You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I’d agree that the next leader shouldn’t necessarily go into the next election as leader.
Makes sense to me. The LibDems sort of tired that… with Cable helping the party to regroup and then pass onto a fresh leader, to try and use their honeymoon period to give the party another kick for the general election… but boy did they pick the wrong person for that! 🤡
Labour probably need someone to guide them through the early years of Brexit and Johnson’s winning afterglow, and then change to someone fresh to build up to the next general election. They are going to lose that election, but they HAVE to do better than this time, to start building support and, ahem, momentum, if they want to get into power again before 2030.
Unless this theoretical coalition did the sensible thing and introduced PR
If PR passed a referendum
Don’t be daft, all they’ve got to do is find a shiny suit and say they want to stay in the EU ad infinitum and they’ll all come flocking back.
👌😂
It terms of parties coming back from the dead
Yeah it's all about the personality, not really about the policies. So all you need is the right person. Problem for Labour is that they haven't been able to find one since Blair shot himself in the foot.
What are peoples takes on the ideal Labour leaders position on the climate emergency?
For me I'd want this to be a top priority, but do you think this will broaden or narrow their appeal with the general electorate?
Whoever it is will get mauled and held to one-sided standards, verging on the immaculate conception by the predominately right-wing print media regardless. You know the stuff people read on Sundays with a cup of tea, so they can pretend they are erudite and informed!
They didn't really have much dirt on Corbyn but harnessed the power of suggestion! Labelled him a communist straight off the bat and twisted details of his associations. Went to town on his unprofessional bumbling appearance, nailing his hat on within days and it stuck. Remember other Labour leaders, Miliband his communist Dad, bacon butty and tombstone. As pathetic as it all is, it coalesces in peoples minds!
At this election they offered too many policies, that seemed on the face of it expensive and unachievable, pretty much confirming the communism jibe and high taxes/borrowing planted in the minds of voters. Every small business owner I met thought they were going to be taxed to the hilt and expected to pay a ridiculously high, already resented, minimum wage. TBH most small business owners I know view their staff (and some of their customers) with raging contempt and would be ecstatic to regress back to something resembling medieval slavery.
Forcing Labour to be the conduit for remain (second ref) was fatal, as proved at the previous election when the only mainstream remain party got hammered. I suspect they would have done better competing with the Tories as an alternative leave party, but would have still lost because of the other failings, some of which Corbyn just didn't deal with.
Dianne Abbot should have been shuffled to the back of the pack, she contributed to an air that became a stink of incompetence.
What are peoples takes on the ideal Labour leaders position on the climate emergency?For me I’d want this to be a top priority, but do you think this will broaden or narrow their appeal with the general electorate?
How many seats have the greens got?
What's the point? We've literally just seen that the majority of the voting population has elected a government they believe will make things better for them personally, not other people.
I find that quite depressing and frankly, with the combination of a hard Brexit and huge Tory majority, I'm quite looking forward to the fact that they'll get well and truly shafted by Boris Johnson over the next ten years.
They didn’t really have much dirt on Corbyn but harnessed the power of suggestion!
When the editor of the New Statesman says (today's Sunday Times) that he couldn't endorse Labour because of anti semitism allowed by Corbyn and his association with extremists over decades then it's more than a Tory press smear.
What are peoples takes on the ideal Labour leaders position on the climate emergency?
For me I’d want this to be a top priority, but do you think this will broaden or narrow their appeal with the general electorate?
The biggest (and certainly most realistic) weapon we can deploy against climate change is innovation in science and engineering, IMHO. So I'd be looking for a brave, committed, and visionary science policy.
LOL only kidding - no major political party has a serious science policy, partly due to their being no real scientists in parliament. So we need the closest proxy for science policy which is economic policy, which is foundational to any manifesto.
So if climate change was my top, overwhelming priority as a voter, I'd just vote for whoever I thought could deliver the best economic performance for the UK.
Remember when Julian Huppert was an MP?
Openly bullied for being a ‘nerdy’ scientist.
Are there any in the new intake?
dazh
Subscriber
I doubt anyone will want to take on the ball-ache of being leader without the opportunity to fight an election.
I think they have a few people who could do well as a unity candidate, but know they wouldn't be the right people to fight an election. The thing about fighting an election is you might not win. Ironically Corbyn could have made a pretty good short-term caretaker. Equally I think some of the best candidates for the next election probably aren't the right people to turn things around- it's two different jobs and skillsets.
And I think that any worthy candidate for leadership will be doing what they believe is right for the party, not necessarily because they've always wanted a go in a government limo. The next leader might never be prime minister but they might well be "the one who saved the Labour party".
(OK, admittedly the flaw in my argument is that they've basically remembered Kinnock as a failure and excised Smith entirely from the party history, and replaced all their work with BLAIR MADE LABOUR ELECTABLE. But still)
ctk
Member
Yep PR please Santa
Aye, I'm sure this party that just won 56% of seats with 43.6% of votes cast will get right on fixing FPTP.
kiksy
Member
What are peoples takes on the ideal Labour leaders position on the climate emergency?
Same one pretty much everyone should take- climate change is going to be bloody hard work and expensive, and the later we start the worse it will be. It isn't just morally wrong to leave it to the next generation, it's also the most fiscally stupid decision in world history. Not to mention the most destabilising- hey kids, if you like mass immigration, you'll love the flooding of Bangladesh.
And the thing about hard, expensive things is that they create new industries and new jobs. And those technologies and skills will be the most important and most marketable and most in demand in the world, for probably most of the next century.
This is one place where the left wing stance and the green stance are also the only good economic stance- and where the conservative stance of denial and delay is economically moronic.
Remember when Julian Huppert was an MP?
Openly bullied for being a ‘nerdy’ scientist.
Are there any in the new intake?
Don't know Kelvin. Probably have a few with a science degree but people who've gone past that to become scientists are v rare in parliament.
Irving Kristol reckoned scientists and engineers were the second worst type of politician concievable, behind businessmen [the scientists see things in terms of problems to be solved according to certain axioms, and the businessmen expect to be able to make instant decisions and have people do what they say - neither approach viable in politics]. You'd definitely not want to see a parliament full of scientists, but the plague of lawyers and PPE dross that we're currently treated to tells its own story.
Remember when Julian Huppert was an MP?
Openly bullied for being a ‘nerdy’ scientist.
Are there any in the new intake?
Probably not.
I have a theory that the working classes and sections of the middle classes are happy to elect a posh buffoon as long as they come across as a bit anti-intellectual - what really grinds their gears are nerds from more working class or middle class backgrounds.
Then there is the culturally top down sneering at scientists from the Oxbridge PPE/Law lot.
Irving Kristol reckoned scientists and engineers were the second worst type of politician concievable, behind businessmen [the scientists see things in terms of problems to be solved according to certain axioms, and the businessmen expect to be able to make instant decisions and have people do what they say – neither approach viable in politics]. You’d definitely not want to see a parliament full of scientists, but the plague of lawyers and PPE dross that we’re currently treated to tells its own story.
Irving Kristol was part of the problem that has left this country in a ****ing mess. The US/Japan/Germany and now China have or are building their economies on the back of science and engineering, the US in particular was lucky enough to have a massive military industrial complex that recognised the value of science even if their politicians didn't. Whilst we're still obsessed with pushing money around and longing after the days when we could plunder bannanas and coco to trade.
ransos you don’t win power by appealing to your core electorate. You appeal to those in the centre. Whoever wins the centre, when added to their core gets to govern. Those are the rules. Labour seem to have forgotten how to play and decided to just appeal to their core.
This is the opposite of reality. Labour lost seats because it stopped appealing to its core. Shifting to the centre may appeal to you, but it doesn't win back the north. What you are describing is a pathway to permanent oblivion.
Does not compute.
Labours core electorate shifted right, why do you think staying where they are or shifting even further left will bring them back?
The truth is, is that those who feel that they have lost something or are on the fringes of society are historically just as likely to vote extreme right as further or far left. Once traditional norms break down and people no longer feel that they have to vote for one party out of tradition, this demographic of voters becomes reactionary and can swing wildly from one group of extremists to the next early on, the fascists and the communists in the 30s were in constant competition for the same voters. To keep them, you have to undertake a constant spiral to ever increasing political extremes - not policy or ideological extremes but authoritarianism and nationalism - which is why communists and fascists often sound so much alike. Eventually one side wins out and ends up with a mass movement - the conservatives so far look to be on course to winning that race.
Leave the tories to chasing reactionaries - Labour can sweep up in the centre ground.
I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone suggested distancing from Momentum and their batshit brand of socialism?
Does not compute.
Agree - makes no sense.
Labours core electorate shifted right, why do you think staying where they are or shifting even further left will bring them back?
We're all just hypothesising, but to me it looks like it was Labour's lurch to the left that alienated it's traditional base. Corbyn probably thinks that traditional Labour voters are clamoring to return to the labour ideals of the 70s/80s - but people just don't want that any more. In fact, they don't want it so much.... they voted tory.
It didn't help that labours policies were presented (poorly) by somebody who's persona epitomizes the labor party of the 70s and 80s.
