[Closed] The labour party

JY, all I am doing is posting links or references to statements made by Labour Party MPs and Shadow cabinet members, past and present.

The Labour Party came out almost immediately to counter Livingstone's idiotic statement on NATO. It's Labour Party policy to vote in favour of Trident renewal and if Cobyn wanted to something different he could have debated at the party conference. As it was he dodged the issue as he got wind he would lose the vote.

@zokes - nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn. Blair got Labour 13 years in Government, thats the key fact.

Surely the point is that regardless of the labour membership, the UK do not vote for hard-left policy. Are the hard leftists happy to remain in opposition and watch the tories do what tories do for the next X years?
Because I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that Labour under JC or any other hard left won't win.
Leaves me hoping that the lib dems can get their act together.

all I am doing is posting links or references to statements made by Labour Party MPs and Shadow cabinet members, past and present.

Can you not be honest with yourself? No else is struggling to understand why you will quote anyone anywhere criticising him .

nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party

JY video below here is a good example. Labour kicked put militant tendancy, it was Kinnock's greatest achievement and paved the way for a Labour government. Corbyn and his suporters need to do the same if they want to get elected. As you know from my perspective the longer Corbyn remains around the better.

The Labour Party abandoned all its morals and values to attract right wing voters when 'new Labour' came along, they just turned into a Tory plan B and offered nothing as an alternative to the Tory party,
Lots of people see Corbin as a genuine alternative to the 'same old same old' political circus that we seem to be stuck with now,
The more they howl about Corbin and try to character assassinate him the more a lot of people think he might be onto something and offer a genuine alternative to the tossers we're stuck with now..

the UK do not vote for hard-left policy.

Are the hard leftists happy to remain in opposition and watch the tories do what tories do for the next X years?

Because I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that Labour under JC or any other hard left won't win

IMHO he needs to persuade those who do not vote to turn up and persuade folk that voting can make a difference and change things

TBH the tories imploding over the EU is probably the best hope Labour have

@kahni - middle ground voters, not rigjt wing. Blair brought in the minimum wage, if youndon't win elections you can't do anything except get a bit shouty and go on prptest marches

Jamby have you considered addressing what I say rather than just repeating what you do?

Switches blocker on had enough of your biased partisan drivel for a while.

Surely the middle grounders are the deciders?
So it should (and mostly does) come down to who is more middle ground, lab or tory.
From my POV, neither are an appetising prospect at present.
Oh for un-entrenched, neutral, un-indoctrinated political parties.

Junkyard - lazarus

All this is is tory using whatever he does as a method to beat him JHad they stayed in position no one would be condemning him for having an open party they would be claiming he has weak leadership

In fact they've done both- he's simultaneously a dictator crushing all dissent, and weak for not crushing Benn for dissent

TBH I don't think he's chosen the best strategy; it's a sensible tactic, he opened the door to people and gave them a chance to work with him, then acted when they chose not to. But that's been spun twice, once as weak leadership and once as hypocrisy and authoritarianism. If he'd just picked his favourite cabinet first time he'd have still got the second line but not the first. It seems like he's chosen the reasonable course of action in an unreasonable world and maybe not understood how it would be painted. (OTOH maybe I underestimate how things will be spun regardless of what he does; but here I think he's not played the game well)

I think he also underestimates the labour party's willingness to score own goals- he's brought people onto the team who want to see the party fail so that they can blame him, rather than trying to make the party succeed. The blairites would rather have 10 years in the wilderness as long as it's them that leads them back out- basically they're playing a different game entirely where the object is to win the party not elections.

(though, I had an interesting chat with some old blairite mates last week who're basically bricking it- they'd formed a lot of opinions based on the idea that Cameron was going to be basically a Blair 2 and that having him win wasn't that big a deal. And now they're finding out what it really means and asking what sort of country will be left in another 5 or 10 years, and realising that all their ideas about moving to the centre have enabled the tories to move massively to the right. Mind you they're still all thinking about who to blame rather than what to do, but it's progress)

Though a bit of an elephant in the room is that the labour party is just low on quality right now. You saw it in the leadership election- Corbyn succeeded largely because of the low quality competition. And now you see it in the weak field of cabinet candidates. He can only **** with the dick he's got.

nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn.

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost? I've said it before plenty times, but they have a simple choice, either accept that they lost and do whatever they can to support the new leader, or leave.

