Forum menu
Been avoiding this thread for a while but jeez, there’s a lack of vision there. Not least a failure to see the connection between health and social care, and how investment in one offers savings to the other.
To be fair to him, linking health and social care is one subject in particular that Andy Burnham has been going on about for years now. Here's a Guardian article from 2014 advocating exactly what you've just said. He's explicitly linking the two as much as he can in Greater Manchester now and is still saying it needs to be happening on a national level
Having said that though, if you look at the present labour party it does politically seem to be sat in Twilight Meadows home for the terminally bewildered, babbling on about how they used to come here when it was all fields.
Perhaps its time to start looking in to that trip to Dignitas...
To be fair to him, linking health and social care is one subject in particular that Andy Burnham has been going on about for years now.
To be fair Andy Burnham isn't the Leader of the Labour Party.
To be fair to Keir Starmer he supported the National Independent Living Support Services proposals. From the link :
"Starmer supported the National Independent Living Support Service (NILSS) proposals during his successful campaign to be elected party leader last year, telling DNS in February 2020 that he backed a motion supporting those proposals which had been passed at Labour’s annual conference."
To be fair one disabled party member was correct when :
She said the party was now run by “cowardly, unprincipled careerists”
Just to be fair.
She said the party was now run by “cowardly, unprincipled careerists”
She's must have been reading my posts on here. 🙂
He’s explicitly linking the two as much as he can in Greater Manchester now and is still saying it needs to be happening on a national level
How's he going to pay for it though?
He's in charge of the devolved Health and social care budgets. So he's trying a different approach - the one that he's been going on about for years - in explicitly linking the two things in a unified approach to health and social care
I know that that's all very awkward, finding a politician who's just quietly getting on with doing things he said he'd do. I'm sure that his 70% vote share at the last election is in no way connected to that at all.
It does seem like this is something that regional government is doing throughout the country.
Meanwhile.... back at Westminster....
Meanwhile…. back at Westminster….
Yup. So why the diversionary tactic of 'to be fair to Andy Burnham' when discussing the Labour Leader in Westminster's failure to back a policy which he claimed he supported when he was desperate to become Party Leader?
You appear to be extremely reluctant to talk about Keir Starmer on the Keir Starmer thread binners, preferring instead to talk about almost anyone but Starmer.
Why is that?
As I've been saying, they have no interest in winning elections, only internal political machinations and retaining power within the party. It's no wonder no one wants to vote for them.
"Some centrists believe that Starmer’s best hope of proving his party has changed would be to tear up its member-led leadership rules and return to an electoral college that restored MPs alongside unions and members. MPs represent millions of voters, whereas party members represent only themselves, allies say. The Left would be sure to react with fury.
It’s too late to mobilise such a radical reform for this autumn, and it may need Unite the union to elect centrist Gerard Coyne to have a chance. But there is chatter of a special conference next spring to carry it out.
Although Starmer likes to talk about tackling anti-Semitism as defining his leadership, some MPs believe the public either don’t know or or uninterested in the issue. A big bang change to water down members’ hold over the party leader would be more bold.
There are however downsides, as one senior aide points out. “It’s a terrible dilemma. One of the big, most essential ways that Keir has to define himself is by changing the leadership rules to ensure that this great party never goes back to being run by cranks. But the problem he’s got is as soon as he does that is he could face a challenge from the Right or competent centre. It’s a total Catch-22."
Angela and Kim both caught taking up the "there's no magic money tree" mantra.
Absolutely useless.
They shouldn't be allowed near a major political party if they don't understand how public funding works.
Idiot Blairite John Mcternan saying the same.
https://twitter.com/LoonyLeftyLady1/status/1409237941403230210?s=19
Does seem like Starmer's lot have been programmed for austerity.
The way the Labour party chooses its leaders does need to change. I don't think the role of members should be watered down, but the whole process needs to be quicker. The Conservatives manage to time their dumping of leaders, and replacement of them, so much more nimbly these days, yet still rely on members to make the final call.
You appear to be extremely reluctant to talk about Keir Starmer on the Keir Starmer thread binners, preferring instead to talk about almost anyone but Starmer.
Why is that?
Because theres not really anything to discuss, is there?
I'm now just absolutely baffled by, and pretty despairing of, the continuing silence from the Labour front bench about pretty much everything that's been going on recently. For over 5 years now the labour party has been sat with its thumb up its arse being completely ineffectual.