In terms of a new direction, Labour need to do some really good research and testing..... just what do the people who would consider voting labour want from them? I would suggest that they haven't the foggiest.
They need to win the votes and build their popularity back up with some more slightly-left-of-centre stuff before they start freaking potential supporters out with the stuff that's further left.
I haven’t read the whole thread, but has anyone suggested distancing from Momentum and their batshit brand of socialism?
Yep. I did earlier. And it's not just what they suggest, it's the aggression and condescending way that they engage too. Our local momentum activists were vicious in their attacking anyone on local community pages who dares even utter a word of doubt about labour, corbyn or even the labour led city Council. I know for a fact they disenfranchised people who should have been core supporters. On the doorstep they were abrasive and confrontational - saw this first hand.
I've said it so many times, you don't win hearts and minds by insulting, talking down to or berating the person who's support you want.
@andyrm Coolio, you've made the points I would have made there. I'd argue it's still going on, now branding people thick, that's not going to be forgotten, nor is the way the party is now turning on itself, that for some justifies their switch.
It's party that lacks integrity and substance, which is a ****ing tragedy.
Looks like The Absolute Boy is hanging around until March then.
Incidentally, isn't that when the EHRC are due to report?
Labours core electorate shifted right, why do you think staying where they are or shifting even further left will bring them back?
Yet on the GE thread a Labour supported was foaming at the mouth at the suggestion that a move back towards Blairism and a more appealing message would be of benefit.
"(Blairites) would have another think coming"
I wonder if after the drubbing has sunk in, a more conciliatory message might be seeping through
I find that quite depressing and frankly, with the combination of a hard Brexit and huge Tory majority, I’m quite looking forward to the fact that they’ll get well and truly shafted by Boris Johnson over the next ten years.
I would like to think like that but that is where empathy comes in. A lot of the people who switched to Tory were sold Brexit as the answer after being fooled into thinking that in 2016. They were then lied to during the election of what the tories would do for the country.
I don't wish for people who couldn't see through the bullshit to be even harder hit but they do need to see that it hasn't worked for them. Somebody on the other side telling them upfront doesn't do it so they will now be finding out the hard way but to me the sad thing is that we have parties and governments who completely take advantage of the people they fool into voting for them.
The hardest left candidate will win the leadership election once it does to the members and Momentum changed the nomination rules to make it harder for the PLP to stop the nutters getting through. So in theory the Momentum candidate will be the next leader. *However* it occurs to me that there's a possibility that there might be no candidate from Corbyn's wing of the party willing take the job on given we've seen beyond doubt a hard left manifesto has no voter appeal[1]. Alternatively if a volunteer from Corbyn's wing is found, even with the new nomination rules, is there any possibility they might fail to get the 20 or so required nominations? Both seem unlikely to me but if either happened Labour could be back on track this spring.
If Labour does get itself back in line with the voters this spring there's a lot for them to be electorally optimistic about. There's a high chance of a recession between now and the next election. Brexit may not go well. Boris's approval rating is poor and his election campaign was dire. It's entirely possible Labour will have an open goal for the third election in a row. With a credible leadership taking back the centreground they could well win.
In other news: Interesting contrast between Labour's handling of the Northern seats and the Tory's. Boris went straight up there on a charm offensive working to keep them onside. In contrast Labour have spent three days calling them elderly racist idiots. On Friday morning it seemed inevitable all of those seats would return to Labour at the next election. By Monday I'm thinking Labour could have chased them away for the long term.
In other other news: Corbyn lost his vote of no confidence back in the day 172–40 and was only able to stand again because a dubious interpretation of the rules meant he didn't need to be nominated. If he'd quit then there's an excellent chance there would currently be a Labour government.
[1] Yes, Corbyns wing of the party are all over twitter saying the problem wasn't with the Manifesto. Yet none of them are saying the Manifesto was enthusiastically received so we can safely say it wasn't.
I'm 54 next and am pessimistic about ever seeing a Labour government again in my lifetime.
I think that for a large number of people in the UK now the ideas on which Labour were formed are alien to them, and the number of such folk will only increase.
Hope I'm wrong but.....
Yet none of them are saying the Manifesto was enthusiastically received so we can safely say it wasn’t.
Corbyn has been saying exactly that, hasn’t he?
I wonder if after the drubbing has sunk in, a more conciliatory message might be
If you beleive what they're saying on twitter you'd think not but I'm wondering...
For the Momentum project to continue they need to find a candidate willing to flog a dead horse for 5 years and then lose an election. If there is such a volunteer they've got to find 20 nominations form the PLP. 20 people who want to flog a dead horse for 5 years and then lose an election.
