New Labour Leader (40 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

Blair wasn't a socialist. I accept both wings of the party have to compromise and find some common ground. Blair went too far right as far as im concerned.

I really hope Starmer can find a common ground for all, however, there are people, on both sides, now so entrenched in their position they will never compromise.

Oh no I totally agree. Blair has an awful lot to answer for, but my point is there wasn’t a visceral reaction to the word like there is now.

I think Blair was too fiscally conservative and bought into the narrative too much, I think if there hasn’t been the GFC Brown would’ve corrected that quite a bit. Blair was also obsessed with making public services like private industry to a fault. While some reforms were good, many were ideological and made things worse. Target culture, making services compete, making everything a graduate job, etc.

Starmer is pretty left wing by most standards, I think he might end up disappointing a few on the right. But Corbyns big mistake was not realising that the right of the party are the closest to the public on a lot of things and making the most of that. Reeves comments about not being the party of people on benefits may make lefties cringe but it’s music to most voters ears who do think we are the party of layabouts, immigrants, and terrorists.

 

---

[Skybluefaz]

Over the moon Starmer is the new leader. Electable, working class, not Corbyn.

 

[shmmeee]

Sir Keir Starmer – 275,780 (56.2%)

Rebecca Long-Bailey – 135,218 (27.6%)

Lisa Nandy – 79,597 (16.2%)

First round win, no need for second prefs. Disappointed Nandy was so low in the end.

Rayner won deputy as well haven’t seen numbers.

 

[shmmeee]

Really not sure how anyone can call this list of policies right wing, even just in the context of the Labour Party:

• Economy: An increase to income tax for the top 5% of earners, a reversal of Tory cuts in corporation tax, and a clamp down on tax avoidance, particularly of large corporations
• Social issues: Abolish Universal Credit, set a national goal for wellbeing to make health as important as GDP, investment into preventative science, support the abolition of tuition fees, investment in “lifelong learning”, and protection from the NHS
• Climate change: Continuing Labour’s plans for a “green new deal”, introducing a clean air act to tackle pollution, and demanding international action on climate rights
• Human rights: “No more illegal wars”, introduction of a Prevention of Military Intervention Act, putting human rights “at the heart of foreign policy”, reviewing of UK arms sales
• Common ownership: Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water, end outsourcing in the NHS, local government and justice system.

(Those are from Starmer to be clear, some of them (nationalise Mail) are further left than I am!)

 

[Ian1779]

Oh no I totally agree. Blair has an awful lot to answer for, but my point is there wasn’t a visceral reaction to the word like there is now.

I think Blair was too fiscally conservative and bought into the narrative too much, I think if there hasn’t been the GFC Brown would’ve corrected that quite a bit. Blair was also obsessed with making public services like private industry to a fault. While some reforms were good, many were ideological and made things worse. Target culture, making services compete, making everything a graduate job, etc.

Starmer is pretty left wing by most standards, I think he might end up disappointing a few on the right. But Corbyns big mistake was not realising that the right of the party are the closest to the public on a lot of things and making the most of that. Reeves comments about not being the party of people on benefits may make lefties cringe but it’s music to most voters ears who do think we are the party of layabouts, immigrants, and terrorists.

Yours was the comment about the British public being leftish economically but rightish in terms of justice etc?

 

[Ian1779]

It’s already started....

 

[clint van damme]

Oh no I totally agree. Blair has an awful lot to answer for, but my point is there wasn’t a visceral reaction to the word like there is now.

I think Blair was too fiscally conservative and bought into the narrative too much, I think if there hasn’t been the GFC Brown would’ve corrected that quite a bit. Blair was also obsessed with making public services like private industry to a fault. While some reforms were good, many were ideological and made things worse. Target culture, making services compete, making everything a graduate job, etc.

Starmer is pretty left wing by most standards, I think he might end up disappointing a few on the right. But Corbyns big mistake was not realising that the right of the party are the closest to the public on a lot of things and making the most of that. Reeves comments about not being the party of people on benefits may make lefties cringe but it’s music to most voters ears who do think we are the party of layabouts, immigrants, and terrorists.

The problem I have with centrists, is that when your debating Blair with them and bring up the Iraq war they raise an eyebrow and say here we go again!

