Forum menu
All I want is for a labour govt to stand on a platform of and then enact labour policies which eliminates the corruption and unfairness which infects almost every aspect of our political and economic system. Once that’s done that it can then turn to practical problems like tackling climate change and poverty. I don’t think that’s particularly radical or unachievable.
How do they enact labour policies without being in power? You stated you don't need to be in power to change things and have now said you need to be in power to change things haven't you?
So outside of a revolution or military coup how would you enact labour policies (while not being in power)?
So outside of a revolution or military coup how would you enact labour policies (while not being in power)?
By screwing your eyes up really tight and wishing hard enough.
Keep the ideology pure and the electorate will come to you. They just don't realise it yet.
🤣
That has to be one of the silliest posts I’ve ever read.
I agree - it was a daft thing for you to say.
I agree he is obviously going to have to get proactive soon
It's interesting that you say that, because it seems that when I or others make the same point we're accused of juvenile ideological purity destined for permanent opposition.
There was an article in the Guardian today saying essentially the same thing: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/09/labour-starmerism-movement
And before the lefty-baiters get revved up, the article cites Thatcher and Blair as successful examples.
So outside of a revolution or military coup how would you enact labour policies
Stop being a pedantic arse, I already answered your question. If labour can't win an election on a platform of removing endemic corruption and unfairness from our political and economic system then there really is no point.
then there really is no point
Obviously there is. Perfect being the enemy of good, and all that. And we don't currently have anything close to "good" when it comes to our government, do we. I'll take a much better government, with the aim to make things better for us all, thank you very much. I'd love it to be my perfect government, but I'm happy to accept that it has to be a government for all, voted for by enough people to get into power, rather than act just for me... and just win over people like me... there aren't enough of us... and that's democracy.
It’s about timing. You’d have to be insane to try and set out some kind of ‘vision’ at the moment.
When the furlough scheme ends we’re going to see mass unemployment last seen in the late 80’s. Maybe far worse
With a second Covid wave hitting at the same time as a likely no deal Brexit, the country is going to be plunged into absolute economic turmoil, and the disaster capitalists are waiting in the wings to seize the opportunities’ this affords them. We could also have attained ‘Rogue State’ status, just for good measure.
This country is going to look a very very different place in 6 months time. All for the worse. If you think the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism has failed most of society (it has)... you ain’t seen nothing yet!
That’s going to offer up a world of opportunities for a credible and competent-looking opposition. Maybe even getting the electorate onside for the radical policies Daz thinks we should be pursuing.
I live in hope, anyway. Because, god knows, that’s been in short enough supply for the last few years
It’s interesting that you say that, because it seems that when I or others make the same point we’re accused of juvenile ideological purity destined for permanent opposition.
Soon means weeks/months. He has to go as long as possible with the shit and pain building up and no one in the spotlight other than the fly-tipped sofa himself.
Of course the press and the usual suspects are going to try to drag something out of him so they can attack it, and he will have to have something to say. I would go with a policy of only addressing each bit in isolation (don't set out the full roadmap).
The basic idea is for him to say "Look at what this oaf is doing. Look at the damage it is doing. There will have to be some pride-swallowing soon if we aren't going to ruin this country for decades".
He should also be pointing out that not all the people who voted for Brexit are full scale flag-waving frothing gammony maniacs. He should emphasise the point that if the referendum question had referred specifically to No Deal and WTO trading terms, Leave would not have won. A nice bit of divide and conquer. Consensus building. And don't forget that De Pfeffel will also be busy embarrassing himself and by extension the UK with every move he makes.
If Johnson's rabble push for a full roadmap he should say "No, you show yours first, you are the ones who have the power".
Keep knocking the ball back over so the camera keeps panning to the utter shambles that is 'our' Prime Minister.
I’d love it to be my perfect government
Who's talking about perfect? I'm simply talking about bringing back some honesty and fair dealing where the government doesn't hand out multi-million contracts to their mates, holds public suppliers to account, doesn't break it's onw laws, doesn't break international law, doesn't routinely lie to parliament and the electorate and doesn't hand out peerages to its cronies. That's basically the bare minimum we should expect so if that's not achievable then we might as well give up.
I live in hope, anyway. Because, god knows, that’s been in short enough supply for the last few years
Me too. Logic dictates that eventually this disaster will be so obvious that the Tories (or should I call the The Brexit Party) are chased down Whitehall in their socks.