I wonder if people on Corbyn's wing of the party are more rational than we think and they'll look at the situation and just hand the party back to the moderates by default.
I'm not saying that will happen, but it's a thought.
Corbyn has been saying exactly that, hasn’t he?
I've been following twitter/the media pretty closely this weekend and not seen that but maybe I've missed it. Quote it?
Corbyn has been saying exactly that, hasn’t he?
'I am proud that on austerity, on corporate power, on inequality and on the climate emergency we have won the arguments and rewritten the terms of political debate. But I regret that we did not succeed in converting that into a parliamentary majority for change.
'There is no doubt that our policies are popular, from public ownership of rail and key utilities to a massive house-building programme and a pay rise for millions. The question is, how can we succeed in future where we didn’t this time?'
So sort of. If you're going to be forensic, there's a difference between individual policies being well received and the manifesto as a whole.
It feels a little like this GE was the point to which Momentum and their dangerous identity politics game of division came utterly crashing down around their heads, problem is they're so arrogant and deluded they can't reflect on that and have taken to continuing to insult the voting populace, seems they like to partake in political self-harming.
With a credible leadership taking back the centreground they could well win.
I think this is it, but I do think what 'the centre ground' is not so clear as it was 10/20 years ago. The idea of working class people being automatically left wing and affluent city types tending to be right wing has gone out the window (if it was ever really that true I don't know).
Labour now needs to spend some serious time looking at the population and really deeply understanding the issues they face and how they can get them to understand that Labour will help them. This is across the spectrum, not just the ex-Labour working class leavers.
Simply keeping on banging the nationalism drum without people understanding how it can improve there lives won't be enough, equally neither will simply settling into a traditional 'Blair voting Tory' style policies. There are some huge chasms to be bridged and it's not going to be easy.
So which of the seven stages of grief are the Labour hierarchy currently at?
I reckon we're getting past denial now and well into the anger.
@kiksy I saw many people change, red to blue and one thing that stood out for me was opposition to the activism and divisive politics, a lot of my former colleagues who have been red their entire lives hated the activism of Momentum and the questionable loyalties of JC. No doubt a lot of the stuff about him was made up, but even the stuff he's on record with isn't a good look for a potential PM.
Appreciate BoJo is questionable, racist some might say, but clearly the people are okay with that and not someone who may be an anti-semite and sympathetic towards over paramilitary organizations. I certainly do not expect perfect, but they can and must do better. Also anything that gets Owen Jones away from my TV screen the better, and that Sarkar idiot can go leap too.
Appreciate BoJo is questionable, racist some might say, but clearly the people are okay with that
not someone who may be an anti-semite
what??!?!?!?!?
I meant in regard to all the bluster in the press. Old Corbyn was hammered by the media at every turn, whereas Boris seemed to have got off very lightly. But both their public indiscretions are out there for all to see.
The public clearly preferred one over the other. So maybe next go around, find someone a little less of a target.
Whoever it is will get mauled and held to one-sided standards, verging on the immaculate conception by the predominately right-wing print media regardless.
if left wing people bought left wing newspapers there would be more choice
Even the most ardent right wing proprietor would keep a left wing paper going if it made him money and there would be other trying to take the market share
The public clearly preferred one over the other. So maybe next go around, find someone a little less of a target
#BackBurgon
People keep talking about 5 years of Tory rule until the next election but aren’t they going to repeal the FTPA so they aren’t forced to hold an election after a specific period, or have I misunderstood that?
but aren’t they going to repeal the FTPA so they aren’t forced to hold an election after a specific period
Yes, but unless there is some advantage to the Tories to have an early election, they won't bother. With that size of majority, I can't see things being bad enough in Parliamentary terms that it would happen.
Rebecca Long-Bailey is obviously Corbyn and MacDonalds choice and why they havent walked already. She is the MiniCorb in waiting, and they want to secure her in post.
As much as I like her I do worry that its just a repeat of the left wing of the party making the same mistakes. RLB quoted clause 4 at the labour party conference and said "It may not be on the back of our membership card any more but its in here" (pointing to heart). All good for the faithful but not really appealing to their lost voters?. And they will blame Brexit, The Press and scapegoat what moderates are left, because as Corbyn says they lost the election but "won the argument" so its ok, and not admit it was because as nice as they are they were to stuck on outdated class issues and didnt have the charisma to succeed.
Its all a bit 1983 really isnt it? When Michael Foot lost and they then made the same mistake of electing another left winger, Kinnock and it was only when he lost they moved back to the centre to appeal to a wider audience and elected John Smith.
I am not seeing any change of direction.
As much as I like her I do worry that its just a repeat of the left wing of the party making the same mistakes.
Does she have less baggage though? Let's face it, it wasn't policy that lost Labour the election.
Nope, it was Brexit and the leader. Brexit is no longer an issue (or won't be the same vote winner in 5 years time that is for sure) so 100% about popularity of leader.
I do expect the same mistakes to be made again though as this point will be completely missed.
Rebecca Long-Bailey would be the Labour Party's William Hague. Offering a fresh face but very little else to the electorate.
Rebecca Long-Bailey is obviously Corbyn and MacDonalds choice and why they havent walked already. She is the MiniCorb in waiting, and they want to secure her in post.
As much as I like her I do worry that its just a repeat of the left wing of the party making the same mistakes.
John Crace - the Guardian political sketch writer - was talking about Long Bailey on one of the regular Guardian podcasts and basically said that listening to her pretty much put him to sleep. I thought that was a bit brutal, so I went and checked a few videos of her on YouTube and I have to admit that he had a point.
Does she have less baggage though? Let’s face it, it wasn’t policy that lost Labour the election.
You think?
Nope, it was Brexit and the leader.
43% leader
17% brexit
12% economic policy
Personally I think the manifesto alone was enough to stop them winning. If Corbyn and Brexit had not been an issue scrutiny would have passed to the ludicrous manifesto which nobody believed. ...and if they did believe it, it was blown out of the water by the promise of another 58bn out of nowhere.
Does she have less baggage though?
If she is quoting clause4 then no. Still stuck in the old mould. Labour need to accept that their traditional approach is broken. Its not about traditional class divisions any more its about understanding frustrations and being able to offer solutions to appeal. Whether it be "Get Brexit done" or Scottish Nationalism. More than anything its about actually being in government to be able to do something.
It feels a little like this GE was the point to which Momentum and their dangerous identity politics game of division came utterly crashing down around their heads, problem is they’re so arrogant and deluded they can’t reflect on that and have taken to continuing to insult the voting populace, seems they like to partake in political self-harming.
Couldn't agree more. Momentum are a massive blocker outside of their own echo chamber.
If labour want to recapture lost votes and regions, they need to get shot.
andyrm agreed. Unfortunately Momentum don't see it this way. They think they have vibrantly captured peoples hearts.... 1983 all over.
RLB would be the wrong choice. Too attached to McDonnell, and without wanting to be sexist, she looks a bit odd and comes across a bit like Theresa May. I'll say it again, Rayner is the perfect candidate. An amazingly inspiring backstory, has a natural connection with northerners and the working classes, is passionate and combative, and she has just enough distance from Corbyn and McDonnell (widely regarded as 'soft left'), but not too much. The only thing missing is some intellectual rigour and a bit of diplomacy, but given her opponent I'm not sure that's necessary.
Nandy's good too, but where Rayner is too combative, she's the opposite. Also stained after her association with the anti-Corbyn coup so the membership will view her with suspicion. It's a recipe for more infighting. Rayner would be a good unity candidate as I hear very little negativity from the right about her (rayban doesn't count).
Personally, I’d exclude anyone from becoming Labour Leader for the following crimes:
Using the term “Working Class” it’s condensing, maybe if you used to work down t’ pit like Dennis Skinner, but if you’re a Public Educated London based career politician, no. From a purely electable point of view it’s completely toxic. We’ve gone like the Yanks, most people who have a job and their choice of consumer goods consider themselves Middle Class. We’re a Virtual Labour heartland but we’ve had more than a few threads on ‘class’ on STW, spoiler alert – most people on STW consider themselves Middle Class, apart from those who think the class system if pointless these days, or similarly only consider themselves Working Class because the ‘real’ class system is Working or Elite, there is no in between.
If you search “working class” on STW you’ll often find the work “rough” before it, or even used to describe poor, thick as mince Racists.
Using the term “Comrade” unironically. Comrade, really? Most voters grew up watching Film and TV when the Baddies were all Russian Communists who called each other Comrade. It puts people in mind of totalitarian communist states, exactly the sort of imagery the Tories use to discredit Labour.
Similarly “Labour Movement” most people want a decent Government who isn’t going to screw them over to make their friends rich, isn’t going to exploit us, is going to look after those who need it and once you’ve cracked all that, leave us alone. We don’t want a bunch of 6th Form Trotskyists controlling our lives.
Sad news. Probably confirms they're looking towards the one after next with Rayner at the helm.
https://twitter.com/GuardianHeather/status/1206599224214872065?s=20
The left wing labourites need to take a reality check, the UK is now too affluent for socialism. Very very few people want to share their stuff, nor pay a little more so others less fortunate may receive the welfare assistance and housing that they need to enable a healthy sense of self esteem and self worth.
It’s all rather ‘me, me, me’.
If labour are going to pursue a left wing socialist ideology, then they really have no connection with the contemporary society. In many ways, the Lib-dems should be the primary opposition party as they really do try to occupy the middle fence sitting ground, but somewhere along the line, they haven’t been able to connect with the electorate.
Sad news. Probably confirms they’re looking towards the one after next with Rayner at the helm
Lol - so with Rayner at the helm in 2025, we can finally look forward to a Labour government in 2030.
Maybe even 2035 - because no doubt they will keep Rayner for two terms like they did with comrade Corbyn.
Corbyn had less than 5 years don’t forget (he should have gone in 2017 in my opinion, but you can’t really claim he has had “2 terms”).
Anyway thought about it for long enough… I think…
Jess Phillips for PM.
Yvette Cooper for deputy leader.
One to raise the emotions of voters, the other for behind the scenes skill and experience. A team is needed to turn this around, not just one person.
Keep up the good work, P-Jay, you're getting closer to the heart of the problem with each post. put it all together and send it to Labour HQ.
Comrade is one I too find really irritating. In the country the term was originally hijacked by Marx and co., you hardly ever hear it unless someone is taking the piss or talking about history (google genosse, genossen). Yet time warp Labour keep it alive in Britain. Perhpas because they were never occupied by their comrades and been faced with living under sef-serving comrades.
The Long-Bailey rumours are just to get people to join Labour to vote against her, yes?
43% leader
17% brexit
12% economic policy
Not a chance. Those percentage bear no resembalance to what happened in the seats.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-results-2019-maps-breakdown-constituency/
(See blue diamond chart.)
"If you cannot see that the traditional Labour heartland in the old industrial and mining towns in the north deserted Labour for the Tories then you are blind.
And if you think that the almost 100 per cent correlation between the strength of the Leave vote and the change in seats in the heartlands is not meaningful then you lack analytical capacity (being polite).
To aggregate the vote for Labour, SNP, Liberal Democrats etc into a ‘Remain’ vote and then claim that the British people actually want to Remain rather than to Leave is just being part of the problem that caused Labour’s electoral demise.
Last Thursday, Britain held the ‘second’ referendum that all those smart-alec, urban, educated, cosmos were demanding, and which so perverted the Labour Party’s message to the people."
the traditional Labour heartland in the old industrial and mining towns in the north deserted Labour for the Tories
Indeed.
“I’m not voting for that man”
If you’ve been any where outside London and not heard this sentiment, repeatedly, it’s probably because people see your #JC4PM badge, and wisely avoid saying what they truly feel.
Last Thursday, Britain held the ‘second’ referendum that all those smart-alec, urban, educated, cosmos were demanding, and which so perverted the Labour Party’s message to the people.
No, it had an election instead. An election Labour could never win.
Using the term “Comrade” unironically. Comrade, really? Most voters grew up watching Film and TV when the Baddies were all Russian Communists who called each other Comrade. It puts people in mind of totalitarian communist states, exactly the sort of imagery the Tories use to discredit Labour.
Spot on. However, as well as the totalitarian states, it also puts people in mind of the ultimate cosplay commie.
This means it's far too easy to ridicule, even when there's decent substance being delivered. "Solidarity comrades", with a fist held high just makes you look, and sound like Citizen Smith.
Hilary Armstrong ought to know:
every day through the campaign, the current leadership offered more and more free stuff. It just didn’t add up.
The fact that people didn’t vote for loads more free stuff shows that voters understand the importance of their own activity in improving their lives. Being given everything is just unreal – they knew it would have to be paid for.
To aggregate the vote for Labour, SNP, Liberal Democrats etc into a ‘Remain’ vote and then claim that the British people actually want to Remain rather than to Leave is just being part of the problem that caused Labour’s electoral demise.
Even for the Johnson mouthpiece which is the Telegraph, that assertion is poor English and thought avoidance. More people voted for parties that wanted rem/ref than did for parties wanting Brexit. The fact we're nevertheless about to get Brexit tells you about our broken electoral system, not about any upsurge in brexitiness.
(Sure broken as it is, we still have to live with it. And it's about to be rigged rightwards as per Tory manifesto.)
If Labour really want to capture people's hearts and minds again then, based on what I saw and heard during the election campaign, Rebecca LB is the wrong answer. The staggering thing about all this is that the Labour hierarchy have not seen and understood this. Theresa May ran quite possibly the worst election campaign in living memory and still beat Jeremy Corbyn. The Conservative government for the past few years has been pretty much all at sea, it surely has been the biggest open goal in history and still they failed to win. For this campaign none of the parties managed to run a half way decent campaign, BoJo seemed to be doing his best to appear the least statesman like candidate of the lot and at the end of it still romped home. For the Labour leadership team to start questioning the media hate campaign against JC amongst other excuses just shows their delusion up for what it is. The trouble is that, for many people, it wasn't just JC. People like John McDonnell, Barry Gardiner and Dianne Abbott were equally desperate characters in the shit show. And yes, as others have said, the perception of the policies was just fantasy politics from the 70's and no real credibility. One of the most depressing elections I can remember
Agree every word, but I'd slightly quibble with:
The staggering thing about all this is that the Labour hierarchy have not seen and understood this.
IMHO Momentum fully understand their ideas won't win elections - they just don't care about the winning part.
Jon Lansman:
Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves
PS: Where's Binners?
Rebecca LB is the wrong answer.
I agree. She has zero emotional connection to normal people and comes across as another academic. Now that Rayner has ruled herself out (either at the behest of McDonnell, or because she think she has a better chance next time), the only other candidates who can do what she could are Nandy and Phillips. One of them is going to have to make way for the other to have a chance of beating RLB. Given the sad reality that anyone who isn't a naked self-promoter doesn't have a chance of being PM, and I hate to say this because I've never liked her, Phillips is probably the best bet, on the condition that Rayner or RLB is deputy. She could probably win too, all she has to do is extend a hand to the left and promise to retain the best of the Corbyn/McDonnell policies (broadband, green new deal, national education service, rail privatisation).
She'd also have a better chance if Binners put his money where his mouth is and joined up to vote for her instead of whining on the internet.
IMHO Momentum fully understand their ideas won’t win elections
FFS momentum aren't interested in winning elections because they're not a political party. They're no more than a policy pressure group/think tank like all the rest of them.
Bring back Binners!
Or at least stop slagging him off while he has no way of responding.
(broadband, green new deal, national education service, rail privatisation)
Phillips has already praised all of those post election, except the broadband part. While I think it is exactly what is needed, public provision of our data network that is, I fully expect any leader to drop it like a stone… the Nationalistion part of Labour’s policy book will be paired back by anyone wanting to show they’re not cloth eared… sadly… its scale was a turn off for so many voters.
IMHO Momentum fully understand their ideas won’t win elections – they just don’t care about the winning part
https://twitter.com/JeremyDuns/status/1206199245801476097?s=19
Kier Starmer is the only one that voters will be able to envisage as PM. All the others in the top team. No other solution will win back enough voters. I know he doesn’t wear a dress or speak northern, and he may have a bit of Brexit baggage but he is the only one who will win the respect of the press and the government front bench.
Kier Starmer is the only one that voters will be able to envisage as PM. All the others in the top team. No other solution will win back enough voters. I know he doesn’t wear a dress or speak northern, and he may have a bit of Brexit baggage but he is the only one who will win the respect of the press and the government front bench.
I agree. I'd vote for Starmer in a heartbeat. He's a serious public servant.
You don't need to be Northern to appeal to Northerners, just competent. Leadership transcends class and accents. (Churchill, Thatcher, Blair or pick your own examples)
Academic though, because RLB is the annointed one.
Competent isn’t enough. He’s one of few in the shadow cabinet that is 100% ready for high office… but not as PM. I’ve not changed my opinion of him, but this election has moved my opinion of what is needed to lead a party to a win and become PM.
Look at Johnson. Now talk about competence. Now talk about trust. Something more is needed.
I think 'power' is in fact a dirty word for Jeremy Corbyn. The powerful, in his mind, are by their very nature corrupt. His life's mission is to protest against those who have power. A Labour goverrnment led by him or those who think like him is impossible for this reason.
Corbyn's spent his life avoiding responsibility and sniping from the sidelines. There's no doubt that's his preffered role. He certainly wasn't expecting to win the leadership and wasn't that pleased when he did.
*But* as leader he has had a at least two wins. He's pretty much delivered a Brexit victory in the Ref because with such a narrow margin a serious remain Labour leader would certainly have won over the handful of votes required and Corbyn stopped that. Also united Ireland. That was unthinkable a few months ago, now it's looking plausible. So on two policy areas that he's been campaigning on for years Corbyn has had a decisive impact.
Competent isn’t enough. He’s one of few in the shadow cabinet that is 100% ready for high office… but not as PM. I’ve not changed my opinion of him, but this election has moved my opinion of what is needed to lead a party to a win and become PM.
Look at Johnson. Now talk about competence. Now talk about trust. Something more is needed.
I'd agree, what they really want is a Blair - someone with electoral stardust who is also a competent administrator. I'm not sure they have a candidate of that caliber.
But Boris's approval ratings are dire and his campaigning ability has turned out to be dire. So a capable genuine leader and a sane platform of conservative (small c) should give him a good chance IMHO. They have nobody better, that I'm aware of.
Academic because we're going to get RLB and she doesn't meet *any* of the criteria.
As I see it, the whole concept of a left wing party has become part of the problem. We are stuck in a two party polictical system and left and right are co-dependant. Labours very existance seems to further enable the Conservatives.
Working out how Labour can become re-electable over the next decade isn't the answer. It perpetuates the cyclical nature or worse, dooms us to many more terms of Tory rule. This country simply needs a much more representative parliament. We need the parties, candidates and electoral system to enable it.
Jenny Chapman who has just lost her seat has some good (imho) things to say this morning.
Selective quotes include:
Chapman an ally of Keir Starmer has ridiculed the idea that the next Labour leader must “have ovaries or a Northern accent”,
Ms Chapman added: “I didn’t lose my seat because Jeremy Corbyn is a man from north London.
“People in Darlington have just elected an MP whose party is led by an old Etonian from Islington, who speaks Latin! This Westminster media obsession with personalities misses the point entirely.”
So looks like Starmer could be standing.
Any candidate for the PM and Deputy PM roles proposed and supported by Corbyn, McDonnell, McCluskey, or Lansman or their acolytes should be automatically excluded from the contest. They have managed to create the biggest electoral disaster in Labour's history and more of the same with a different face will have the same or a worse outcome.
The political narrative in the country seems to have moved right to a degree and Labour need to reflect that with a more 'centrist' proposition. My choice would be Jess Phillips or Lisa Nandy, with a strong shadow cabinet of people such as Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper and David Lammy.
Labour also need to engage more effectively with the millions of small businesses, self-employed etc. which have been the growth area of employment rather than listen to the antiquated views of McCluskey who still hasn't moved on from the union heyday of the 1970s.
Labour will continue to fail if they pick another economic left winger. We've seen Russia and China, we're not them, it's not a post-war rebuild-the-country era, it's not the 1970s. Proles owning the means of production? Anyone with any kind of private pension already does
that. We don't want a glorious revolution. The country is generally rich enough that it doesn't need the constant promises of free stuff. Nationalisation of rail / water / electric / whatever may or may not win people over, mainly I think that is down to how they view the privatisation is working out, some countries have made it work, we mostly haven't. Economic left wing policies aren't what will win the election. Stealing 10% of industry didn't sound good. Super right wing free meerkat at all costs type policies don't quite seem to fit. So they should go mostly centrist, economically.
As for the other angles, I just don't know.
Nationalist or Globalist? I'd like to see a more outward looking leader in charge, the world is big and we need to fit into it and work with it. The elephant there is Brexit which is horrendously nationalist in all the wrong ways and the electorate voted for that. So I just don't know.
Socially, I'd like to see fairly liberal policies. The electorate in its great unwashed glory appears to be favouring a rather conservative outlook (argh, Brexit). So again, I don't know.
Blair was generally globalist and liberal. Maybe Labour probably need someone a bit like him (minus the megalomania and religious excuses for warmongering).
How's Starmer looking?
No beard - check.
Wears a suit - check.
Square jawed - check.
Sounds credible - check.
need to engage more effectively with the millions of small businesses, self-employed
This, times a lot.
+1 to the last 3 posts.
Starmer is the only credible candidate, the rest are little more than gobshites...
Not sexist just a fact.
Starmer is the only one that can recover the vote, the other suspects will only shout at the opposition.
With Starmer a 5 year recovery is possible, without him its 10 to 15
Starmer is the only credible candidate
Of the current shadow front bench, hes certainly the only one who at least looks and sounds like a statesman (or woman, obvs!). Can't help but feel that he, and the party, would be better served by keeping his powder dry and letting the cosplay commies burn themselves out in an orgy of idiocy, before coming in 18 months or so before the next GE with a far more conciliatory, appealing approach.
They're going to squabble like children for a while yet. Let them.
He can hold a conversation without rhetoric...
Doesn't use the term Comrade...
Actually has held a serious gov job...
Understands the legislative process...
Little or no baggage.
So no chance of him getting the job.
I agree Flashie, the problem is that Momentum / McCluskey dont think they have done anything wrong. Until they accept they are the problem, Labour will continue to fail. RLB will be leader for a long time sadly.