We're not talking about a misguided hike in council tax we're talking about the biggest foreign policy disaster of my life time based on lies and misinformation that set the world alight in cahoots with the republican.party.
How can you compromise with people who are so ambivalent to such a seismic event?
Everything else he did, good and bad, pales in to insignificance after that.

 

[shmmeee]

Yours was the comment about the British public being leftish economically but rightish in terms of justice etc?

Soft left economically and authoritarian/communitarian/small c conservative (take your pick) on social issues yeah.

Have a look at this graph, even Tory voters are left of centre in the grand scheme of things.



Paula Surridge does some great stuff of values of voters and what sort of voter Labour are attracting.



I think a massive mistake modern Labour supporters Make is conflating economic and social issues. By calling authoritarian views right wing they basically handed half the country to the Tories. There’s nothing stopping left wing people being authoritarian (hate that word because of its connotations prefer communitarian), in fact generally they are. They want more control over the economy and people’s actions. Just like libertarians tend to be right wing economically. The number of left wing liberals is quite small and focused in university towns. It’s basically the Lib Dem vote, yet under Corbyn we decided anyone outside that space wasn’t good enough to vote for us.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

So for the benefit of my ignorance- what does Starmer stand for?

On the scale of, say, Corbyn at the left and Blair in the middle, where does he slot in?

 

[fernandopartridge]

So for the benefit of my ignorance- what does Starmer stand for?

On the scale of, say, Corbyn at the left and Blair in the middle, where does he slot in?

He's got nice hair which is about the depth of analysis the masses of centrist punditry get into

 

[Ring Of Steel]

He's got nice hair which is about the depth of analysis the masses of centrist punditry get into

lol, fair enough.

Does he have any chance at all? I saw the media have already gone after him.

 

[shmmeee]

The problem I have with centrists, is that when your debating Blair with them and bring up the Iraq war they raise an eyebrow and say here we go again!

We're not talking about a misguided hike in council tax we're talking about the biggest foreign policy disaster of my life time based on lies and misinformation that set the world alight in cahoots with the republican.party.
How can you compromise with people who are so ambivalent to such a seismic event?
Everything else he did, good and bad, pales in to insignificance after that.

What good does it do though? The anti war movement was lead from within the party, we had cabinet members quitting to lead marches.

It was bad, really bad, but what good is there in constantly bringing it up? Do you hear the Tories banging on about Black Wednesday all the time or whatever?

 

[shmmeee]

So for the benefit of my ignorance- what does Starmer stand for?

On the scale of, say, Corbyn at the left and Blair in the middle, where does he slot in?

Read his policy positions I posted up before. Pre a Corbyn he’d had been easily “the left wing candidate” maybe on the left of the soft left. He’s further left than Milliband. I’d order the last few leaders right to left as: Blair >>>>>>>>>Brown>>Milliband>>Starmer>>>>>Corbyn

 

[fernandopartridge]

What good does it do though? The anti war movement was lead from within the party, we had cabinet members quitting to lead marches.

It was bad, really bad, but what good is there in constantly bringing it up? Do you hear the Tories banging on about Black Wednesday all the time or whatever?

That is a fair point. Labour beats itself up over the Iraq war more than the opposition does (because perhaps they recognise they all voted for it anyway)

 

[skybluetony176]

He spoke very well in his acceptance speech. Maybe he’ll be the right balance between New Labour and old and bring us the type of socialism that all the happiest countries in the world enjoy, something akin to the Nordic model. Here’s hoping. I think Lisa Nandy would have bridged that void the best but I’m hopeful Kier Starmer will rise to the challenge. Hopefully he’ll offer Lisa Nandy a senior place on the shadow cabinet, she’ll certainly bring quality to it.

 

[clint van damme]

What good does it do though? The anti war movement was lead from within the party, we had cabinet members quitting to lead marches.

It was bad, really bad, but what good is there in constantly bringing it up? Do you hear the Tories banging on about Black Wednesday all the time or whatever?

But there are sections of the party who are dismissive of it and who would welcome Blair back
That's dangerous. And the same people call the 'Corbynista' a cult.