If this isn't the case then I might well end up saying to the Missus that even the strong family ties on her side can't be enough to keep us here and we have to go somewhere that doesn't hold idiocy up as a virtue.
Who’s talking about perfect? I’m simply talking about bringing back some honesty and fair dealing where the government doesn’t hand out multi-million contracts to their mates, holds public suppliers to account, doesn’t break it’s onw laws, doesn’t break international law, doesn’t routinely lie to parliament and the electorate and doesn’t hand out peerages to its cronies. That’s basically the bare minimum we should expect so if that’s not achievable then we might as well give up.
But an hour or two ago you were describing your basic requirements as 'world peace, zero emissions, free puppies for everyone and the eradication of poverty'.
Now it is 'bare minimum'.
Gymnastics that Olga Korbut would struggle to emulate going on right here.
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Soon means weeks/months. He has to go as long as possible with the shit and pain building up and no one in the spotlight other than the fly-tipped sofa himself.
Which seems to be pretty much what I was saying: "sooner or later". So it seems we're agreed that Starmer should be about more than electibility in purely reductionist terms, which is why I'm at a loss why discussions about what that should entail invariably lead to a heap of opprobrium. Other than it presenting an opportunity for baiting.
But an hour or two ago you were describing your basic requirements as ‘world peace, zero emissions, free puppies for everyone and the eradication of poverty’.
No you said that, not me. I said we needed a govt which changed the system to remove the endemic corruption and unfairness. Once that was done then then they could think about the big ticket problems. And by 'change' I mean real change, as in prosecuting corruption, full transparency, banning MPs from having outside jobs, regulating lobbying, changing party funding, breaking up monopolies, tighter regulation of suppliers, fair competition rules in public procurement, democratic accountability of senior public employees, closing of tax loopholes and making tax avoidance much more difficult/impossible etc.
Here's a thought--
During the 1970s Thatcher and tge Tory party took an economic opportunity and used it to put the Unions and the working class "back in its box" by destroying its powerbase in industry they then went on to reshape the country to reflecg their needs and create huge opportunities for the Tory electorate. They left nothing behind and created no opportunity for the disenfranchised working class. Thatcherism.
So is brexit "New Thatcherism" is the enemy the new working well educated middle class? Boris has had to seek new support as his heartlands are literally dying of old age? He needs to nuture that new powerbase to reshape the country just like Thatcher?
Boris has had to seek new support as his heartlands are literally dying of old age?
Constituency politics doesn't work like that, though. If the populace of an area is 60+ in age, as they die off another group is 'coming of age' to replace them. With the same attitude of what I have now I must hold onto, no pinko is going to take it off of me.
There is a reason that the likelihood of voting Tory goes up with age.
Nah, Johnson's strategists (Cummings and his mates with all their lovely data) identified certain tendencies amongst certain groups who might have been traditionally considered 'Labour'. They then fed those people their own prejudices back to them as 'news' via Facebook. Turns out it was fertile ground.
Using social media is good too, because you can tell different lies to different people and they are none the wiser.
dazh five hours ago (near the top of this page)
All I want is for a labour govt to stand on a platform of and then enact labour policies which eliminates the corruption and unfairness which infects almost every aspect of our political and economic system. Once that’s done that it can then turn to practical problems like tackling climate change and poverty. I don’t think that’s particularly radical or unachievable.
dazh around 1 hour ago
Who’s talking about perfect? I’m simply talking about bringing back some honesty and fair dealing where the government doesn’t hand out multi-million contracts to their mates, holds public suppliers to account, doesn’t break it’s onw laws, doesn’t break international law, doesn’t routinely lie to parliament and the electorate and doesn’t hand out peerages to its cronies. That’s basically the bare minimum we should expect so if that’s not achievable then we might as well give up.
The first is very different from the second.
If the sentiment behind them is the same, you need to be more careful with your wording.
The first is about addressing deep-seated structural unfairness/corruption as well as something hugely worldwide (poverty/climate).
The second is about not actually being crooks on a day to day basis.
Exactly, the second would be Starmer's government, the first would be the government that got voted in on that platform/policies and if it doesn't get voted in on that then people clearly don't care about it as much as some do.
I'd settle for vaguely competent and not actually crooks right now.
These are well below minimum standards in normal times, but frankly they are both in stark contrast to the abomination of a 'government' we currently have.
Boris. Brought to you by Brexit.
The first is about addressing deep-seated structural unfairness/corruption as well as something hugely worldwide (poverty/climate).