I was one of the many who lived in hope that a change of leader might have resulted in that changing. Looks like I was wrong. The party is a complete basket case in its present form and somewhat depressingly it looks like Boris and chums are free to do what they like and a large enough proportion of the electorate are happy enough with that state of affairs to keep voting for it
The way the Labour party chooses its leaders does need to change.
The Labour Party is constantly changing the way it chooses its Leader.
Every few years they come up with new creative ways to guarantee that leftwing radicals don't get the position.
Obviously Ed Miliband screwed up when his particular sure proof idea, fully backed by Tony Blair, backfired so spectacularly.
Q: What's the difference between Binners and Dazh types?
A: About 18 months.
Starmer is dead. Long live Burnham.
And the whole process starts again.
The circle of life for Labour supporters.
I wouldn’t have thought Andy would be remotely interested in a return to Westminster any time soon.
The majority of the electorate in this country seems determined to play out this toxic experiment in nationalist populism, where everything is somebody else’s fault.
Whenever we get the next Labour government - and it looks like it’s going to be a while off - they’ll be tasked with repairing the damage. The circle of life?
For over 5 years now the labour party has been sat with its thumb up its arse being completely ineffectual.
The majority of the electorate in this country seems determined to play out this toxic experiment ...
Well if the majority of the electorate seem determined to play out this toxic experiment sitting with a thumb up its arse seems a reasonable position for the Labour Party.
everything is somebody else’s fault.
Quite.
More from that huffpost article that I missed earlier...
"One MP says: “He needs some drama, a big moment to show what he stands for. He can show leadership by saying there are some people in my party who believe things the country will never accept and I’m going to take them on. The country will understand that.”
"The key has got to be both a clean break with Corbyn and a positive vision of Britain, one frontbencher says. “Nobody I talk to tells me you know what ‘Labour has changed too much’. And when I ask Tory MPs privately what they fear most, they say it’s if we got rid of the loonies” they say.
“If we lose in Batley, and the expectation very much is we will, we have to get the PLP and the wider party to accept that without a big change things could get even worse than 2019, despite that election being absolutely catastrophic for us.
“It’s a huge achievement that for the first time since Tony Blair we have a leader who passes the prime minister test. But the toxicity that there still is around the brand and the damage that has been done, it’s not going to be solved just by a guy who looks like he could stand outside Number 10, it’s got to be much more fundamental.”
All they want is to be like the tories, get rid of the membership, and turn the party into their own private vehicle for their selfish career ambitions.
And then there's this. Labour MPs deserve everything they get.
https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1409454025926397955?s=20
All this talk of Burnham has reminded me that he was a decent opposition Health Secretary. Ashworth doesn't come across well and the rest of the front bench are pretty unmemorable aswell.
Is this truly the best Labour can put up?
Corbyn's front bench was supposedly shite because nobody would serve under him, so what's the excuse now?
The circle of life for Labour supporters.
I'm a long way from being a labout supporter right now.
Well , I’ve been watching a bit of Starmer on TV this week and it’s pretty much reinforced what I thought earlier.
He’s a complete non entity.
He offers nothing and I’d be surprised if anyone actually expected any sort of action from him.
He basically repeats what’s been happening and says”yes, that’s bad, we wouldn’t do that”
I imagine Boris has a little chuckle to himself when he watches Starmer on telly
He basically repeats what’s been happening and says”yes, that’s bad, we wouldn’t do that”
And what if the majority of the people is this country now think “Its not that bad. I’d do that”
“I’d give that girl I always fancied at uni a cushy taxpayer-funded job so I can try and get into her underwear in the stationary cupboard. I’d take some backhanders and dish out some big fat contracts to my mates, and deport asylum seekers to camps in Rwanda, and sell arms to Israel and Saudi and anyone else who wants some, and let kids on council estates go hungry .... and can we bring back hanging?”
I think the majority in petty, small-minded, insular little Brexit Britain now think like that. Certainly there’s not many people who seem to be that arsed with it all as long as can watch Love Island tonight
I don’t know where that leaves the Labour Party
In the minority, clearly
And what if the majority of the people is this country now think “Its not that bad. I’d do that”
“I’d give that girl ...
Well if the majority of the people in this country thought "Its not that bad. I’d do that” then Matt Hancock would still be in a Cabinet Minister.
Brads makes a comment that when Starmer is on TV he comes across as someone who has nothing to offer, and you respond binners with your usual ploy of blaming the audience.