I think that has certainly been the case but as so many dont vote I am not sure it is the ONLY way to win.

I also find it strange that both parties have to flip flop around trying to win over the [s]unprincipled[/s] wavering voters who could flop either way based on who has the nicest haircut 😉

I think only time will tell whether this approach works or not- I do suspect some "hard left" polices - no nukes possibly being one [ even though i do , weakly, support such a position]- are sufficiently off the wall to , alone, render the party unelectable.

They still have to give some thought to not being always "far left"

@zokes - nope its the leftish Corbyn-ites who need to leave and form their own party which will be just as unelectable as Labour would be under Corbyn.

So, as per my post, over three quarters of them then? Why don't the 25% who secretly want to **** pigs with Cameron go and do so instead? Or maybe they could form a new party - they could call it [i]New Tories[/i]

Blair got Labour 13 years in Government, thats the key fact.

Mainly (with the odd exception, such as the minimum wage) by out Torying the Tories. I'm 32. There hasn't been a left wing government in the UK in my lifetime.

basically they're playing a different game entirely where the object is to win the party not elections.

Oh and another excellent balanced post with an amusing ending

I also find it strange that both parties have to flip flop around trying to win over the unprincipled wavering voters who could flop either way based on who has the nicest haircut

There is plently I agree with from both the tories and labour (even now) but if I have to choose.......

Though a bit of an elephant in the room is that the labour party is just low on quality right now.

And why is that? Could it be that Blair and Brown packed the parliamentary party with PPE drones straight out of Oxford and gave jobs to those who were best at greasing their way up the pole, instead of the using the tried and tested local constituency/trade union route where prospective MPs had to cut their teeth on the coalface by working their way up through local government or trade unions?

I think the lib dems ruined coalition they were so keen on being seen to be in power that they forgot to have principles and use their position to further their agenda - they did seem to have the hang by the end to be fair but the damage was done as election night proved.

They just looked like unprincipled spineless turncoats

If you are a middle ground [ not an insult] voter then you will prefer middle of the road politics and a coalition certainly delivers that.

I do prefer PR and this will lead to coalitions so perhaps the "best" [ least worst] option is to have bland middle of the road policies that enthuse very few of us but anger very few of us?

dazh - you're right, he did get voted in but there's a huge gap of people between him and the people who voted him in..

It is comical really. He's nothing special but his values really get people's knickers in a twist.

Essentially he believes in trying to change the power relations within the UK to make it a fairer society...but god do people hate that.

"What..you mean we can't wave our dicks around by going to war and showing how tough we are"...."what, you mean give some money to some deserving people...i mean i know they were born without arms but still, they should try harder"..."what, pay taxes...god no, that's so below me"..."i deserve my place at the top and the rest of you can get lost you bunch of disabled (or insert other unfortunate life circumstances people here if you wish) scroungers"....

I think the lib dems ruined coalition they were so keen on being seen to be in power that they forgot to have principles and use their position to further their agenda - they did seem to have the hang by the end to be fair but the damage was done as election night proved.

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost?

The illusion is that the Labour Party 'leader' is anything more than the head of the PLP. Conference and NEC run the party, and while Corbyn has considerable clout and the backing of much of the 'machine', conference sets policy and it could be argued that Corbyn should accept that he's lost over Trident and stick to its line.

Corbyn's mandate is important, but until that works it way through to conference and NEC, he is not yet the ultimate authority in the party.

Does Corbyn have a sufficient majority among full members to start loading conference with delegates who would back him?

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote. When are the blairites going to accept that they lost? I've said it before plenty times, but they have a simple choice, either accept that they lost and do whatever they can to support the new leader, or leave.

You'll never win an election by appealing to the party membership, particuarly not when setting policies.

They are, by their very nature, the hardcore.

You only need to look at Cameron - to most of the party membership many of his policies are weak willed and/or a complete anathema (Europe, immigration, gay marriage etc). While most of the other ones don't go far enough. (Benefits etc).
In fact you can see the mistakes that they have made by pandering to the membership, then backed away from because they utterley isolate them from the voters (eg. Tax credits) that's not to say they haven't been thrown the occasional bone to keep them happy, but ultimately, Tory policies and decisions have remained far closer to the centre ground than their party membership (well, those who hadn't abandoned it and gone to UKIP)- and thus they won the election.

