Rebecca Long-Bailey sacked (1 Viewer)

[JimmyHillsbeard]

Labour would’ve won without Scotland in 97, 2001 and 2005.

It’s not the SNP making Labour unelectable.

whenever Labour have won a Westminster majority they have secured Scotland - but they’ve won England and Wales too. They have never been put in power by Scottish seats.

 

---

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The old saying about the “average British voter” is that they want a “hang the pedos and fund the NHS Party”, to break that down it’s basically: immigration controls, tough sentencing on crime with a well funded police force, tough on anti social behaviour, tough on benefit cheats, and probably these days “less woke bollocks”. Also probably not hammering drivers though I think maybe less so these days as people generally get the need for climate action.

Think Blair’s “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”, think ASBOs, Browns “British jobs for British people”, FB memes about homeless veterans and OAPs needing looking after ahead of recent immigrants. Your average Sun campaign “back our boys and crush the criminal scum” type stuff.

Blair was pretty close socially but IMO further right than most want economically. I think he could’ve been a lot more left wing but in hindsight he was it was just he paid for it in a right wing way (PFI) rather than sensible left wing economics.

The left however have put themselves in a corner where anything short of open borders, close the prisons and ACAB makes you right wing filth and that’s a million miles away from your average voter.

I can’t stand the woke stuff I must be honest. Mind you I also support wiping or vastly cutting the foreign aid budget so Christ knows what that would do to me at a CLP meeting

 

[Grendel]

Labour would’ve won without Scotland in 97, 2001 and 2005.

It’s not the SNP making Labour unelectable.

They may well have done but the seat composition is now hugely different and the swing required is sizemic - Corbyn received a huge percentage of the vote in 2017 and still was the minority party.

 

[Grendel]

Would make it easier though particularly as in the years you refer to the Tories were a non entity there as opposed to being the opposition party they are now.

This shows the scale of the task - a 10% swing to have a 1 seat majority and including a significant number in Scotland

https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Another-Mountain-to-Climb.pdf

 

[Deleted member 5849]

This shows the scale of the task - a 10% swing to have a 1 seat majority and including a significant number in Scotland

https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Another-Mountain-to-Climb.pdf

Best bet is reduce the majority next election, let it struggle because backbenchers then have more influence (see Major, May), and take advantage at the election after.

Really, if you see the mess May/Johnson's government was, a half coherent strategy would have built on 2017 to win, rather than slip back.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

This shows the scale of the task - a 10% swing to have a 1 seat majority and including a significant number in Scotland

https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Another-Mountain-to-Climb.pdf

Well it’s things like this that make me think Labour in its current form and coalition is never going to win. Which even if you’re a dye in the wool Tory is not a good thing for the country

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

- Corbyn received a huge percentage of the vote in 2017 and still was the minority party.

??

Labour received 40% of the UK vote, the Tories got 42.4%. It’s sensible that they received fewer seats than the Conservatives - the largest party but who also failed to get a majority.

Even in Scotland Labour received fewer votes 27.1% (vs 28.6%) and seats 6 (vs 12) than the Conservatives in 2017.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I can’t stand the woke stuff I must be honest. Mind you I also support wiping or vastly cutting the foreign aid budget so Christ knows what that would do to me at a CLP meeting

Wokeness, ironically, is destroying parties on the left of the political spectrum. In the UK, the Tories win the working class vote, and Trump secures a 16% swing in favour of the Republicans from the lowest income bracket in 2016.

Yet, the same working class voters who swung for Trump viewed Bernie Sanders very favourably.

I’m generally centre-left, and I can’t stand how the left/liberal types are embracing post-modernism ‘critical theory’. As a scientist yourself, this must also drive you crazy.

 

[Grendel]

??

Labour received 40% of the UK vote, the Tories got 42.4%. It’s sensible that they received fewer seats than the Conservatives - the largest party but who also failed to get a majority.

Even in Scotland Labour received fewer votes 27.1% (vs 28.6%) and seats 6 (vs 12) than the Conservatives in 2017.

The point is 40% is a huge share of the vote that even in itself will take a huge change in fortunes. Even with 16 seats in Scotland a huge 10% swing is required for a 1 seat majority

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I can’t stand how the left/liberal types are embracing post-modernism ‘critical theory’.

I really don't think they are...

There's also nothing wrong with critical theory!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Wokeness, ironically, is destroying parties on the left of the political spectrum. In the UK, the Tories win the working class vote, and Trump secures a 16% swing in favour of the Republicans from the lowest income bracket in 2016.

Yet, the same working class voters who swung for Trump viewed Bernie Sanders very favourably.

I’m generally centre-left, and I can’t stand how the left/liberal types are embracing post-modernism ‘critical theory’. As a scientist yourself, this must also drive you crazy.