It’s not a case of blame, it’s a case of weary resignation
We’re 5 years on from Brexit and now into our third consecutive Tory administration each worse (imho) yet apparently more popular with the electorate than the last.
The majority in this country clearly aren’t remotely interested in what Labour is selling
It’s clear that they want flag-waving nationalism and petty, nasty populism and deportations and royal yachts and kids singing songs about the glorious nation
If you want to know what the majority really want then tomorrow’s tabloids will make a good guide, when Engerland play Germany.
I can already feel my toes curling in anticipation. I’m sure they’ll surpass themselves. expect lots of references to the Second World War
I can already feel my toes curling in anticipation. I’m sure they’ll surpass themselves. expect lots of references to the Second World War
It's always like that, regardless of the government.
Maybe, but I fully expect ‘we’ will see new lows tomorrow to reflect the mood of the nation.
And when I say ‘nation’ I mean Engerland, and specifically the unpleasant majority who have delivered Brexit then elected this shower and seem very, very pleased with themselves having done so
The majority in this country clearly aren’t remotely interested in what Labour is selling
So you are disputing brads claim? I'll remind you what it was :
He’s a complete non entity.
He offers nothing and I’d be surprised if anyone actually expected any sort of action from him.
Personally I think it's a fair assessment.
People aren't interested in what Labour are selling? People don't know what Labour are selling. Presumably you think people should buy blindly into Labour?
And as for the last five years, you obviously have a memory issue. 13 million people were interested in what Labour were selling in 2017, the greatest increase in Labour vote in 70 years.
Obviously they then went on to screw that up but that's a different story.
Britain is full of ****ers who seem happy/want endless tory governments.
You can either move to another country where the ****er ratio is a bit lower or just isolate yourself from them like I have. I also stay off Facebook and pretty much any social media other than this forum (as it is bike related) and that keeps me happy enough as I don't have to see them and just ignore the couple of tory idiots on here.
Queue the usual suspects to tell me how the British people need to be sold a vision that they are not remotely interested in...
the greatest increase in Labour vote in 70 years
Victory!
I was one of those first time Labour voters at that election. There’s lots of positive stuff to learn from it, especially the policy shift in that election manifesto. It should be built on. But assuming that Labour can lose less badly just by aping it would be as unwise as trying to ape the policies and approach seen during the elections campaigns Labour actually won in the past.
13 million people were interested in what Labour were selling in 2017, the greatest increase in Labour vote in 70 years
You keep desperately clinging to that comfort blanket if you like
They say a week is a long time in politics. 2017 might as well be another planet.
You’re not in Kansas any more Dorothy
I keep desperately clinging on to facts binners.
You want to talk about what has happened to Labour since the referendum? I will talk about what happened to Labour since the referendum.
Britain is full of * who seem happy/want endless tory governments.
You can either move to another country where the * ratio is a bit lower or just isolate yourself from them like I have.
Or if you live in Wales or Scotland, you can support independence.
Wales unfortunately voted Brexit, theindependence movement is gaining traction though.
If you want to know what the majority really want then tomorrow’s tabloids will make a good guide, when Engerland play Germany.
Not many will be supporting Germany?
Btw I thought if I wanted to know what the majority really want you recommended popping down to your local the Rose and Crown?
Maybe I should pop in the Rose and Crown with a copy of Daily Star.in my hand eh?
I have to say binners your distain common people is impressive, you seem to despise them as much as you despise the Tories.
And all the more remarkable as you have on numerous occasions on here castigated the left for allegedly dismissing working-class people as thick racists.
Thangam Debbonaire told female party members at a meeting last weekend that introducing free social care for disabled and older people would “give the Tories a stick to beat Labour with”, Disability News Service (DNS) has been told.
The lack of ambition or ideas or spine is depressing
A coherent policy on social care that treats the carer and the cared for properly is needed, just accept if it's any good the conservatives will steal it and if they hate it then you have put clear distance between labour and them on a issue that will attract the aging Tory voter who doesn't want to lose the home they worked hard for to pay for care
Britain is full of **** who seem happy/want endless tory governments.
Most people don't vote Tory.
You want to talk about what has happened to Labour since the referendum? I will talk about what happened to Labour since the referendum.
Well we could always talk about how different things might have been if the Labour Party hadn’t had an enthusiastic lifelong Brexiteer at the helm during the referendum who essentially said ‘the EU is a bit shit” then went on holiday for 2 months
Shall we talk about that *?
Shall we talk about how much of where we are now is down to him?
Oh no... perish the thought, because..., he’s an honourable and principled man and ... blah, blah, *ing blah....
Sorry.... I just dozed off
Nothing... absolutely NOTHING is St Jeremy’s fault. Not even the fact that he was more keen on Brexit than Nigel Farage
Jeremy Corbyn... the greatest gift that right wing nationalists could ever even dare to dream of
*slow handclap*
Shall we talk about that ****?
Yeah, why not binners? I'm happy to talk about that, and anything else.
We could also talk about how Labour gave the Tories an open goal in 2019 with their second referendum policy. You wanna talk about that too?
The truth is binners you want to talk on pretty much a daily basis, literally year after year, about what Labour should and shouldn't do to win elections.
However for you the 2017 general election, which saw the greatest increase in Labour votes for 70 years, is a taboo subject which must never be discussed because it doesn't fit in neatly with your narrow ideological agenda.
And for you ideology is sacrosanct, if it conflicts with the truth then the truth needs to be ignored.
Which is why you go into one every time I mention the 2017 general election. You really don't want to talk about it.
You would much rather talk about the 1997 general election.
Listening to Corbynites talk about the 2017 general election is like listening to Jose Mourihno talk about a game where his team got absolutely humped, but he’s keen to talk about what percentage of possession they had
Like it matters. Like anyone cares
Remember that game we enjoyed 55% possession?
Not really, no
You know.... the one we lost six nil?Brilliant wasn’t it? All that possession?
Binners don't be scared - Jez isn't coming back!
You can talk about the 2017 election without fear of him coming back. You don't have to keep up the act.
Most people don’t vote Tory.
Yeah, people keep saying that but all I see is a Tory government for the last 40+ years with a slight blip where Labour fooled them with a bit of Tory lite.
They may not all be voting for it but they are not voting against it much are they, which is why I said they seem happy with OR want a tory government.
The fact that rather than people all hitting the streets protesting about how shit the tory governments are they actually increase in the polls.
Jeremy Corbyn… the greatest gift that right wing nationalists could ever even dare to dream of
The tidy irony that the current Labour party have headed toward that very direction; very much on their own terms because they think they might pull in the votes.
And somehow, that is apparently better than the 'For the many not the few' years - whilst Starmer on the other hand is currently performing dreadfully without the onslaught of the media, the Guardian nut jobs, the Watsons, Austins etc.
You've got a right wing party in Labour. They've offered nothing up that is remotely useful or interesting. And further to that nothing that pushes back against the current terrible Government.
You can't make it up but somehow you have managed it.
Yeah, people keep saying that but all I see is a Tory government for the last 40+ years with a slight blip where Labour fooled them with a bit of Tory lite.
Sure, but that's a different point.
Yeah, people keep saying that but all I see is a Tory government for the last 40+ years with a slight blip where Labour fooled them with a bit of Tory lite.
Slightly more than a blip
They may not all be voting for it but they are not voting against it much are they, which is why I said they seem happy with OR want a tory government.
Or have failed to find an alternative, many people vote on a "least worst" basis. Labour have over relied on "identity" votes. They spend their time and energy trying to appeal to sections of voters carved up into convenient blocks. I suspect more time and effort at CLP meetings is spent on motions on Palestine (an important foreign policy issue) than trying to discuss and develop policy on social care (one of the most important issues to reframe aging in the UK).
Unfortunately for labour the conservatives weakest leader coincided with JC in the hot seat.
The fact that rather than people all hitting the streets protesting about how shit the tory governments are they actually increase in the polls.
Covid uplift, all the parties in power have had a lift. Street protests need something or someone to coalesce around. street protests can also turn into cover for the usual suspects to damage property and fight the police which turns ODP off
Let's take a policy area, the high rise issue, 3.5 million people live in property impacted by either cladding or duff fire protection. Lease holders carrying the can, freeholders likely to profit, people's lives on hold, potentially financially crippled for life. They are home owning therefore the people who conventional wisdom would say are conservative voters being shafted by the system.
So, who is the labour frontbencher with this portfolio? When were they last in the media? What is labours policy? What are their proposals for building regs reform? What are the freehold reforms labour is putting forward? Why aren't they bashing Jenrick every single day?
I haven't a clue, does anyone know without googling?
