You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Keir Starmer favourite amongst the bookies. Is he your choice Binners?
I joined first time around to vote against Corbyn as I was pretty sure where it would lead*
Since then I know a lot of lifelong labour members who have left in despair at the state of the party and nobody who has joined.
But then I don’t know many sixth formers. My eldest daughter will be next year, studying politics, but she’s centre/left and thinks Corbyns a complete idiot too
I still hold out no hope. The common room PFJ will elect Rebecca Long Bailey, and as the favoured Corbynista sock-puppet she will continue the headlong march into the 1983 re-run of the political wilderness.
Irrelevance beckons
Cummings can’t believe his luck
* see the last two election results for confirmation of that
I think Jess Phillips would be brilliant. Exactly what the Labour Party needs.
Kier Starmer would be good too. As would Yvette Cooper
None of them have a cat in hells chance, obviously
Jeremy has spoken...
RLB Corbyn-approved sock-puppet it is
The next thumping Tory majority is already a done deal. All gift-wrapped
Cheers Momentum! You’ve played a blinder...
For the Tory’s
I voted for him twice
To be leader? That second time, you should have had the knowledge to understand the most likely consequences of your vote, and knew that the vast majority of MPs were saying he was useless in the role. Don’t expect the country to thank you for saddling them with the choices they had in front of them at 2019 elections.
Let go of the obsession, everyone else has moved on already.
Moved on? The Labour Party?! It might do. Here’s hoping for it… cheers!
Daz, Gen Z’ers are considered to be more right wing and conservative on balance than millennials, so if you are banking on them you are shit out of luck.
Lisa Nandy states the bleeding obvious
The left wing of the Labour Party has already decided to have a conversation with itself and to draw the conclusion that they were right all along and that they’d ‘won the argument’ (despite the worst loss since the 1930’s). They probably weren’t radical enough, right?
The ****ing electorate are all idiots anyway, and we just need to shout at them louder that they’re wrong.
Let’s nationalise veganism!
I got in a taxi today in Sheffield Binners, and for the first time - beside my Asian missus - had to put up with a racist tirade from a taxi driver on the way back from Meadowhall...who formerly voted labour but voted conservative this time because the Muslims were turning all the old pubs into Mosques. I had to resist garrotting the **** whilst he was driving.
Do you really reckon a bit more hardcore socialism is going to get those people back?
The battle lines have changed.
That’s kind of been my point all along.
This country will never vote for a socialist government. Never. Wouldn’t do in 1983, certainly won’t do it now. I don’t think we need any more proof of that
It’s glaringly obvious to anyone who’s spent much time outside Islington
Loads of people (like me) are self-employed and running small businesses, working in the gig economy and are looking at Len McClusky banging on about ‘collective bargaining’ like it’s 1973 and thinking “WTF are you even on about”?
Unfortunately that doesn’t describe anyone at the top of the present Labour Party, and I’m just waiting for the Cobynite Labour Party to draw the opposite conclusion and propose nationalising breakfasts and making it law that we all have to get around by space hopper
@kelvin don't you remember how badly the PLP acted? &then didn't have the courage to put someone decent against him. A big name might have had a chance. The PLP got it all the wrong way round, they should have backed him/ kept quiet til the election and (assuming the result was the same) then got rid. I would have voted against him after the first election even though he did ok.
He did ok? Faced with the total ineptitude of Theresa May and what is generally acknowledged as the worst election campaign in living history, he didn’t do quite as bad as everyone expected?
Brilliant!
What an achievement
He should have been long gone.
Merry Xmas Binners...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/24/labour-clean-break-jeremy-corbyn-dan-jarvis
Dan Jarvis going very heavy on the C word in that piece above which offers exactly zero solutions to the biggest problems today..
“There are some very simple things you have to do: you have to have a credible leader, you have to be credible when it comes to the economy and security, you have to have a manifesto programme that is credible and speaks about the challenges that the country faces. Those are the things we didn’t do in the most recent general election.”
Any of the usual suspects care to enlighten us to what 'credible' actually means apart from being an empty platitude? What's a 'credible' solution to climate change? What's a 'credible' solution to resource depletion? What's a 'credible' solution to poverty and inequality? The only opinions I'm hearing from the likes of Jarvis is how they can get back into power, not what they're going to do with it. And I'm pretty sure that's because, like before, they plan to do very little.