Bernie in 2016 was the slightly socially conservative but left wing economic politician that would have won handily. Since then he has embraced more of the wokeness and though I still wanted him to succeed, the campaign this time was weaker. What annoys me most is that we are praising things that are more and more just symbolic or done on the internet than substantive achievements.

Keir Starmer seems to be going full woke and it does nothing for me.

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

In the UK, the Tories win the working class vote, and Trump secures a 16% swing in favour of the Republicans from the lowest income bracket in 2016.

Yet, the same working class voters who swung for Trump viewed Bernie Sanders very favourably.

Since universal suffrage the Conservatives have needed working class votes to win any election. That doesn’t mean that the working class are Tories. Most w/c don’t vote Conservative. Even in northern Red Wall territory the Conservative gains from Labour were significant but small.

Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. Swing is very difficult to read in the USA because of the turnover in the registered vote and differential turnout of those groups that are actually registered to vote. In 2016 Trump and Sanders were both playing the same hand - the anti-establishment outsider. After running against Clinton so hard for the Democratic nomination (mostly on the charge that she thought she was entitled to it) it’s less surprising that some Sanders support found it difficult to transfer to her. Nevertheless it’s still commonly overstated how large this intersection in the diagram actually was.

Currently I can’t see where Trump is going with the culture wars stuff. Electorally it looks like a dead end, very few extra voters are to be won there - those that voted for him despite misgivings in 2016 were insufficient to help him win the popular vote then and it’s hard to see many coming over to the race-baiting tweeter whose former staff are writing books about how he’s not fit to govern. The only clear strategy is to aim at those registered electors who are certain to vote - older, whiter (demographically dwindling) and restricting access to the vote for minorities and younger voters by stopping mail in ballots and registration drives etc.

Trump could win in November but he could also get humiliated. I think the current strategy (more Goldwater than Nixon) suggests they really fear the latter and are going for broke to scare white middle America into voting for him.

whether he’d concede defeat in November might also be a moot point.



Anyway that’s a massive set of interjections from me abt Politics which I don’t normally do here but save for my day job.

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

Keir Starmer seems to be going full woke and it does nothing for me.

Really? That’s what you think? Really?
Aren’t most of the what-you-might-call- “woke”pissed off with him that he sacked RLB and he publicly celebrated Armed Forces day ?

 

[Grendel]

Really? That’s what you think? Really?
Aren’t most of the what-you-might-call- “woke”pissed off with him that he sacked RLB and he publicly celebrated Armed Forces day ?

I do find the labour people on here reaction to him and total negativity strange

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Really? That’s what you think? Really?
Aren’t most of the what-you-might-call- “woke”pissed off with him that he sacked RLB and he publicly celebrated Armed Forces day ?

Christ knows what the ‘woke’ crowd thinks of him. Just how he comes across to me.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I do find the labour people on here reaction to him and total negativity strange

Who here has shown total negativity towards him?

 

[Grendel]

It isn't, it's an utter embarrassment. Labour is finished, Starmer is pathetic.

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

Pretty negative

 

[Grendel]

you're working on the assumption that all Labour has to do is win back lost voters. But it also has to keep the ones it's got.
If there was an election tomorrow I'd have to think long and hard about voting for a Starmer government. The fact this country is going to hell in a hand cart under Johnson would probably swing it but it's hardly a ringing endorsement.

Not what I’d call a ringing endorsement

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Pretty negative

Fair enough though I think the majority are willing to give him time.

 

[Grendel]

Fair enough though I think the majority are willing to give him time.

The problem labour has is it’s shaped policy wise by its members - members don’t win elections

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

The point is 40% is a huge share of the vote that even in itself will take a huge change in fortunes. Even with 16 seats in Scotland a huge 10% swing is required for a 1 seat majority

I’m still confused by what you’re trying to say here. I think we are mostly in agreement.

Labour’s share in the vote in 2017 was relatively impressive - but still almost 3 percentage points lower than that received by a badly underperforming Prime Minister in the worst campaign anyone can remember. And even then Labour’s campaign was inefficient. A core vote strategy piling up huge majorities in constituencies they already held (large swathes of Greater London, Manchester, Liverpool, Coventry). Very few seats were won from the Tories on narrow margins (Warwick and Leamington being one of the v few exceptions).

In 2019 Labour fared even worse down to 32% of the vote while the Tories improved slightly to 44%.

They face a mammoth task to get back in - I think we agree on this. But it’s not insurmountable. Most people thought the Conservatives were in for another generation after the 1992 election. Then Black Wednesday robbed them of their reputation for economic competence. Labour worked hard to assume that mantle (I don’t think it was inevitable). if the Conservatives suffer a similar loss of public faith and Labour do make inroads into the voters that have not always voted for them in the recent past there is a clear chance of a labour majority at the next election.