Blair did much the same, rule from the centre whilst throwing occasional bones to the membership (minimum wage, hunting) and won elections by doing so. Even the Lib Dems couldn't satisfy the party membership, 'cause they were mainly nutters.

Corbyns 'appeal' to the membership and Labour Party supporters (rather than the voters at large) and the sudden upsurge of new party members from the 'random nut jobs' on the left is the equivalent of a new Tory leaders policies bringing the UKIP members flocking back home to the Tories - electoral suicide.

sunnydaze310 - Member

Essentially he believes in trying to change the power relations within the UK to make it a fairer society...but god do people hate that.

The number of times you hear about how he's "far left" or "extreme left" really says a lot. He's no such thing, the UK doesn't really have much of a far left, but it's the standard description. It's a well proven trick tbh,a lot of people seem convinced that Cameron/Osborne/May are centrists in much the same way.

I don't think you can dismiss everyone who backed Corbyn as a random nut jobs. Many were younger people making their first foray into politics, which is a good thing for the Labour Party in the longer term, especially when you look at the ageing nature of both the Conservative and LibDem membership. Look how young membership has energised the SNP.

My reading is that JC was elected not for broad electoral appeal, but to shake up the party and make it fit for future purpose after a decade of decline.

The problem for him is that that his core support are not yet represented in party structures, and may never be. And that he'll get removed pretty quickly (would he even get on the ballot in another leadership election?)

The number of times you hear about how he's "far left" or "extreme left" really says a lot. He's no such thing, the UK doesn't really have much of a far left, but it's the standard description. It's a well proven trick tbh,a lot of people seem convinced that Cameron/Osborne/May are centrists in much the same way.

Well you have to admire the Tories' spin machine for making sensible things like state-owned railways seem like the beginning of a Stalinist tyranny, while you marvel at the stupidity of the British electorate who routinely vote for things which are directly opposed to their own interests, apparently stuck in a time warp of forelock-tugging and blindly doing the bidding of the gentry.

from the middle, Corbyn is hard left. As as far left as Farage is right.

You'll never win an election by appealing to the party membership, particuarly not when setting policies.

And you'll never win a leadership election by not appealing to the membership. You can't do the latter without doing the former. Has it occurred to you at all that the main reason the general population hate politicians is because they do exactly what you suggest? Corbyn tapped into this and it's the main reason he won. If he does as you suggest and abandons that he'll be finished far quicker than he will be at the hands of the PPE drones.

and the sudden upsurge of new party members from the 'random nut jobs' on the left

Like yourself you mean?

You see the trouble with this is that Corbyn won the biggest ever landslide in the leadership election, in all 3 sections of the vote.

Not entirely true, he won all three votes but actually if you compare like for like with Blair's election the result is quite similar. It is is £3 voters who massively change it because Corbyn dominated there more than Blair dominated the PLP vote.

£3 voters Corbyn 84% vs Blair N/A
Constituency Corbyn 49.69% vs Blair 57.61%
Affiliated Corbyn 58.2% vs Blair 52.3%
PLP Corbyn N/A vs Blair 60.55%

Note Blair won a majority in each electoral college, which Corbyn didn't quite.

martinhutch - Member
...Many were younger people making their first foray into politics, which is a good thing for the Labour Party in the longer term

The Labour mis-management have to proceed very carefully.

if (when?) Corbyn gets done-over, the exodus by the new membership will be huge, and they'll associate the words 'labour party' with a very nasty taste in their mouth. They'll never come back on side.

Here's a thought...why is it people support Cameron who would rather kill people (go to war) over offering a helping hand to the destitute (immigrants fleeing worn torn counties)... Says it all really...least Corbyn has some compassion and empathy...

I don't think you can dismiss everyone who backed Corbyn as a random nut jobs.

I wouldn't seek to do so - on the same basis as I wouldn't dismiss [u]everyone[/u] who backed Farage as a random nut job, but the fact that they both attract random nut jobs like flies round **** should be enough of a warning on how the majority see them to ring alarm bells on their policies, leadership and electability.

And you'll never win a leadership election by not appealing to the membership.

Which is why the Labour Party previously weighted elections towards the PLP - in fact, prior to that I think it was entirely a PLP decision.

but the fact that they both attract random nut jobs like flies round **** should be enough of a warning on how the majority see them to ring alarm bells on their policies, leadership and electability.