And somehow, that is apparently better than the ‘For the many not the few’ years
Moral superiority doesn't win elections.
There comes a point where you have to acknowledge reality and deal with the world as it is, not as how you'd like it to be.
We live in a country that is increasingly right wing, very conservative, quite racist and yearns to return to the days of empire.
The labour party is presently completely paralysed by this new reality as it knows that it can't offer the electorate this, despite this being what they clearly want, and remain as the labour party in anything but name.
So what to do? I haven't got a bloody clue? Is there even an acceptable answer? I'd love to hear anyone come up with a solution. Have you any suggestions? And FFS don't start with "well in 2017...". Thats ancient history now and just to remind you yet again... Labour LOST that election.
The irony here is that this new nationalist populism that is being mined so successfully by this present UKIP-ite Tory party has all been focussed around Brexit and the subsequent fallout, which was enthusiastically enabled every step of the way by Grandad and his Lexiteer chums. They were too thick wrapped up in their Bennite anti-EU sentiment to see what was staring them in the face - that they were nodding through the far rights wet dream
Talk about useful idiots
Heres the exact moment the labour party well and truly ****ed itself. When the glorious leader surfaced again after his 2 month sabbatical...
binners Full Member
We’re 5 years on from Brexit and now into our third consecutive Tory administration each worse (imho) yet apparently more popular with the electorate than the last.
The majority in this country clearly aren’t remotely interested in what Labour is selling
It is clear from what you are posting that you want to talk about the period which covers 2017 binners, but you just don't want me to mention 2017.
Why? Because it exposes as completely false your claim that each Tory government is, quote, "more popular with the electorate than the last".
In 2017, which was definitely after the 2016 Referendum, Labour increased its support by a THIRD with an extra 3 million votes and ten percent of the vote.
Far from being more popular, as you falsely claim, support for the Tories a year after the Referendum fell so much that they FAILED to win the election. No party won the 2017 general election.
But you can't stomach the truth binners so you bring up, through your own volition, the 2016-2021 period in UK politics but insist in leaving out 2017.
Insisting instead in insulting anyone who does.
With your causal relationship with the truth binners you should have been a Tory politician 🙂
No party won the 2017 general election.
Oh... have I not been living under a Tory government for the last 11 years then? Blimey. Who knew? This socialism lark we've all been enjoying since 2017 didn't look like I imagined it would.
There comes a point where you have to acknowledge reality and deal with the world as it is, not as how you’d like it to be.
Yes let's do that. 28% of the electorate voted tory in 2019. Labour won their biggest vote share in decades and highest increase in vote share in 2017 by offering something real and different to the majority who don't vote tory. Now they've gone back to targeting the votes of the tory voting minority they've predictably lost the votes they gained in 2017 and are in a worse position.
We live in a country that is increasingly right wing, very conservative, quite racist and yearns to return to the days of empire.
See above.
We banging on about 2017 again? Quelle surprise!
You sound like Spurs fans
Remember that year we nearly won something? What a golden age that was, eh?
We banging on about 2017 again? Quelle surprise!
Why wouldn't we discuss 2017? It's a fact that Labour significantly increased the number of people voting for them so it's reasonable to suggest that they were offering something with popular appeal. It makes no sense at all to abandon that approach in favour of one which appears to be taking them ever further from government.
You are aware you have to get more votes than the other party to 'win' an election?
It's great how 'not nearly as bad as the disaster we thought it was going to be' is now hailed as a great victory and a sign of the electorates true yearning for socialism.
Maybe we should build some statues as a memorial to the great triumph of 2017? Jezza holding aloft a turnip outside his garden shed perhaps? Dianne Abbot stood by a money tree with an abacus?
Because if theres one thing we know, it's that people love a statue in todays Britain. Can't get enough of them
We banging on about 2017 again?
We are, because it's the clearest and most reliable evidence we have that if you address the concerns of the non-tory voting majority, and offer them a real alternative, they will respond. You don't want to accept that though, and instead think chasing the votes of an ever decreasing minority of swing voters will somehow magically deliver the millions of votes needed to defeat the tories.
The answer is staring you in the face, but you refuse to see it because it would mean admitting Corbyn and his 'cabal' were actually doing something right back in 2017. Had the whole labour party, and in particular its MPs got behind that then they would have won, in 2017 or later, and the dystopian nightmare we're now experiencing would have been stopped in its tracks. It's a crime of indescribable proportions that Labour MPs preferrred to protect their own myopic, selfish interests.
Why wouldn’t we discuss 2017?
Because it is irrelevant.
- It was against May who gave Corbyn a run in how not to be a popular leader
- Brexit was not being dealt with well
Do you seriously think the result would have been the same if it was Corbyn vs Johnson ?
I love the Soviet style selective re-writing of history regarding the Great Victory of 2017*
You just missed the tractor production figures, comrade. I believe they are up, once again. The fatherland is truly prospering under such great leadership
* Don't mention 2019 though. Like Brexit, we'll just pretend that never happened
We live in a country that is increasingly right wing, very conservative, quite racist and yearns to return to the days of empire.
Only if you live in Guardian Op-Ed's or believe the SNP propaganda.
With your causal relationship with the truth binners you should have been a Tory politician
David Chaytor didn't do much for truth in the constituency either
You are aware you have to get more votes than the other party to ‘win’ an election?
Precisely my point, branes. So while you will continue to support a strategy of losing more and more votes to the other party, I would prefer to look at a strategy that has a chance of winning.
Because it is irrelevant.
– It was against May who gave Corbyn a run in how not to be a popular leader
– Brexit was not being dealt with well
Of course it's relevant. Labour managed to come up with a manifesto which had popular appeal, and persuaded millions more to vote for them despite the deep personal unpopularity of its leader. This isn't about Corbyn, it's about providing a genuine alternative to the electorate. Something that Starmer is singularly failing to do, with entirely predictable results.
Because it is irrelevant.
– It was against May who gave Corbyn a run in how not to be a popular leader
– Brexit was not being dealt with well
Christ the defeatism is ridiculous. Corbyn didn't win tory votes off May, he gained votes from people who had stopped voting, and lib dems and other left leaning voters who supported fringe parties and swithced back to labour (I was one of them). There are millions of people out there who make up 72% of the electorate who refuse to vote tory. If Labour can't capture enough votes from that majority and encourage them to vote *for* something then they don't deserve to win. The tories only win because Labour's centrist defeatists allow them to.
Corbyn wasn't much better than Starmer.
Both face the same problem - a right-wing media that batters anyone who falls out of line.
Starmer has gone down the Blair route of trying to court them.
Corbyn's tactic was to soak up abuse and basically hide - mumble a few words and disappear.
His views as a backbencher pretty much collapsed when he was in a position of power.
If he wasn't so lacking in political nous he would have realised that he was never going to be elected. And instead, used the time to find a successor, to build on grassroots success and deal with right-wing elements.
You could argue that Corbyn is worse than Starmer.
Starmer is a career politician doing what career politicians do.
Corbyn was a principled left-wing backbencher who somehow found himself as leader.
He had a unique opportunity to fundamentally change the direction of Labour and he utterly failed.
He had a unique opportunity to fundamentally change the direction of Labour and he utterly failed.
He was trying, and yes you could argue he should have gone further in pushing through democratic reforms and getting rid of the likes of Austin, Hodge etc. His biggest failure was the assumption/optimism that labour MPs on the right would put the party before their own ideology and interests. You'd think in the wake of 2017 they would have admitted they were wrong and got onboard, but no, they did exactly the opposite and pushed the AS nuclear button.
Christ the defeatism is ridiculous. Corbyn didn’t win tory votes off May, he gained votes from people who had stopped voting, and lib dems and other left leaning voters who supported fringe parties and swithced back to labour (I was one of them)
So what happened in 2019 then?
Did all those people stop voting again (doesn't appear so looking at turnout numbers) or switch back to the fringe parties (doesn't appear so looking at voting numbers)
And let's pretend they did do those things why was that?
Corbyn was still there in 2019, the policies were still there in 2019
(Clue, May had been swapped for Johnson)
So what happened in 2019 then?
Anti-semitism, 2nd referendum policy, and two years of labour's own MPs copying the tories by calling their leader a racist and terrorist sympathiser. The electorate could ignore the tories saying that stuff, because that's what they would do, but when people on your own side say it, they take notice. Combine that with Johnson's easy optimistic populism and it was a perfect storm.
Anti-semitism, 2nd referendum policy, and two years of labour’s own MPs copying the tories by calling their leader a racist and terrorist sympathiser. The electorate could ignore the tories saying that stuff, because that’s what they would do, but when people on your own side say it, they take notice. Combine that with Johnson’s easy optimistic populism and it was a perfect storm.