 

[Ian1779]

The problem labour has is it’s shaped policy wise by its members - members don’t win elections

I agree with this point - this is what led it to its disastrous Brexit policy of 2019. Members do not necessarily correspond to voters.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The problem labour has is it’s shaped policy wise by its members - members don’t win elections

Didn’t you also say that policies don’t win elections?

 

[Nick]

Guns don't kill people. Rappers do.

 

[Ian1779]

Labour’s campaign was inefficient. A core vote strategy piling up huge majorities in constituencies they already held (large swathes of Greater London, Manchester, Liverpool, Coventry). Very few seats were won from the Tories on narrow margins (Warwick and Leamington being one of the v few exceptions).

This was one of the far less mentioned things that came out of the leaked report. ‘Allegedly’ the people responsible for either shaping or delivering this channelled resources to seats where the party had comfortable majorities and kept it away from marginals that could have resulted in more seats switching hands.

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

This was one of the far less mentioned things that came out of the leaked report. ‘Allegedly’ the people responsible for either shaping or delivering this channelled resources to seats where the party had comfortable majorities and kept it away from marginals that could have resulted in more seats switching hands.

it was a direct leadership strategy. Reconnecting with the core vote to show that Labour was more popular than it had been under New Labour. Look at where the leader visits were in 2017, Corbyn and Milne had direct sign off on that.

 

[Grendel]

I’m still confused by what you’re trying to say here. I think we are mostly in agreement.

Labour’s share in the vote in 2017 was relatively impressive - but still almost 3 percentage points lower than that received by a badly underperforming Prime Minister in the worst campaign anyone can remember. And even then Labour’s campaign was inefficient. A core vote strategy piling up huge majorities in constituencies they already held (large swathes of Greater London, Manchester, Liverpool, Coventry). Very few seats were won from the Tories on narrow margins (Warwick and Leamington being one of the v few exceptions).

In 2019 Labour fared even worse down to 32% of the vote while the Tories improved slightly to 44%.

They face a mammoth task to get back in - I think we agree on this. But it’s not insurmountable. Most people thought the Conservatives were in for another generation after the 1992 election. Then Black Wednesday robbed them of their reputation for economic competence. Labour worked hard to assume that mantle (I don’t think it was inevitable). if the Conservatives suffer a similar loss of public faith and Labour do make inroads into the voters that have not always voted for them in the recent past there is a clear chance of a labour majority at the next election.

What I’m saying is I think 40% is around labours peak and I don’t see Tories getting back to 30% levels with a now pretty dead 3rd party which they seem to have benefitted from

Major was dead duck in 92 - agajnst all odds he held a wafer thin majority which by 97 had vanished. There were splits over Europe bastardgare the disastrous family values increased tax rates against election promises and a gold dust opposition leader - the Tories were finished

 

[Nick]

Will the leader now have to backtrack on BLM? I assume it's the same sort of thing?

 

[Ian1779]

it was a direct leadership strategy. Reconnecting with the core vote to show that Labour was more popular than it had been under New Labour. Look at where the leader visits were in 2017, Corbyn and Milne had direct sign off on that.

I was referring more to on the ground activists - sorry I wasn’t clearer.

 

[Grendel]

Didn’t you also say that policies don’t win elections?

Largely they don’t. Again most people don’t read manifestos in the end most are only engaged every five years.

Politics in the uk is like a duopoly and every 5th year you have yo take market share

Economic competence or perceived confidence is the one thing that wins elections

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I do find the labour people on here reaction to him and total negativity strange

The stated policies he ran on for election are pretty left, really.

Left enough for me, anyway, and he has at least achieved based on merit. That's surely a good thing?

 

[Grendel]

The stated policies he ran on for election are pretty left, really.

Left enough for me, anyway, and he has at least achieved based on merit. That's surely a good thing?

Oh he will need to ditch anything that’s controversially left wing and I am sure he will - after all who else are you going to vote for anyway

 

[Ian1779]

The stated policies he ran on for election are pretty left, really.

Left enough for me, anyway, and he has at least achieved based on merit. That's surely a good thing?

I was happy with his pledges that he ran on. I’m prepared to give him time, he has responded well to some things, and a couple of things concern me.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I agree with this point - this is what led it to its disastrous Brexit policy of 2019. Members do not necessarily correspond to voters.

Not sure that's the best example, really. Agree with it or not, a policy akin to members' wishes would have been a clear and definable platform to run on. As it happened, the leader wasn't aligned with members on this issue, and what we ended up with was a massive fudge that was impossible to explain, and turned people off regardless of view.

In trying to be all things to all people, it ended up pleasing nobody. Now Thatcher understood that if half the country hated you, it didn't matter if the other hal,f loved you...

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Largely they don’t. Again most people don’t read manifestos in the end most are only engaged every five years.

Politics in the uk is like a duopoly and every 5th year you have yo take market share

Economic competence or perceived confidence is the one thing that wins elections

Right, so really the membership proposing policies shouldn’t be that detrimental according to this?