about the lack of funding ? they keep getting shafted by westminster and say nothing about it. Labour need to campaign with ideas of their own.
Scotland is now the preserve of the SNP, wales is split between plaid and labour, the only way that we will have anything other than Tory to the end of time is to get rid of FPTP with a full coalition between lab, libdem, SNP, plaid, green. make this the big policy along with getting shot of the HoL and changing the way that councils are funded and organised, get rid of dodgy money practices at westminster.
Labour should have picked Lisa Nandy.
I haven’t got a clue how labour counter this now.
I only came here this morning to enjoy the delights of binners latest rants and find out from him which politician was currently "utterly clueless".
You can imagine my disappointment when I discover that binners apparently hasn't got a clue.
Then sorry to say this, but if you don’t at least participate in the (so-called) democratic process, then you can’t expect your opinions to be acknowledged or respected.
Yeah you can piss off with that paternalist patronising bollocks. The entire system is corrupt and stacked against the interests of working people. The problem isn't which party exercises politics, the problem is politics, and I'm having nothing to do with it. I'll start voting again when I'm confident that the politicians I'm voting for are interested in solving problems rather than just getting into power to massage their egos and provide themselves with a nice nest-egg.
'Your opinion is valueless unless you play our game'. Well f*** that!
Blair destroyed any trust and it’s been shit since.
"The only time we've been in power in the last 50 years we were shit: Vote for us."
I can't help wonder if there might be a more appealing message...
Labour should have picked Lisa Nandy.
Good idea. She could have wowed everyone with her 2% pay rise for nurses. Revolutionary stuff 🙂
I can’t help wonder if there might be a more appealing message…
Vote for us; we have to blackmailed into feeding hungry children?
I suspect the kippers didn’t switch to Tory in 2017 because they didn’t like May.
In contrast, as all the opinion polls showed, they were strangely attracted to Corbyn's magnetic personality.
Makes you wonder why Theresa May called an unnecessary general election.
Yeah you can piss off with that paternalist patronising bollocks. The entire system is corrupt and stacked against the interests of working people. The problem isn’t which party exercises politics, the problem is politics, and I’m having nothing to do with it.
Fair enough. You don't have to waste any more time in this thread then.
‘Your opinion is valueless unless you play our game’. Well f*** that!
I totally get that. I can't say I was particularly motivated to walk the 300m or so to the local polling station, just to scrawl a few 'X's' against the names of people representing parties/groups that might vaguely represent my own interests, but I did so anyway, because even though voting might not achieve much, apathy achieves nothing.
So where does Starmer and Labour go from here? Hemorrhaging votes, supporters and members, it’s looking very bleak. Be interesting* to read what the Armresters on here think.
Gut reaction he has to go. If he goes Tory will see it as a massive win and shout about how they got rid of another leader. If he goes who replaces him god knows if you ask Twitter its Andy Burnham. Labour will double down on Starmer say they improved since the last election and continue to play the long game. They need to seriously reinvent themselves.
The general public didn't want Corbyns far left ideas and it seems like they dont want Starmers middle of the road either. God knows what they do. Im feeling very down about the Labour party today.
Vote for us; we have to blackmailed into feeding hungry children?
"Vote for us: We don't trust poor people to pass cash benefits onto thier kids so we demand benefits to be paid in kind."
Personally, I think Labour were on the wrong side of that (as we saw from the quality of the food) one and I'm pretty sure in the last lock down they offered a cash option which is far cheaper to administer and gives parents the ability to choose appropriate food for their kids.
Well I say wrong. It played brilliantly in the media so Kier did the right thing in that sense.
If he goes who replaces him god knows if you ask Twitter its Andy Burnham.
Is that Manchester's own Andy 'Blame the brown people for spreading CV' Burnham? No thanks. Blairite, lost leadership elections twice; who wants a loser?
Corbyns far left
Oh dear.
Do we think Burnham will be announced a winner again today?
Gut reaction he has to go
And yet, London* is effectively a one party state these days and Stamer and Khan are hugely popular,
Edit: *apologies Typo.
Do we think Burnham will be announced a winner again today?
I'd say so.
Do we think Burnham will be announced a winner again today?
I'm sure of it. Does that make him a better candidate for the Labour leadership than he was last time?
And yet, London* is effectively a one party state these days and Stamer and Khan are hugely popular,
Edit: *apologies Typo.
Really good point. You walk towards one set of voters you're effectively walking away from another.
Nothing's easy.
Does that make him a better candidate for the Labour leadership than he was last time?
No. But I was just wondering what "who wants a loser?" really means. Does the Labour Party now have a system for picking "a winner" to lead them? Does it have a way of replacing "a loser" in a timely fashion, in a way that builds support for the replacement with the general public?
And yet, London* is effectively a one party state these days and Stamer and Khan are hugely popular
I can see the next general election showing a narrowing of the popular vote between Labour and the Conservatives, yet the Tory majority be increased. Increasing your support in areas you are already winning seats in, gains you nothing under FPTP. The tories will take more seats away from the big cities in the near future, while losing irrelevant (to them) voters where it doesn't matter when to comes to staying in power.