The second is about not actually being crooks on a day to day basis.
They're the same. The reason they act like crooks is because the system enables and encourages it. You change that by implenting the things I listed. Once you have that you have the basis for tackling bigger problems like climate change and poverty. You certainly can't do the latter until you solve the former, and that has been proven many times over.
The reason they act like crooks is because the system enables and encourages it.
I disagree totally. No matter what has gone on before, even the expenses scandal and celebrated examples of more individual corruption, this current 'government' is on a totally different level.
They are breaking the law in plain sight, admitting it in plain sight and basically telling every normal citizen they are a mug if they follow rules/laws.
At least they used to have the decency (fear of consequence, at least) to try to keep their dirty dealing a secret.
Indeed. There is now absolutely NOTHING that is actually regarded as a reason to resign by this lot. Or as a reason to be sacked.
They are completely without shame
Robert Jenrick took a bung to then illegally grant planning permission to one of his cronies. Still in a job.
They’ve all spent this crisis chucking billions of public money at their mates for untendered contracts, without any real attempt to even cover it up
And let’s remind ourselves that a government minister stood at the despatch box in parliament yesterday and announced his intention to break international law.
This is proper Banana Republic stuff.
Would be nice if there was some visible opposition.
There is. The SNP.
this current ‘government’ is on a totally different level.
So just because the current government has raised the bar for corruption we should lower our expectations and ambitions for how we should fight it? Honestly I've never heard such defeatist nonsense. The current govt prove more than any other that the system is totally f****. This shouldn't even be possible, if Starmer can't make the case to change it *and* win an election then he shouldn't be leader. Yet you lot seem to be content with having someone competent to manage the corruption rather than expecting them to eliminate it.
I disagree totally. No matter what has gone on before, even the expenses scandal and celebrated examples of more individual corruption, this current ‘government’ is on a totally different level.
They are breaking the law in plain sight, admitting it in plain sight and basically telling every normal citizen they are a mug if they follow rules/laws.
At least they used to have the decency (fear of consequence, at least) to try to keep their dirty dealing a secret.
I am not at all sure that is true. It seems to be assumed that the internet and the changes it has forced onto traditional media has created a new new breed of opportunistic power grabbers.
Personally I suspect that it has just revealed what has always been, it is still the same incompetent privately educated oxbridge club running the country for their own benefit as has ever been. In the old days that would have been the polticions, media moguls, police chiefs and senior civil servants all looking out for one another and applying pressure to keep the hegemony going. Now the internet has created a new branch, some might try to game it for a while, but it isn't controlled in the same way.
Look at the expenses scandal, the traditional media didn't want to touch it, they had all turned it down, 20 years previous the whistle blower would have just ended up in prison, and life and corruption would have continued as normal. What changed was that rumours started to circulate on the internet, the information was out there and the traditional medias hand was forced. The establishment couldn't cover it up the way they once had.
Now we are in such an information rich connected world the bullshit is obvious (although demonstrably not to a majority) in the past the bulshit was supported by the media, and there was no alternative information available to challenge it.
So just because the current government has raised the bar for corruption we should lower our expectations and ambitions for how we should fight it? Honestly I’ve never heard such defeatist nonsense.
Daz.
We've had some run-ins on the past. I have also let my standards slip on the odd occasion, and I have apologised.
But you really must stop talking bollocks. You are trying to characterise my asking that the principle opposition party make themselves more electable by becoming more centrist and less easy to caricature as a willingness to accept sleaze, so long as it is just less sleazy.
That is shite and it betrays your world view that if anyone is in any way more centrist than Trotsky they must be embracing some kind of crookery as a result. Utter bollocks. What I am starting to suspect is that you are akin to Corbyn. Half dedicated to a doctrine out of belief and half because you are actually afraid of the responsibility of being in power to then have the Wolfie Smith stuff challenged.
Your desired world will actually happen at some point in the next few decades. Climate change, finite resources and population growth will eventually force there to be some kind of world government. Or there will be a big **** off war that either kills everyone or its aftermath prompts the adoption of massive international cooperation.
But whichever way you cut it, there will end up being a lot more international cooperation required. In the meantime the UK seems determined to be such an arsehole that cooperating with us is impossible.
But this is all in the future. If you want a Labour government you are going to need to be electable. Corbyn was not electable. How do I know? Because he had his arse handed to him by a pissed up chump who hid in a fridge. If he had lost more narrowly then it would have been more acceptable, but he lost northern labour heartlands to a cod-Latin speaking old Etonian shyster who has never done a decent day's work in his life.