Agree with all of that, but would add a poorly-run campaign, with a manifesto which seemed to have a new commitment each week.
Anti-semitism, 2nd referendum policy, and two years of labour’s own MPs copying the tories by calling their leader a racist and terrorist sympathiser.
You seriously think the people who voted Labour in 2017 voted Tory in 2019 because of Anti-semitism and infighting. Those things were so important to the average voter (above the great policies they loved in 2017) that they switched to Tory.
If Starmzy loses at Batley with less votes than Corbyn, Corbyn will definitely have to resign.
You seriously think the people who voted Labour in 2017 voted Tory in 2019 because of Anti-semitism and infighting.
The brexit voters went tory because of the second ref policy, the rest just went back to not bothering. No one is going to vote for a party who's own MPs call their leader a 'f***ing racist'.
but would add a poorly-run campaign, with a manifesto which seemed to have a new commitment each week.
Agree, but I'd (strongly) argue the poor campaign and poorly communicated policies were a function of the siege-mentality that resulted from two years of labour MPs calling Corbyn and his supporters racists. Not even Barack Obama would have run a good campaign in that sort of environment.
You seriously think the people who voted Labour in 2017 voted Tory in 2019 because of Anti-semitism and infighting. Those things were so important to the average voter (above the great policies they loved in 2017) that they switched to Tory
You seriously think that a party riven with in-fighting isn't a turn-off to the electorate?
and two years of labour’s own MPs copying the tories by calling their leader a racist and terrorist sympathiser.
The view from inside the bunker....
Can you find us any specific examples of Labour MP's calling Jeremy Corbyn a racist and a terrorist sympathiser? Because I think that only exists in the minds of the type of people who get their 'news' from the Canary on Twitter
with a manifesto which seemed to have a new commitment each week.
A manifesto promise on the hour, every hour.
Can you find us any specific examples of Labour MP’s calling Jeremy Corbyn a racist
Binners have you got early onset alzheimers or something?
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-anti-semite-racist-labour-177905
You seriously think that a party riven with in-fighting isn’t a turn-off to the electorate?
[ Looks at the current situation ] You make a good point.
Anyway, Starmer is trying his own bit of football focussed popularism today... he's learned something from Johnson's team over the last year then... and, no, it won't work coming from him.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1409791010259996674?s=20
Any other examples?
You honestly think that Margaret Hodge calling Grandad a racist resulted in the collapse of the labour vote?
99.9% of the electorate probably don't know who Margaret Hodge is.
And there's a lot more to the relationship between those two and that whole situation than her just calling him an antisemite
You seriously think that a party riven with in-fighting isn’t a turn-off to the electorate?
They voted one into power....
Can you find us any specific examples of Labour MP’s calling Jeremy Corbyn a racist and a terrorist sympathiser?
I think John Mann had robust views on his leaders character
You honestly think that Margaret Hodge calling Grandad a racist resulted in the collapse of the labour vote?
It was splashed all over the newspapers and tv news. I think you massively underestimate the impact of an MP using that sort of language against their own leader. And it wasn't just her, Austin, Mann et al, not to mention the tingers were all singing from the same hymn sheet, with the overt or tacit support of more prominent centrists like Mandelson and Blair et al. They were all on the news giving non-answers to the simple question of 'do you think Jeremy Corbyn is a racist?'. Why would you think that wouldn't cut through to the public? Because it clearly did, I seem to remember you and many others on here saying exactly the same, so clearly it wasn't a fringe issue that no one cared about.
Any other examples?
Let's look at what you said:
Can you find us any specific examples of Labour MP’s calling Jeremy Corbyn a racist and a terrorist sympathiser? Because I think that only exists in the minds of the type of people who get their ‘news’ from the Canary on Twitter
It's a pity that you're completely incapable of admitting when you're wrong. It reminds me of the time when you asked me to substantiate my claim that Starmer was abandoning his manifesto pledges. Having done so, your lack of grace was noteworthy.
They voted one into power….
Indeed
We've just watched a party effectively have a civil war, purge anyone regarded as even slightly moderate from its ranks and replace them with hardline Brexiteer nut-jobs who all appear to be utterly useless and they still got an absolutely mahoosive majority
Yet apparently we're meant to believe that a virtually unknown backbencher being howwid to Jewemy lost labour the election
Talk about clutching at straws
Why would you think that wouldn’t cut through to the public? Because it clearly did, I seem to remember you and many others on here saying exactly the same, so clearly it wasn’t a fringe issue that no one cared about.