Seems pretty obvious to me that when politicians use the word 'credible', what they really mean is only being seen to be doing something, because they don't have the courage or conviction to stand up to the vested interests who would lose out if they really did want to tackle problems like climate change and poverty.
Any of the usual suspects care to enlighten us to what ‘credible’ actually means apart from being an empty platitude?
They’ve been telling you for years Dazh. You just choose not to listen.
Merry Christmas all!
Looking forward to 2020.
See you then.
Doesn't matter how credible it is if nobody wants it. Any plans to improve poverty and inequality don't go down well. The only party really trying to offer anything was Labour and most of the response to that was "where is the money coming from?"
That second time, you should have had the knowledge to understand the most likely consequences of your vote, and knew that the vast majority of MPs were saying he was useless in the role. Don’t expect the country to thank you for saddling them with the choices they had in front of them at 2019 elections.
As CTK says you have to remember that PLP were being obstructive from day one. They tried a coup, flung a bunch of muppets out as candidates and the membership voted for Corbyn, overwhelmingly, again. That should have been an end to it and they should have got down to making the best of it. Instead they dug in and continued to split the party along idealogical lines.
As for the rest blame me if you like but remember you're looking at it with the benefit of hindsight. That was 2016, this is now and a lot has happened since then. FWIW I don't particularly rate him these days but it was obvious at the time that sticking with the same folk wasn't working.
If we're talking demographics then 25-35 is where I've seen a lot of support. You know, the generation that grew up with Blairism and have seen where that road ended up going. Tories elected in by folk wanting the good times to keep rolling, a Labour party unelectable thanks to their toxic legacy and a subsequent decade of austerity, populism and lies that got us to where we are today. Maybe ask why folk are attracted to Corbyns politics rather than insulting them, have you learned absolutely nothing in the last few weeks?
dazh
Subscriber
Any of the usual suspects care to enlighten us to what ‘credible’ actually means apart from being an empty platitude?
It means "the candidate I personally want"
One of the better post-election analyses I’ve seen. Although I’m not sure what he’s getting at with the final point. Is he expecting the next labour govt to be Tory-lite as with Blair?
The only opinions I’m hearing from the likes of Jarvis is how they can get back into power, not what they’re going to do with it. And I’m pretty sure that’s because, like before, they plan to do very little.
"There was only one catch and that was Catch-STW, which specified that a concern for one own electability in the formation of a coherent policy platform automatically rendered that person unelectable in the eyes of the party faithful. As soon as a politician ceased to consider his or her electability, he or she became a viable leader, but not an electable one. Which in turn meant they were no longer a viable leader.'
Labour party unelectable thanks to their toxic legacy
The denial is strong with this one. Labour only became un-electable when they voted the wrong milliband in as leader, and the road, let's call it a dual carriage way with the labour left on one side and the tories on the other, all proceeded into heading in one direction that has lead to the destination we are at today.
The left wing of the Labour Party has already decided to have a conversation with itself and to draw the conclusion that they were right all along and that they’d ‘won the argument’
They do keep winning "moral victories".
I suspect that there are those on the left who are relatively happy with the recent election result...what better way to introduce disaster socialism, than after a five year bout of disaster capitalism which we are going to be getting? They would have to get elected first of course.
I suspect we will be seeing more moral victories in the future then.
@dazh that Guardian article is just so far off the mark it's hard to know where to start.
Front page of Saturday Guardian - Tom Watson claims he left parliament because of the brutality and hostility he experienced within the labour party.
Also blames poor organisation and messaging for labour's GE performance.
Critical of Corbyn's advisers but not, apparently, of the great leader himself.
Further interesting comment is that he voted for Owen Smith in last party leadership vote.
I thought Watson would be unequivocal when he decided to go public so I'm disappointed with his equivocation - maybe it's a way to avoid the flood of online criticism that would have resulted if he had been clear and direct in his comments.
No surprises there. That Guardian article is utter bollocks.
“The flood of online criticism”
?
Seriously?
The modern Labour Party is exactly the same as Mitant. Even the most cursory glance at social media will tell you that to criticise the glorious leader is to expose yourself to an endless volley of vindictive hatred from the grizzled old trots. If you’re female or Jewish, or both, then you’re really for it!
All the sane voices in the Labour Party (a lot of whom have just lost their seats anyway) will just quietly totter off - like Tom Watson - and leave the basket-case unelectable hard-left headbangers to get on with it. And who can blame them. Why expose yourself to that if you didn’t have too? And for what? Permanent opposition? Great!
The rest of us will just be left with permanent Tory rule
Yay!
Thanks for that.
Loved it in the 80’s. Living in the north west of England it was great! A real blast.
Can’t wait for another decade, or more, of it
Still... as long as you get to feel smug, pious and self-righteous, safe in the knowledge that they’re all absolutely, definitely right about absolutely everything, then that’s what really matters
Can't tell if your agreeing or not.
I was referring to the Guardian article Daz posted up as utter bollocks
If you refer to an absolute electoral arse kicking as a ‘moral victory’ then please do us all a favour and * off back to the common room and leave the politics to the grown ups.
imagined ‘moral victories’ count for * all other than permanent Tory rule.
How’s the self-righteousness feeling? Telling us all what’s best for us. Warm enough for you? Or do you need a bit more middle-class piousness?
Let's face it, Labour has become like a religious cult. Corbyn was always more concerned with being right than getting it right. Safe in the knowledge that when he finally gets to Marxist heaven and is met by comrade Paul at the pearly gates he'll go straight through, as his record of always saying the right thing will be un-blemished. Woe betide that he ever said anything pragmatic in his political past, lest he be held in purgatory whilst a committee meeting is set up to audit his political soul. Meanwhile he can look back at a real world that resembles a Hieronymous Bosch painting. His conscience will be clear though and that's the most important thing.
This thing with party membership electing party leaders is killing democracy.
Democracy is this thing where we can just about drag 2/3 of the electorate out to vote every four or five years, (with local elections for those explicitly concerned with local issues). Before, when elected MP's selected their party leaders, the result reflected the whole of the electorate as reflected in a general election result. Creating a special layer of democracy for only the few who are party members creates elites, the same can be said for the European parliament, where a tiny minority turn out to vote, those who are 'cleverer', 'more informed' and 'special' than the majority. (It also enables wronguns like Farage to have undue influence where they didn't have a hope of getting a seat in a general election)
This minority effect is what has lead us to see swings to the far right and far left with the two major parties. It's the biggest problem facing the Labour party right now. Appointing Ed Miliband, the man who introduced this mechanism to conduct an enquiry into what went wrong is beyond absurd.
What went wrong Ed?.....You did.
The rest of us will just be left with permanent Tory rule
It is what the country wants (via the current voting method) I have been interested in politics since 1979 when I was 11. My whole life has been living in a Tory country, the Blair years were better but he did a whole lot of stuff that could have come from Major or Cameron.
I think we just need to accept that it is a Tory country which was pretty much cemented during Thatcher years where the "I'm alright jack" state of mind ruled and has remained.
The Labour party have to appeal to that person so will need to offer what the Tories do and appear to throw away some of it's dreams and ideals to get into power and then smuggle them in when in power
To do that they need a Leader whose only goal is to win at any cost.
Tom Watson claims he left parliament because of the brutality and hostility he experienced within the labour party
And now he's training to be a fitness instructor. What a career change! He must be heartily sick of politics.
The left is in retreat across the whole world, it's not just UK politics
binners in reactionary rant shocker. I can never decide if it’s amusing or tedious. The Derek Hatton of the blairites.
The rest of us will just be left with permanent Tory rule
It is what the country wants
It isn't. The country wants a workable alternative to the Tories.
From which direction could it come?
It isn’t. The country wants a workable alternative to the Tories.
Why does the alternative have to be workable when the tory governments clearly aren't?
Most of the people in the country haven't got a ****ing clue what they want but the tories/media are good at convincing them
Binners - with passionate people like you rooting for the Labour party I'm honestly amazed* they never did better in the election.
The denial is strong with this one. Labour only became un-electable when they voted the wrong milliband in as leader
Ed wasn't in charge in 2010.
Besides, St David was a Blairite and the press would have used that against him in 2015, why you think otherwise is beyond me.
Interesting that you point that out though, yes, the PLP DID vote for the wrong person as they had plenty of times before and yet two times the membership got a say and it was toys out prams.
*I'm not.
Happy new year comrades!!!! 😂
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1211941180587544581?s=21
How’s it feel to be ‘The Resistance’? It all sounds very exciting and revolutionary, doesn’t it? Life on ‘The Front Line’.
It’ll all look great on T-Shirt slogans too! Maybe a nice red one, paired with some ironic US desert camo combat trousers, like the ones they wore in Iraq?
To the barricades, brothers and sisters! Break out the AK-47’s Internet petitions!
You couldn’t make it up! Though I dearly wish somebody had 🙄
Binners, are you still a party member?
Are you involved with your local branch, trying to make a difference?
I ask because you are a prolific poster on threads involving the labour party - usually offering criticisms with a side order of sneering.
Anyone can pay a few £/month but, if that's the limit of their activism, nothing is going to change.
Your posts increasingly suggest someone standing outside shouting at the moon; lots of noise but pointless.
Joined the party specifically to vote against Corbyn (a lot of us knew how unfit for leadership he was and how this would end up), left in despair (like so many non-corbynites), now re-joined to vote against whichever unelectable, hopeless clown that Magic Grandad, Len and Seamas favour anointing.
As for involvement- I’ve done quite a bit of design work over the years for the local Labour Party, both for my former Labour MP (who just lost his seat by 100 votes - we’ve now got a Tory) election campaigns, Andy Burnhams mayoral campaign and for the local labour councillors in their campaigns
But I don’t sign enough internet petitions, or have enough interest in Venezuelan politics to be truly classed as one of ‘The Resistance’.
Once Corbz has gone you'll be ok though right bins? It was Corbz that was the problem more than his policies right?
I assume you voted against him in the first leadership contest because of him not the policies (which as i remember were good at the time, not the OTT wish list from this election).
In the second leadership contest Owen Smith promised to keep same policies as they were popular.
I have absolutely zero optimism when it comes to the future of the Labour Party. I see Ian Lavery is being mentioned. Seriously... Ian ****ing Lavery! The man who was responsible for a ‘magic money tree wish-list’ election manifesto that delivered a thumping great Tory majority. A 1970’s throwback that makes Len McClusky look like David Beckham
Then I look at the people running the party and making the decisions and thought.... of course that’s what they’ll do. They’ll stitch it up ‘elect’ another dinosaur like Ian Lavery to lead them further out onto the electoral wilderness. In fact I’m now going to stick a tenner on them doing just that!
Because listening to Corbyn and those around him since the election, they’ve learnt absolutely nothing other than, apparently they ‘won the argument’
You ‘won the argument’? Really?!
I’d hate to see what losing one looks like 😳
In which case the Labour Party is truly finished as anything other than a fringe protest group. Which I’m sure a lot of them are quite happy with, as that’s their comfort zone and the limit of both their ambition and their capability.
Sixth form placard-wavers and trade-union tinpot emperors
Your posts increasingly suggest someone standing outside shouting at the moon; lots of noise but pointless.
But don't forget the hilarious images, lots of noise and hilarious images.
The rest of us will just be left with permanent Tory rule
It is what the country wants
This times a gazillion.
The public have made it clear that they are happiest to recreate Upstairs Downstairs, tugging thir forelocks when the Eton boys come to town abd burying their children died of consumption. So let 'em have it.
Er... no. Only 43% of 'The Public' (or at least the 2/3 of the electorate who bothered to vote) endorsed the mendacious self-serving narcissist. The big problem we have is our 'democratic' system that is about to be further rigged in the Tory's favour. (I note that some in the Labour party are now pushing PR; shame they didn't do that in 2008.)
The public have made it clear that they are happiest to recreate Upstairs Downstairs, tugging thir forelocks when the Eton boys come to town abd burying their children died of consumption.
Almost nobody was "happy" to vote Tory in the last two elections. Boris's approval ratings were as bad as Mays. People just chose the lesser of two evils:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/23/tory-boris-johnson-labour
Any Labour leadership since and including Kinnock would have won comfortably in 2017 and 2019 against a lame duck Tory party on it's knees.
The Tory's weren't popular, Momentum/Corbyn are un-electable and the Manifesto was economically illiterate nonsense. People reluctantly voted Tory or voted for parties like the Lib Dems and SNP knowing that would likely stop a Labour win.
So let ’em have it.
You're happy with that, momentum are happy with that. A lot of people aren't.
(I note that some in the Labour party are now pushing PR; shame they didn’t do that in 2008.)
If we adopt PR then Momentum-esqe ideological purity will have to be sacrificed in compromises. If Momentum are going to sacrifice ideological purity anyway why not just hand the party back to the centrists right now and let Labour win majorities under FPTP?
Zero chance of PR under any government which has won a decent majority under FPTP. For the last 10 years the main advantage of FPTP (majority governments) had evaporated and nobody said a word about PR, very hard to make the case now FPTP has just produced a majority government. Can't see the SNP buying it either. PR would cost them 20 seats.
I'd have thought another 10 years in the future of no majority or tiny majority would make PR look very tempting but I thought that since 2015 when it became clear majorities had become difficult to achieve and there wasn't a peep about it.
I think it is more that they are happy with what they are told to be happy with, which is sort of the same thing.
The big problem we have is our ‘democratic’ system that is about to be further rigged in the Tory’s favour.
How?
Boundary review? Are the civil servants doing it corrupt?
Voter ID? You need it to vote at your CLP for internal Labour party issues
Any other way?
He’s back, with the same talking points!
Civil servants do what they are briefed to do… if that is to “equalise” the population size of constituencies, and/or to reduce the number of them… all previous attempts to do so have been analysed as to bake in further advantage to the Conservative party under FPTP.
Voter ID isn’t needed for a General Election, as in person voter fraud is not an issue in Scotland, England and Wales, and would introduce an unnecessary extra step to be able to vote for those who don’t drive or travel abroad. Why introduce it? A five minute analysis about how it has been used in the USA, by people with strong links to those now running the Conservative Party, might offer up some ideas. Go do so.
He’s back, with the same talking points!
Yep, same allegations that the system is being rigged
all previous attempts to do so have been analysed as to bake in further advantage to the Conservative party under FPTP.
References? I would suggest that any pre December 2019 analysis might well be overtaken by events.
What are your alternative proposals for evening up constituency sizes?
, as in person voter fraud is not an issue in Scotland, England and Wales,
The implication is that in person voter fraud is an issue in CLPs in England, Scotland, and Wales. Otherwise why the requirement to have voter ID?
As for electoral fraud, there are clearly better techniques https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tower-hamlets-to-tackle-voterigging-with-photographic-entry-system-a4058746.html
I'm sad to see that Richard Burgon has decided to not go for the top job, his announcement as a candidate for deputy leader belies his obvious talent. #BackBurgon
The question is will be declare a preference for the new leader?
https://labourlist.org/2019/12/richard-burgon-announces-deputy-leadership-bid/
big_n_daft
Member
The implication is that in person voter fraud is an issue in CLPs in England, Scotland, and Wales. Otherwise why the requirement to have voter ID?
You know perfectly well what a straw man that is- of course you have to prove membership before voting in a members-only election. It's the same for CAMRA.
You know perfectly well what a straw man that is- of course you have to prove membership before voting in a members-only election. It’s the same for CAMRA.
It goes beyond having a membership card, they require additional photo ID
https://order-order.com/2019/10/25/labour-voter-id-hypocrisy/
Don't think CAMRA go that far....
big_n_daft
Member
It goes beyond having a membership card, they require additional photo ID
And? Carrying a membership card is proof that you have a membership card.
Comparing how you operate a small closed membership organisation to a national election with a regulated electoral roll is ridiculous. and you know that.
Comparing how you operate a small closed membership organisation to a national election with a regulated electoral roll is ridiculous.
If it's important to make sure the voting within a party is kosher it must be equally or more important to ensure voting in an election is.
Most countries require ID, seems to be best practice worldwide:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_Identification_laws
Outofbteath nothing is perfect so in these cases we have to pick the route of greater fairness.
In the case of ID for GEs - there is no evidence of any voter fraud of any significance whatsoever at polling stations, but there is a real issue for people turning out to vote. Putting another barrier to voting which will disproportionately affect particular demographics in response to a virtual non-problem would seem to fail the route of most fairness test.
Also this is a bit of a deviation for this thread
Comparing how you operate a small closed membership organisation to a national election with a regulated electoral roll is ridiculous. and you know that.
Small? I thought there were 500,000 members?
There will be good reasons for the requirements, I imagine the conservatives will have to do the same soon if they don't already.
Bearing in mind that to vote you just need the name address and the nearest polling station to be able to vote. Labour CLP require a membership card and photo ID/utility bill with matching address.
Which is why people are questioning the hyperbole.
I agree in person fraud is probably very low, postal votes are easier for that, and obviously there are shenanigans at the count etc.
Edit - off topic post -
There is no opportunity for shenanigans at a GE or LE count.
Tower Hamlets appear to disagree
Anyway back on topic.
Anyone think a Starmer leader, Burgon deputy leader has a Father Ted/Dougal or Blackadder/ Baldrick vibe to it?
More detail on the polling...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/01/poll-of-labour-members-suggests-keir-starmer-is-first-choice
K. Starmer: 31%
R. Long Bailey: 20%
J. Phillips: 11%
Y. Cooper: 7%
C. Lewis: 7%
E. Thornberry: 6%
L. Nandy: 5%
Encouraging. On the face of it the Labour party could sort itself out as quickly as it broke itself.
As I understand it the unions like to nominatate the candidate they think will win so topping the polls makes nomination much easier.
Amusing that the conclusion of the membership is "Binners was right all along.". 🙂 (On the basis of that poll.)
Mind you, reversing Momentum's rule changes might be tricky or impossible.
Whoever they pick as leader they need to have a claus to reassess within 12 months to see if that leader is actually popular with the masses. If they are not they pick another leader and give them a go for 12 months.
Don't repeat the mistake that was made with Corbyn. While he was doing okay for the first year or so it was clear he was not doing okay after losing the May election. Most people knew that (including himself I would imagine) but he stayed in post anyway.
If for example Starmer hasn't appealed to people within 12 months then no point going on for another 3 or 4 years and losing another election for Labour.
My view is that Starmer is not the right person.
If for example Starmer hasn’t appealed to people within 12 months then no point going on for another 3 or 4 years and losing another election for Labour.
The only electoral test will be the local elections, So he gets one chance?
My view is that Starmer is not the right person.
None of the candidates are without their issues, it's arguably a "least worst" choice based on your preferred direction for labour, i.e. continuity Corbyn or not
While he was doing okay for the first year or so
😀
He was a total disaster from the first fortnight - especially in the first fortnight! It was obvious he'd be a disaster from before he even took over, that's why people who wanted to sabotage Labour were joining to vote for him.
Don't agree. He brought the party back to the direction it should be taking and was actually popular for a while. That clearly waned and at that point he should have pass it over to another leader.
The only electoral test will be the local elections, So he gets one chance?
No. Use polling, focus groups, media success or failure etc,. continually over the 12 months. Treat it like something you actually want to win rather than just seeing what happens in a few years time.
None of the candidates are without their issues, it’s arguably a “least worst” choice based on your preferred direction for labour, i.e. continuity Corbyn or not
It is not about issues, it is about who would be popular with the idiots who get to vote. I personally would choose Starmer but I realise to most of the voters he is another faceless politician.
Mind you, reversing Momentum’s rule changes might be tricky or impossible.
Momentum don't have rule.
No. Use polling, focus groups, media success or failure etc,. continually over the 12 months. Treat it like something you actually want to win rather than just seeing what happens in a few years time.
Who makes the decision he has done enough?
Do conference, the NEC or other policy making bodies take any responsibility?
He brought the party back to the direction it should be taking and was actually popular for a while.
Continuity Corbyn then
I personally would choose Starmer but I realise to most of the voters he is another faceless politician.
I don't agree. He's a 'Sir' and his past employment plays right in to what the public seem to want. I need to see a bit more of him to be convinced but his past plays right in to what the public subconsciously want in a way Corbyn never could. In the same way I don't think a black or female candidate would stand a chance unless they were so central they may as well be Tory.