Coming from someone who has been quite open about paying 3 quid to vote for Corbyn I'm surprised you can write that with a straight face.

Really? I think it proves my point perfectly 😆

Though unfortunately you seem to be mixing up the 'attracts lots of £3 voters' and 'surge in membership' as the same people 😉

from the middle, Corbyn is hard left. As as far left as Farage is right.

But the middle has moved waaaaaay to the right. What Corbyn is mostly suggesting is only slightly to the left of Thatcher on most issues!

Though unfortunately you seem to be mixing up the 'attracts lots of £3 voters' and 'surge in membership' as the same people

I suspect only a tiny number of fanatical Tory/UKIP loonies actually paid 3 quid to vote.

from the middle, Corbyn is hard left.

Whose definition of the middle?

anyone who does not embrace thatcherism/blairism.serve the interest of global capitalism and our "free press" is seen as hard left.

Have the far left and right ever existed in the UK - at least in power?

To consider mild shifts in UK political positions as movements far in one way or another requires an extraordinary narrow context.

Even then, strip away the titles and look at actions not words. Some of the more RW stuff and policies are found north of the wall from a so-called anti-austerity, left of centre party. And the far right (sic) austerity driven nasty Tories are currently running one of the widest budget deficits in the developed world! Far right of centre???????

So much for the headlines....

More like noise around a consistent centre ground. Hence the challenge of recognising that a different mindset is needed to tackle the current situation that does not fit into LW or RW categorisation. That's just historically convenient labelling (and BS) frankly

[url= http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/laura-kuenssberg-not-good-enough.html?m=1 ]This doesn't seem right...[/url]

The BBC orchestrated the resignation of a MP from the shadow cabinet and timed it to cause maximum trouble for Corbyn while feeding Cameron the info. Then deleted the blog detailing it.

And the far right (sic) austerity driven nasty Tories are currently running one of the widest budget deficits in the developed world! Far right of centre???????

You're seeing things from a purely economic viewpoint in which a poor person's pound is the same as a rich person's pound. "Austerity" a la Osborne is not about spending less, it's about spending less on poor people, such as via working tax credits.

The BBC orchestrated the resignation of a MP from the shadow cabinet and timed it to cause maximum trouble for Corbyn while feeding Cameron the info. [b]Then deleted the blog detailing it[/b].

Particularly telling.

Austerity is a set of economic policies implemented with the aim of reducing government budget deficits.

I think most would agree that the govt is doing this , or attempting to do so, even if THM will refuse to accept this point.

Given the state of the public sector its pretty hard, though I am sure some will take up the challenge, to argue that the govt has not/is not implementing polices designed to reduce its spending and therefore the deficit.

Well you have to admire the Tories' spin machine for making sensible things like state-owned railways seem like the beginning of a Stalinist tyranny, while you marvel at the stupidity of the British electorate who routinely vote for things which are directly opposed to their own interests, apparently stuck in a time warp of forelock-tugging and blindly doing the bidding of the gentry.

But some 'stupid' people still remember national strikes crippling state-owned industries so maybe they think (rightly or wrongly) putting them back into state-ownership would result in something similar again, so maybe they are thinking of their own interests (i.e. they need to go to work, have electricity etc.).

Its that kind of "I know better than you" attitude that did for the Labour at the last election.

But some 'stupid' people still remember national strikes crippling state-owned industries so maybe they think (rightly or wrongly) putting them back into state-ownership would result in something similar again, so maybe they are thinking of their own interests (i.e. they need to go to work, have electricity etc.).

Its that kind of "I know better than you" attitude that did for the Labour at the last election.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/27/privatising-east-coast-rail-rip-off

I know, Grum, thats my railway, you're preaching to the converted here!

I was more trying to point out the aggressive labeling of people with a different opinion doesn't win them over.

If you walked up to me, told me I was as thick as mince then you would be unlikely to get me to look at your facts to prove it.

Its not stupidity that gets the Tories in..its greed and selfishness which is a product of neo-liberalism. That's why the Tories can only ever talk about the economy...and also why you never here the tory supporters on here defending Cameron and co for the good, community spirited work they (obviously don't) do...nstead they have to hide behind slinging insults at othe politicians...I meam , strike in the 70's..what a lame argument for not voting Labour now...