You don't see why you should compromise your revolutionary principles one iota to make Labour electable. What are you going to do? Wait for the electorate to come around to your way of thinking? It has been a while since 'unicorns' did the rounds, but you seem to want to wait for one to show up. Enjoy the wait. Don't hold your breath, though.
Pmq's yesterday, what are the thoughts here?
Hammering testing right now looks like an odd tactic when you consider the gov have transformed testing from one end of the scale to the other🤔 is it purely through fear of discussing leaving the EU?
I also caught a bit of Peston and Jess Phillips completely silent on WA
Starmer organising monthly televised question and answer sessions could be interesting 👍
Look at the expenses scandal, the traditional media didn’t want to touch it, they had all turned it down
Not entirely true.
The Sun and Times didnt want to spend the amount requested for it, for whatever reason.
The Telegraph by all accounts was happy to buy and publish.
It doesnt seem to have been offered to anyone else.
It is also worth noting the reason the data was readily available to be sold was because the Guardian, Sunday Times and Sunday Telegraph had all been pursuing the story for several years including legal action. This resulted in a requirement for it to be released although anonymised. Which meant it all had to be gathered together in a usable format.
Hammering testing right now looks like an odd tactic when you consider the gov have transformed testing from one end of the scale to the other🤔 is it purely through fear of discussing leaving the EU?
The world (and by that I mean people across the world) are making it clear that the WA manoeuvring is damaging to the UK... but Cummings will be itching to make it something he can use to paint Labour as the enemy of the people... a series of interviews have made it clear that Labour appose the move, and why they do... and the shadow NI spokesperson asked the questions that needed asking in the commons... sticking to the pandemic "preparation" at PMQs seems a wise move to me... and that preparation is a mess, and that you think otherwise is interesting... I'd advise you to check out the most recent BBC "More or Less" episode, to make sure you're being careful when digesting the figures around it... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000mb06
I note that Binners failed to come on here with a rant about how the labour leader failed to mention brexit in yesterday's PMQs. Strange.
Morning comrade. It’s not strange at all. Starmer didn’t mention it because he’s not that daft. It was an elephant trap with a big illuminated neon sign saying ‘ELEPHANT TRAP’ pointing at it. The ones his predecessor would blunder headlong into every time
Johnson wants the conversation moved from this governments shambolic test and trace debacle and onto Brexit so that he can be back in his comfort zone of nationalist populist anti-EU posturing. That’s a major reason they’ve done it in the first place. Because the ERG headbangers, the right wing press and his core support lap it up
Starmer wasn’t playing ball. A smart move. There’s no point getting involved anyway. We’ve left the EU. It’s over. The Vote Leave Party own this shambles now. He’s sensibly leaving them to keep digging.
John Crace in the Guardian sums it up better than I can
Boris Johnson lets rip another demented monologue in Commons
Would a spittle-flecked 10 second rant to be tweeted out on The Canary have made you happier? Maybe a couple of questions about funding for local rural bus services?
Would a spittle-flecked 10 second rant to be tweeted out on The Canary have made you happier?
Not at all, I completely agree he should stay away from brexit. Maybe Corbyn was on to something when he did the same? 🙂
Start a thread about Corbyn?
Again, it’s all about timing.
The trouble was that Corbyn decided to stay off the subject of Brexit the day that Dave announced the referendum.
Mind you, given his decades old hatred of the EU, it’s probably just as well.
The only time I can remember him addressing the issue with any passion was in June 2016 when he returned from his 2 month sabbatical on the allotment and furiously demanded article 50 be triggered immediately!
Seems like the good old days that, now, doesn’t it? A happier, more innocent time?
Anyway... back on topic... Johnson was clearly livid that he was outmanoeuvred yet again by Starmer at PMQ’s
Yet you lot seem to be content with having someone competent to manage the corruption rather than expecting them to eliminate it.
Ok, let's assume Starmer will simply be merely competent. Our next choice come election time is, what...
Blue - utter, utter, unwashed balls, in every way.
Red - competent.
Anything over and above competent looks like a massive bonus, from where the UK is sitting.
The trouble was that Corbyn decided to stay off the subject of Brexit the day that Dave announced the referendum.
Mind you, given his decades old hatred of the EU, it’s probably just as well.
The only time I can remember him addressing the issue with any passion was in June 2016 when he returned from his 2 month sabbatical on the allotment and furiously demanded article 50 be triggered immediately!
should we try talking about something else?
Maybe Keir Starmer? Seeing as that’s what the threads meant to be about.
Mmm, Kelvin, had a listen and nothing new to me there but thanks anyway. The new system is certainly flawed, I think we can all happily agree on that and also that the gov over egg the pudding if that was your point👍
Testing has been transformed though so for me that line of questioning allows Boris to keep repeating the massive transformation (while labelling it NHS testing)
Many here keep talking about the big obvious traps for labour to avoid, I completely understand the simplistic theory but don't you ever think that avoiding those traps has any consequences. Labour will end up in a catch22 on the biggest issues of our lifetime that will also undermine credibility at crunch time (what makes you so sure that isn't the real elephant trap?)
It's dangerous playing games when you aren't sure of the rules,
Oh well, nevermind. Make sure you have cream coloured trousers for PMQs.
They'll be better than the brown ones you had to wear every time Grandpa was led to the dispatch box by one of his carers.
They’ll be better than the brown ones you had to wear every time Grandpa was led to the dispatch box by one of his carers.
You had a long time to come up with a reply, and that's the best you could manage?
You had a long time to come up with a reply, and that’s the best you could manage?
I was reading back through as something occurred to me, and saw your post then.
I thought it was quite good, actually.
I kept it brief and punchy deliberately. I'll do the other bit now because you seem interested. It is an imagined exchange between Grandpa and one of his carers during PMQs.
The background is:
Grandpa is getting all agitated again and looking like he's about to have a seizure, but not addressing Brexit in any way.
Grandpa (shouting): But when.... when.... when.... will the Prime Minister Address the pressing issue of rural bus time tabling and free allotment sheds for all?
Carer (whispering): Jeremy. You've got to keep talking, you can't sit down because you've pissed yourself again.
Grandpa: Ok. But who is Jeremy?
There's loads more if you want. As I said, easy to caricature a figure who is pretty ridiculous in the first place.
Yes he is fairly old but not all old people require carers and not all old people piss themselves. Maybe I am just missing the joke but looks like you are just adding to the ageist bullshit with those comments and I would have thought they were written by Binners (the exclusion of a hilarious Monty Python image was the giveaway they were not)
Yes Corbyn was a useless leader (which can't really be argued against) but the fact he was old is irrelevant.
Yes Corbyn was a useless leader (which can’t really be argued against) but the fact he was old is irrelevant.
If he had not been useless he wouldn't have been so easy to caricature. It is the uselessness that opens the door to the other stuff. Dithering because he knew his position was at odds with his party and much of his base support made it easy to portray him as a decrepit old buffer.
One of the few clever bits of De Pfeffel's character construct 'Boris' is that his dithering and chuntering and often incoherence has been caricatured as a sort of chaotic yet scholarly brilliance. A sort of maverick genius who needs reining in from time to time. Many easily led people hold this view of him. Actually it is due to his utter disregard for detail and hard work. And that his blood is about 40% proof most of the time.
If the likes of ransos and daz stop venerating Grandpa as the messiah and realise that as a leader he was as if he had been teleported from 1973* into a strange world. Then I will shut up about him. He's not relevant now anyway (was he ever?).
*Sort of a reverse Life On Mars. With less laughs.
hilarious Monty Python image
It is difficult not to think of these when talking about Corbyn, Momentum and Labour.
Mainly because Corbyn, Momentum and Labour were the exact thing they were taking the piss out of. Different days, exact (precise) same issue.
There is another thread about Corbyn.
All these intelligent people swallow whole the media image/story presented to them -yet they know how biased the media is!
Back to Starmer - those who said he should be doing more - he met with farmers representatives and presented them with some ideas they liked. Building support.
Yes he is fairly old but not all old people require carers and not all old people piss themselves. Maybe I am just missing the joke but looks like you are just adding to the ageist bullshit with those comments and I would have thought they were written by Binners (the exclusion of a hilarious Monty Python image was the giveaway they were not)
Yes Corbyn was a useless leader (which can’t really be argued against) but the fact he was old is irrelevant.
What kerley said - dannyh your post was unacceptable and from what I recall not befitting of you.
In terms of Starmer - and speaking as someone who voted for Starmer I'm the leadership election.
What is happening now is pretty irrelevant as is a leader of an opposition when the Govt has an 80 majority and an election is 4 years away
He is going to have little influence on policy so he will see his main job as not doing anything to annoy the electors he needs
My worry with Starmer is that he is fine at looking quietly competent ( although he needs to stay away from the fake outrage he tried at PMQs yesterday - not his thing at all) but that will not be enough when the election comes. Covid will be over, Brexit will have played through and the Tories will have binned Johnson. It's gonna take more than quiet competence I fear
All these intelligent people swallow whole the media image/story presented to them -yet they know how biased the media is!
What is Johnson's majority again?
It doesn't matter if I know or don't know that a lot of the Grandpa stuff is a RW media construct. Corbyn left himself wide open due to his dogmatism and his euroscepticism.
It isn't me you would need to convince (as the election result showed in stark terms).
What kerley said – dannyh your post was unacceptable and from what I recall not befitting of you.
Probably. I shouldn't have risen to that bait.
Even the Graun started caricaturing Corbyn, though. I remember a very good cartoon portraying him as a tortoise (generally thought of as slow and old) just poking his nose out of the shell and just reaching a finish line (I think it was on a 2nd referendum). His colleagues were mostly already over the line practically dragging him there.
It’s gonna take more than quiet competence I fear
I agree totally, but competence is the difficult bit. The more 'imagey' and razzmatazz policy announcement stuff is easier. Johnson knows this.
Danny you've also swallowed whole the Boris media construct. And your old people post was not probably out of order but definitely out of order. Nobody baited you.
Even the Graun started caricaturing Corbyn, though.
What do you mean even the Graun? Given its political stance it was never going to be a fan of him. They arent a labour paper but a centre left/liberal one and so, like many centrists, wasnt overly keen on the idea of Labour actually being a left wing party since that would just leave them with the libdems.
They arent a labour paper but a centre left/liberal one and so, like many centrists, wasnt overly keen on the idea of Labour actually being a left wing party
He needs to appeal to those people. If he doesn't he can't win an election. What do you want?
Danny you’ve also swallowed whole the Boris media construct. And your old people post was not probably out of order but definitely out of order.
My post was definitely out of order. I apologise for the content. I know Corbyn is highly principled and consistent. His problem is that he is a useless politician and the things he chose to be principled about put him at odds with the support he needed to be electable.
Nobody baited you.
You had a long time to come up with a reply, and that’s the best you could manage?
You sure about that bit?
In opposition appearing competent is easy - just keep head down and don't say anything controversial - especially when the PM is a buffoon and their are an international and domestic crisis going on together.
Appealing to those of us who listen to PMQs and radio 4 doesn't win elections. Especially now.
Also, I'd like to see a bit of leadership from the he leader of my party on big issues - he's got time but he really need to up his game when we get towards an election
And don't think for one minute that the disinformation machine isn't already working - read the comments under an article on Starmer in the right wing press and you'll see the bullshit comments/narrative forming about Starner's time as DPP
you’ll see the bullshit comments/narrative forming about Starner’s time as DPP
Legal stuff tends to be on the record, though. And the narrative-formers won't have access to it.
I bet they'll play a game of accusing Starmer of hiding behind the necessary professional respect for confidentiality his former role requires.
Normally, of course, this line of attack would be beyond the pale, but this current rabble are already publicly advertising their disregard for decency as a a virtue.
BTW I've met Keir Starmer - had lunch with him (and about 15 other people) when he came to out constituency during the election. In that environment he's really engaging and thoughtful. I hope that can play through at a national level
I hope that can play through at a national level
I hope so too.
I am in my early forties, I have a degree (that I never really use on a practical level) and professional qualification for a sector I really don't enjoy, but these get me through the door of most interviews. I have a reasonable job with reasonable T's and C's. I don't find my work fulfilling, but I take pride in doing a decent job of things. I am married with two kids. My wife works in the NHS. I work in the private sector. We are comfortable but not rolling in money. I drive a shit old car because there are other things I like to spend my truly disposable income on. We cannot afford private education for the kids. I am post Final Salary pensions, so my 'pot' is likely to not be big enough for an average sized midday piss. But I have my health and a reasonable work-life balance. I tend to stay in jobs for more than five years because (I like to think) I am seen as competent, and I just want a 'quiet life'.
I am seriously disillusioned with the UK. The taxes taken from me are being pissed up the wall on a project that is going to make my and my family's life worse. Education is going to suffer as class sizes will creep upwards inexorably. My reasonably comfortable working life is going to come under attack from people who are desperate. Desperate to work 12 hour days so they can 'prove themselves'. To pledge their entire lives to 'the company' just to get in the door. The NHS will continue to be dragged from pillar to post and my wife will continue to feel like she is having the piss taken.
I am basically centrist, internationalist, and liberal in outlook.
There are tens of millions of 'me'.
Labour:
Give. Me. A. Political. Home.
You sure about that bit?
I am. If all you can come up with is the cliched, ageist bollocks I would expect from Binners, you can't have much in your locker. For someone who seems to pride themselves on the quality of their posts (to the extent of deriding those you disagree with) it's a very poor effort.
I am basically centrist, internationalist, and liberal in outlook.
There are tens of millions of ‘me’.
Labour:
Give. Me. A. Political. Home.
Agreed.
He needs to appeal to those people. If he doesn’t he can’t win an election. What do you want?
Sigh I was answering your comment about even the Guardian when it really wasnt unexpected that they would attack.
At least some of them were clear in their objective that they wanted to wipe out the Labour left and so turn the party once more into one which pandered just to them whilst treating the traditional voters as a free vote source. If that meant years of hard right government then so be it. These are the same people who then get confused about why people vote for brexit commenting about the elite and being ignored.
There are tens of millions of ‘me’.
Got some evidence for this? We are a minority as far as I can tell. Dont confuse the swing voters influence for actually being large numbers.
What will happen to the traditional labour voters. Where should they **** off to since their interests wont really overlap with ours.
Yeah this is the problem. There was a time that red and blue could take for granted large swathes of the electorate. This is becoming less the case especially for Labour who have to try and appeal across the range of the electorate including working class voters turned to the right with Brexit - I saw this coming and posted on it in other threads months ago before the election looking at example of eg NE Derbyshire and Mansfield in 2017 GE. But also younger voters with concerns about climate change, social justice etc that play against the populist narrative.
The bit that Labour probably need to worry about least ( in terms of votes)is socially liberal middle class voters, working in public sector or new industry white collar jobs (IT etc)
I think the way to do this is to show leadership and drive the agenda rather keep head down and play for competence to appeal to a middle class liberal audience (i.e. me!) that is increasingly less important in election terms . But it means being brave on stuff like climate change, child poverty, inequalities etc
I get that there is time for this and Covid is dominating everything at the moment - but Labour needs to start the ground work.
Starmer in the right wing press and you’ll see the bullshit comments/narrative forming about Starner’s time as DPP
Starmer is a much more difficult target for the Tory's hate press. OK, he's a lawyer, and everyone dislikes them, but actually his record (as other posters have already recognised) is pretty public spirited....and...well that's it. Corbyn was an easy target by comparison. I think the Labour front bench are doing the right thing. Johnson is desperate to have a rant about sovereignty and Britain standing alone, and breaking international treaties and all that nonsense, and as a lawyer they thought Stamer wouldn't be able to resist, and when Stamer just sidestepped it completely, It wound Johnson up so much he went on a rant that had even Tory MPs going "eh?"
"Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake" , said Napoleon.
This is becoming less the case especially for Labour who have to try and appeal across the range of the electorate including working class voters turned to the right with Brexit – I saw this coming and posted on it in other threads months ago before the election looking at example of eg NE Derbyshire and Mansfield in 2017 GE.
Exactly this. I can't find the link but I read that the overwhelming majority of Tory-held marginals were Leave-voting towns. Labour has a stranglehold on areas dominated by liberal/ left Remain-voting middle classes, but could come under pressure from any Lib Dem revival. Corbyn tried and failed to square that circle: it remains to be seen what Starmer will do.
Sigh I was answering your comment about even the Guardian when it really wasnt unexpected that they would attack.
If a Labour leader can't get himself nearly unequivocal support from the Guardian, where can they?
Socialist Worker?
Razzle?
olddog, you wrote...
but Labour needs to start the ground work.
I posted somewhere up there ^^^ that I have no doubt policies are being worked on behind the scenes and, where appropriate, discretely tested.
There is no need for any of them to be publicised yet.
As a lawyer, Starmer fully understands the importance of thorough preparation; the ground work is, undoubtedly, well underway.
Corbyn tried and failed to square that circle: it remains to be seen what Starmer will do.
with 4 years and an 80 seat majority, what Starmer can practically do is the square root of **** all. By the time Labour get anywhere near government, this shit-show will be neck deep and we'll all be damn near drowning.
Razzle?
What a hilarious comment. Are you going to come out with some childish shite about six forms next?