It is not about issues, it is about who would be popular with the idiots who get to vote.
You are Emily Thornberry and I claim my £5
Sorry that was allegedly "stupid", subject to the resolution of the court proceedings
It is not about issues, it is about who would be popular with the idiots who get to vote. I personally would choose Starmer but I realise to most of the voters he is another faceless politician.
I disagree. Comedians like Corbyn and Boris are found out immediately - both have terrible approval ratings.
Starmer is a serious credible public servant who the electorate will see as a breath of fresh air compared to Boris/Corbyn. I'd agree he's no Thatcher, Blair or even a Cameron but against Boris he won't need to be, just competent.
The electorate never asked for the era of "Unpopularism" and we'll all be glad to see the back of it.
Okay, see you in 5 years time and hope you are right (you are not)
Sorry that was allegedly “stupid”, subject to the resolution of the court proceedings
So you think the average voter is not an idiot? Those people that voted in a large Tory majority based on the crap they have done for the last 9 years having a negative affect on most of those people who voted for them?
Sometimes you just need to face the facts and accept the average person who is allowed to vote is not bright, not that bothered about politics and will vote with no knowledge or analysis. That is who you need to appeal to as the leader.
Those people that voted in a large Tory majority based on the crap they have done for the last 9 years having a negative affect on most of those people who voted for them?
It wasn't based on popularity of the Torys and "the crap they have done" at all. People voted Tory because Labour went mental and walked away from the electorate:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/23/tory-boris-johnson-labour
A cynic might say you want another Corbynite Labour Leader and the only way you can make that case is by claiming that mental leaders are likely to win. The opposite is true.
He was a total disaster from the first fortnight – especially in the first fortnight! It was obvious he’d be a disaster from before he even took over, that’s why people who wanted to sabotage Labour were joining to vote for him.
Agreed, if he started well it was before he was actually leader, he was the rank outsider for the job, only thrown in to appease the Hard Left of the Party, who kept making the cut.
His short golden era was not losing nearly as badly as was expected during the 2017 GE.
So you think the average voter is not an idiot?
That is correct.
What surprises me is all the incredibly intelligent people on the left who think the voters are idiots are unable to convince said idiots of the errors of their way and to get them to vote for them.
Sometimes you just need to face the facts and accept the average person who is allowed to vote is not bright, not that bothered about politics and will vote with no knowledge or analysis. That is who you need to appeal to as the leader.
It's almost as if the new Labour leader needs a sixth sense, you know, "I see thick people"
What surprises me is all the incredibly intelligent people on the left who think the voters are idiots are unable to convince said idiots of the errors of their way and to get them to vote for them.
Yup, the electorate is pushing 70 million. By definition voters are, on average, not idiots, they are the average intelligence for the UK. In fact half of them are above average intelligence. Weird how Labour failed to win all of the above average intelligence over.
About 2/3rds of people didn't vote Labour last time and Labour have spend the last few weeks calling them (amongst other things) idiots. I'm not sure that strategy is going to win people back to the Labour fold. (Even if a moderate wins the leadership, which is far from certain.)
It’s almost as if the new Labour leader needs a sixth sense, you know, “I see thick people”
Labour's 2024 campaign slogan writes itself: "You're all thick, now vote for me!"
as to bake in further advantage to the Conservative party under FPTP
Labour can win FPTP quite easily; they just need a leader with credibility and electability.
Any PR changes are desperate straw-clutching to try and backdate a win for Jezza, rather than looking at what the landscape is and working with it.
Labour can win FPTP quite easily; they just need a leader with credibility and electability.
Any PR changes are desperate straw-clutching to try and backdate a win for Jezza, rather than looking at what the landscape is and working with it.
Agree, FPTP doesn't impede the Labour party in any way at all, FPTP is bad for small parties not big ones. The problem for Labour is Leadership/Momentum.
However, I think while the Scottish Seats go in a block to the SNP it will be harder to get a workable majority than in the past and that, depending on how long it goes on, will make FPTP pretty pointless. If the chaos of coalitions and small majority governments become the norm we might as well just have PR.
oob - you have overstated size of electorate by about 22 million.
UK population is c67 million; electorate c48 million.