Burnham lost to Milliband, and then to Corbyn. Two time failure. Nobody likes failure. He wouldn't last 5 seconds as Labour leader, without the tories deriding him for being such a failure. Besides, he pandered to racism. **** him.
And yet, both those leaders (both whom I would have chosen ahead of Burnham) failed to become PM. Perhaps Labour chooses the wrong leaders under their current system? I'm not saying Burnham would make a good party leader, I don't think he would, but labelling him "a loser" for failing to win the leadership, well... losing that competition doesn't necessarily taint you with the voter. "Winning" the Labour leadership doesn't mean you can win anything with the wider voting public.
You can imagine my disappointment when I discover that binners apparently hasn’t got a clue.
Oh come on, that can hardly have come as a surprise to anyone.
I genuinely haven't a clue how labour counter this narrative. The Tory's, or more specifically the Vote Leave team have successfully forsaken traditional political loyalties, and instead divided people along cultural lines into two distinct camps. And unfortunately the labour party finds itself in a minority on this front, whereas the Tory's (in their present guise) are seen as very much being 'on their side'
Remember also that while doing so, this present Tory party has adopted some very un-Tory financial policies that would traditionally be labour territory. So they've mixed social conservatism with being fiscally very un-conservative. Its a million miles away from Cameron and Osbourne
Its clever and its working as they've stolen labours thunder in a lot of ways
Has anyone any realistic proposals for how Labour counters this? Its not some re-hashed form of Corbynism, that's for sure
Besides, he pandered to racism. **** him.
At least he understands that racist people a) are common in this country and b) don't like being called out for their racist views all the time. Donald Trump realised this, Boris does too.
Do we think Burnham will be announced a winner again today?
He'll absolutely walk it. He was popular anyway, but sticking up for the Manchester residents regarding furlough payments etc, which changed government policy, cemented that
Besides, he pandered to racism. **** him.
Thats one interpretation. Others are available.
Thats one interpretation
Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester in Lancashire, North England, also said that the spike in COVID-19 cases had been impacted by gatherings "in multi-generational households".
When the BBC interviewer asked if he was referring predominantly to the Asian population of Greater Manchester, Burnham said: "Yes, I do mean that."
I'm gonna call it what it is. Blaming a particular section of the population for something that negatively affects all of us. It's no different to what the far-right do.
So yeah; **** him. Nasty racist little shit.
You see that as racist? That certain communities feature far more multi-generational households isn't controversial, is it? That intergenerational households are a risk factor as regards Covid might be debatable, not sure it's born of racism though, is it?
You see that as racist?
Yes, because it is.
Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester in Lancashire, North England, also said that the spike in COVID-19 cases had been impacted by gatherings “in multi-generational households”.
With her job, Mrs Binners has a lot of contact with one of the senior imams in Merseyside who was saying exactly the same, and was absolutely despairing about it. Is he a racist too then?
It's simply a fact. Even the most cursory glance at the only areas in greater Manchester that have STILL got ever-rising Covid cases and you'll see this clearly. And everyone does. Why on earth is it racist to point this out?
Prior to that he was called a racist (by you lot) for pointing out another fact that most of the refugees and asylum seekers are placed in the North compared to the south, placing a disproportionate burden on public services. Again: that's simply a fact. And everyone knows it. How is pointing this out racist?
When you scream RACIST! (which you yourself do at the drop of a hat) about things like this, this is exactly why a lot of voters roll their eyes at the left. Because what you and are doing is effectively placing any sensitive topics off limits, and its exactly this that allows the right to build the narrative that 'its political correctness gown maaaaad' and 'loony lefties'
Its totally self-defeating and counter-productive virtue-signalling, which achieves absolutely nothing, and in the case of rising Covid cases in specific areas has some very real-world implications which are not good, as its actively preventing public health issues being properly addressed.
But hey... as long as you get to parade your ever so 'right on' credentials, thats what's important here, right?
Well, the limited test and trace data we have shows that most transmission occurs within households. Census data will tell us if the multi-generational household thing is true, and true in Manchester.
When you scream RACIST! (which you yourself do at the drop of a hat) about this, this is exactly why a lot of voters roll their eyes at the left
This.
Bridges will have chased Binners and Kelvin into the arms of Boris by the end of the day. 😁
And placing sensitive topics off limits gives the opportunity for proper scumbags to take advantage of them, like what happened in Rotherham.
Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester in Lancashire, North England, also said that the spike in COVID-19 cases had been impacted by gatherings “in multi-generational households”. When the BBC interviewer asked if he was referring predominantly to the Asian population of Greater Manchester, Burnham said: “Yes, I do mean that.”
Yeah, it's a huge problem here at the practice that I work in (overwhelmingly an Asian area in Manchester) We had local Imams come to the practice so that they could get some pointers about how to talk at Mosque to local folk about it, and what they can do to protect themselves We're hamstrung by nationwide imperatives about what age groups we can vaccinate, so in these households when COVID gets a grip, it's really hard to get rid of it, and folk die.
Others are available.
Hate to say it but from where I'm standing Burnham is the only hope for Labour north of Birmingham. There is simply no one else with the profile, reputation and position to get people behind labour in the north. He needs to be back in parliament but I can't see that happening as he's said he's not interested.