The Guardian is a centre left/liberal paper (with a smattering of more left and more right wing columnists).
So to gain the Guardian support you have to move away from the traditional Labour position.
This will gain you some votes and might even allow you to win three elections.
However when those traditional voters realise they no longer matter they start asking questions and start looking for alternatives and are open to voting for something which promises to change things. like brexit.
It also means since Labour then starts crowding the tories that the entire "centre" moves rightwards. So hard right positions become moderate right and so on. To see where this ends just look at the USA where anyone left of rabid rightwing is accused of communism.
What a hilarious comment.
Thanks!
Are you going to come out with some childish shite about six forms next?
But you won't get to be a prefect with language like that.
Anyway enough of this foreplay.
Do you want an electable Labour Party or not?
However when those traditional voters realise they no longer matter they start asking questions and start looking for alternatives and are open to voting for something which promises to change things. like brexit.
There's going to be four years of them getting screwed over at every turn. They won't vote Tory again. Whether they choose a period of reflection or go full fascist remains to be seen.
Do you want an electable Labour Party or not?
I want a functioning political system which ensures that all members of society are represented.
Not just the centrists.
Thats leaving aside whether the centrists dream of making Labour dance to them again will actually work. Blair walked because he knew he had pushed it as far as he could. All the support he had got was evaporating so he went to cash the cheques and leave others to pay the piper.
Now it might work again but I have my doubts.
I want a functioning political system which ensures that all members of society are represented.
Not just the centrists.
Thats leaving aside whether the centrists dream of making Labour dance to them again will actually work. Blair walked because he knew he had pushed it as far as he could. All the support he had got was evaporating so he went to cash the cheques and leave others to pay the piper.
Now it might work again but I have my doubts.
Ok, so that is a 'no', then.
Ta.
Have a nice weekend.
There’s going to be four years of them getting screwed over at every turn. They won’t vote Tory again.
It depends on how effective the propaganda is. Can already see this being spun up for blaming the EU and Starmer with his strong support for remain in the past will get spun as an internal saboteur. When combined with the fact people dont generally like admitting to self harm it will make it easy for the blame to be passed.
Covid could be a counter but outside of PMQ Starmer has been pretty much invisible and hasnt really challenged anything.
Ok, so that is a ‘no’, then.
sigh we are back to the primary school level of debate I see.
exactly this. I can’t find the link but I read that the overwhelming majority of Tory-held marginals were Leave-voting towns. Labour has a stranglehold on areas dominated by liberal/ left Remain-voting middle classes, but could come under pressure from any Lib Dem revival. Corbyn tried and failed to square that circle: it remains to be seen what Starmer will do.
He should do that by not fighting the referendum again. Policy of "constructive engagement / close alliance" with the EU slowly unveiled as the tories eff it all up
He should do that by not fighting the referendum again. Policy of “constructive engagement / close alliance” with the EU slowly unveiled as the tories eff it all up
This.
Thanks for saying it in about 300 less words than I could manage.
Wavering Leave voters have to be told they made an epic **** up, but it needs doing bit by bit, slowly and making sure it doesn't look like sabotage.
sigh we are back to the primary school level of debate I see.
Well if you are going to keep dodging the question by saying 'I want the entire world to change and come around to my views rather than adapt' then that is what you are going to get.
What is Johnson's majority again? Did he make gains?
Labour wasn't electable under Corbyn. The evidence speaks for itself.
Id recommend you all listen to the latest 'Remainiacs' podcast as it has the authors of 'Left Out: The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn" to talk about the infighting.
Some revelations like the party's left leaking a story to the Sun to undermine the party's Right
For someone who prefers to listen to the authors discuss the book's bullet points in a podcast rather than actually read a political book it's ideal 🙂
dannyh:
Anyway enough of this foreplay.
Do you want an electable Labour Party or not?
Well if you are going to keep dodging the question by saying ‘I want the entire world to change and come around to my views rather than adapt’ then that is what you are going to get.
To be fair though, it’s a pretty rubbish question when the only answer you’ll accept is a Labour lurch to the right to gain the necessary votes. You and others talk as if this will guarantee a win at the next election- but fail to acknowledge that some people won’t shift that far, they need more.
Also it’s a bit rich to complain the left won’t adapt, when the right of the Labour Party did all they could to undermine Corbyn et al.
How on Earth do you see,
want a functioning political system which ensures that all members of society are represented.
Not just the centrists.
as “wanting the entire world to change”?