I have grave doubts about these people reaching out across the divide. I accept there are people on the other side equally as entrenched.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Read his policy positions I posted up before. Pre a Corbyn he’d had been easily “the left wing candidate” maybe on the left of the soft left. He’s further left than Milliband. I’d order the last few leaders right to left as: Blair >>>>>>>>>Brown>>Milliband>>Starmer>>>>>Corbyn

So basically he’s got no chance and has 5 years to change perceptions and/or somehow get the public to stop being led further to the right.

 

[Grendel]

He's got nice hair which is about the depth of analysis the masses of centrist punditry get into

He used moisturiser as well

 

[shmmeee]

So basically he’s got no chance and has 5 years to change perceptions and/or somehow get the public to stop being led further to the right.

It’s a funny old game politics. I can see a situation where Corbyn has his “change” thunder stolen by Brexit and Starmer has his “normality” thunder stolen by the pandemic.

Don’t think it’ll happen though. Really hope that one good thing about this pandemic will be people turning away from loud mouths and towards experts again.

What might be hard is in four years fighting a Tory party that’s funding the NHS, nationalised the railways and after this probably gone on a drive to better compensate key workers. All while borrowing shit tons to invest.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

You realise it’s unearned privilege that left wing people don’t like? Just Johnson and Rees-Mogg have. Talentless weirdos who fell into a pot of money at birth and don’t have to work for it?

Working class kids who rise to QC is kinda our thing.

What next Baz? Labour hates people who help others and aren’t racist? Have you had the parties mixed up this entire time?

One which can be declined if one doesn't like, accept or respect the process of selection

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Let's be honest, you'd criticise any of the choices.

No I wouldn't. Not even criticising him in saying it's ironic am I?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[SkyblueBazza]

It was in recognition of services to the legal profession wasn’t it?

I don’t see the problem - it’s not an inherited title - again they need to pick a leader that ticks core competencies and at least he does that in areas Corbyn would always look second best

It is the irony of those who despise the process for selection for knighthood & hold it against pretty much any Tory or LD will find his knighthood perfectly reasonable

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[SkyblueBazza]

He spoke very well in his acceptance speech. Maybe he’ll be the right balance between New Labour and old and bring us the type of socialism that all the happiest countries in the world enjoy, something akin to the Nordic model. Here’s hoping. I think Lisa Nandy would have bridged that void the best but I’m hopeful Kier Starmer will rise to the challenge. Hopefully he’ll offer Lisa Nandy a senior place on the shadow cabinet, she’ll certainly bring quality to it.

Let us hope he does rise to the challenge. He is certainly eloquent and intelligent enough to present policies in perhaps a more acceptable (to the masses) way. Just needs to work towards the ideals rather than spout them from the off to more get people onside imo

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

One which can be declined if one doesn't like, accept or respect the process of selection

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Why should a lad that’s worked his way up to that level turn it down? Not all left wing people are anti-honours, most think they should go to working class kids done good and those who aid their community and not mates of politicians. You’re trying hard to find something that just isn’t there. He worked hard, got to the top, and got recognised for it. I thought all parties would be behind that.

 

[Philosoraptor]

I think it was safe to say he was the best candidate in the field but the field was absolutely poor.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Why should a lad that’s worked his way up to that level turn it down? Not all left wing people are anti-honours, most think they should go to working class kids done good and those who aid their community and not mates of politicians. You’re trying hard to find something that just isn’t there. He worked hard, got to the top, and got recognised for it. I thought all parties would be behind that.

That is the very irony I am talking about though isn't it? Just because someone is a wealthy donor to the Tory party shouldn't preclude them from the honours list either. It's more about the impact of the work they do. Arguably though, NHS A&E Dr saving scores of lives over a short space of time is much more worthy of a QC who is good at his job.
Personally, I think the whole honours thing is another extremely outdated & pointless display of some weird power trip or something.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

This is why I voted Nandy, he has a lot of work to win over more conservative Labour voters. I’m not sure a FBPE strategy will work.