I've never once said that I thought Grandad was either a racist or a terrorist sympathiser. I have accused him repeatedly of being an absolutely ****ing hopeless politician, an even worse leader and the greatest gift that Tory central office could ever have wished for.
And his legacy of both Brexit, which he supported, then enabled and the absolute unelectable shambles he left the labour party in will take years to repair, if it is in fact repairable at all.
But he 'won the argument' right?
We banging on about 2017 again? Quelle surprise!
It was you that brought it up binners. You decided, unprompted, to discuss UK politics of the last 5 years.
Even with only CSE maths I can work out that 2017 is in the last 5 years.
And you falsely claimed that support for the Tories has constantly increased since the referendum.
Since you don't write a column for the Daily Mail your inaccurate rants can be challenged. I reserve the right to do that 🙂
Because it is irrelevant.
– It was against May who gave Corbyn a run in how not to be a popular leader
– Brexit was not being dealt with well
May was pretty popular before the 2017 election and was forecast for a landslide before the campaign, likewise the election was way before the major Brexit skirmishes. (I personally think the Tories "lost" it with well intentioned hubris rather than the Labour "won" it.)
May was pretty popular before the 2017 election and was forecast for a landslide before the campaign, likewise the election was way before the major Brexit skirmishes. (I personally think the Tories “lost” it with well intentioned hubris rather than the Labour “won” it.)
She wasn't popular, the election exposed her weaknesses, she had a track record of being crap and the spotlight brought this out in technicolour the issue was that the alternative was worse and so people held their nose and put an X in the conservative box enough to keep him out of power
Such a shame that so much effort in these discussions comes back to the ‘my dad’s harder than your dad’ or ‘my dicks bigger than you dick’ need to win. Put that effort into changing society and we might just make a change worth making? Just a thought. Expecting incineration imminently…
If you remove the constant attention seeking posts by one particular individual, and the subsequent responses (seriously folks, why bother?), there is perhaps a glimmer of sensible discussion, but hey; this is UK politics right now. But the general mood that seems to be emanating from the Armresters on here, seems to be that the status quo isn't really too bad, and that deep down, they just want more of the same, but perhaps with a slightly less nasty taste. There certainly doesn't seem to be any real desire for actual societal change, as people keep offering up the likes of Andy Burnham* as Labour leader. Which, whilst momentarily amusing, speaks of a deeper malaise in UK politics, that there is simply no appetite within the Labour elite, for a proper fight. Gutless. So it begs the question; if you don't really want proper change, why not simply vote tory? That way, you can be on the 'winning' side, and get to hurl as much abuse at 'lefties' as you want. And we'll all be that much more divided than we already are.
*Burnham's 'blame the darkies for Covid', and 'it's all London's fault' type rhetoric may appeal greatly to a significant number of people, but Burnham's recent ranting about Scotland show that he's a small town boy with small town ideas, with no idea of how to actually unite people, and would be even more useless than Starmer. If such a thing were possible.
You seriously think that a party riven with in-fighting isn’t a turn-off to the electorate?
Yep, I don't think the majority of the electorate give a shit about political infighting and most would not even be aware of it as they are not interested.
You really need to remind your self that most people who vote are not really interested in politics even at a simple level and certainly have no interest in any details, i.e. the people arguing politics on these sorts of threads are very much in the minority.
She wasn’t popular,
Her approval rating in May 2017 was +20% which is very good. The actual calling of the election was one of her biggest mistakes as it was completely contrary to the image she had portrayed.
Yep, I don’t think the majority of the electorate give a shit about political infighting and most would not even be aware of it as they are not interested.
I couldn't agree less. All the infighting does is provide a gift to a hostile media who relentlessly report the party as a disorganized rabble. Without wishing to get into another Blair debate, one thing Labour PLP did very well in the mid 90s was to become a disciplined, on-message unit.
May was pretty popular before the 2017 election and was forecast for a landslide before the campaign, likewise the election was way before the major Brexit skirmishes. (I personally think the Tories “lost” it with well intentioned hubris rather than the Labour “won” it.)
Your point about May is demonstrably true and the forecasted landslide was precisely why she called for a GE. It's also true that Labour was handed a gift with her "death tax" blunder.