 

[shmmeee]

That is the very irony I am talking about though isn't it? Just because someone is a wealthy donor to the Tory party shouldn't preclude them from the honours list either. It's more about the impact of the work they do. Arguably though, NHS A&E Dr saving scores of lives over a short space of time is much more worthy of a QC who is good at his job.
Personally, I think the whole honours thing is another extremely outdated & pointless display of some weird power trip or something.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Every QC gets it, they’re Queens Council, of course the Queen honours them. It’s just part of the job. I’m not sure bunging the Tory party £2m for a lifetime “job” in the Lords is in the same sport, let alone league as becoming QC because you’re good at your job, not to mention basically running the prosecution service for the country.

One is merit based, one is not. That’s the crux of the argument.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Every QC gets it, they’re Queens Council, of course the Queen honours them. It’s just part of the job. I’m not sure bunging the Tory party £2m for a lifetime “job” in the Lords is in the same sport, let alone league as becoming QC because you’re good at your job, not to mention basically running the prosecution service for the country.

One is merit based, one is not. That’s the crux of the argument.

You demonstrate my point perfectly. Rich person works hard to make or continue to build upon a fortune is good & worthy...until he donates to Tory party coffers.

How warped

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 5849]

You demonstrate my point perfectly. Rich person works hard to make or continue to build upon a fortune is good & worthy...until he donates to Tory party coffers.

How warped

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

What?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

This is quite simple. Earn a title, fine. Buy or inherit a title, not fine.

It's not a complex argument!

 

[fernandopartridge]

Let us hope he does rise to the challenge. He is certainly eloquent and intelligent enough to present policies in perhaps a more acceptable (to the masses) way. Just needs to work towards the ideals rather than spout them from the off to more get people onside imo

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The masses have just accepted massive public investment, it was never a case of the policies being unacceptable it was stupid berks like you needing somebody in a smart suit to assure you it was the right thing to do

 

[Johnnythespider]

Let me start by saying my politics are firmly on the left. I believe in nationalised water, rail, electricity and broadband infrastructure. I believe in mass social housing being built, strong unionised workplaces, high minimum wage, generous benefits to the point of UBI and taxing the crap out of the overly rich. I don’t believe in competition in public services and I’d rather we made peace than war generally speaking. I want health and education and social care free at the point of need for all ages and backgrounds.

But the fact is there just isn’t the talent on the left in the PLP and putting people there because of their faction the last five years has lead left wing ideas to become a laughing stock. We are probably further from implementing socialist ideals than we ever were under Blair because Corbyn has made them toxic to the country same as Foot did.

We need to correct now and that means professionalism and competence but it also means meeting the voters half way.

I’m a socialist because I want the average working man to get a better deal. The fact is the average working man despises benefit cheats as he works hard, despises crime and wants criminals cracked down on, and loves his country.

Corbyn didn’t come across as understanding any of this and we will need to overcorrect. That combined with the fact that the left haven’t been cultivating talent will mean the SC probably trends further to the right of the party. Right now I’m fine with that as winning is most important. In the mean time the left need to reflect on what they learned from being in charge and I’d argue number one is find professional competent left wing politicians and grooms them for cabinet, don’t just hang out at rallies with your mates whining about centrists.

The problem here is none of the "talented centrists" would work with Corbyn despite his overwhelming victory in the leadership contest, how do we get the policies you mention, which i am also an exponent of, implemented if politicians don't listen to the membership, for what it's worth i voted for Starmer and am hoping he can make at least some of your ideas policies that people take seriously.

 

[shmmeee]

You demonstrate my point perfectly. Rich person works hard to make or continue to build upon a fortune is good & worthy...until he donates to Tory party coffers.

How warped

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Starmer is rich. He has his honours not through buying them though.

You can be good and worthy all you like but you don’t deserve *honours* until you’ve earned them and shouldn’t be able to short circuit with a cheque.

I swear you’re just arguing for the sake of it now, no one can be so dense as to not grasp the distinction.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

This is quite simple. Earn a title, fine. Buy or inherit a title, not fine.

It's not a complex argument!

People simplify it in such words but many complicate it simply by assuming if they support the Tory party in any way - any grafting to make their own, or continue their inherithed wealth can then be ignored. The honour is bought or a result of who they know.

In reality nearly always a half decent reputation in the upper tier of business or any profession is usually die to an outstanding commitment of effort & an excelpently competent approach to their profession. Starmer included.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk