Drifter
American
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 68,403
100,000 new members.
So you read 50 pages in 9 minutes? Impressive stuff.So Labour went down the 'middle' last election and Lost.
Why do you think. They offered Tory Lite. No vision that ordinary people can relate too. Hey. You have to tighten the belt. But not as much as what the Torys say.
Polls and think tanks are not going to win you elections.
An honest vision from an honest candidate will.
Such a candidate will move people to come vote for you.
We also have to ask ourselves if we want any of these people who voted for an unjust war that ended up killing hundreds of thousands of people, representing us.
no. I did not have to read what you linked to know what is going on. You apparently buy into that.So you read 50 pages in 9 minutes? Impressive stuff.
I buy into evidence and rational argument, yes. Shame on me.no. I did not have to read what you linked to know what is going on. You apparently buy into that.
looks like you do. That is why you support people who led us into a false war that killed hundereds of thousands.I buy into evidence and rational argument, yes. Shame on me.
Sometimes good campaigns don't win. I think Ed was actually reasonably decent, if not the most inspiring leader, but Labour couldn't overcome the shadow of financial crisis, and the public acceptance that it was somehow the UK government that caused a global collapse. There's no evidence that there was some enormous pool of left wing votes that Labour was missing out on by not being more socialist.So Labour went down the 'middle' last election and Lost.
Why do you think. They offered Tory Lite. No vision that ordinary people can relate too. Hey. You have to tighten the belt. But not as much as what the Torys say.
Polls and think tanks are not going to win you elections.
An honest vision from an honest candidate will.
Such a candidate will move people to come vote for you.
We also have to ask ourselves if we want any of these people who voted for an unjust war that ended up killing hundreds of thousands of people, representing us.
Decent read. His analysis of needing to go centre doesn't really align to his own constituency though as they lost it originally because of seeping votes to the Lib Dems and only regained it due to its collapse. In fact in the last GE they got the most votes they ever had.Worth reading from Labour's sole south-east MP. Think he has a decent idea of the public mood here.
http://us7.campaign-archive2.com/?u=d57858d2bdbc2ba256db60991&id=e7c09b4ae6&e=d4c7898469
You're probably right and that is yet another piece of compelling evidence that people, in general, are absolute idiots.It really shouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but I don't think people are going to elect someone who looks like he's bought his clothes at a charity shop. It's probably for the best if he's convinced by his team to step aside for someone who will appeal more to the wider public, whilst still being in a position to influence proceedings. A director of football type of situation, if you like. His policies, but someone else fronting the election campaign.
So why are the grassroots abandoning Labour for UKIP if they're aligned with Corbyn?This has probably been said already, but I think there is a clear tension between the rather Blairite wing of the Labour Party which makes up most of the MPs, and the grassroots voters who are more aligned with Corbyn - very left-wing. I think eventually, one of these is going to have to give and have to leave the party because it does not seem like they can coexist. People dont like splits but, it has to happen IMO.
I think he was referring to all these hard left nutters that have joined the party in recent times, rather than the traditional grassroots that they are alienating.So why are the grassroots abandoning Labour for UKIP if they're aligned with Corbyn?
Oh shut up.I think he was referring to all these hard left nutters that have joined the party in recent times, rather than the traditional grassroots that they are alienating.
the small bunch of people who are labour members are not representative of the broader group of people who define themselves as labour or potential labour votersSo why are the grassroots abandoning Labour for UKIP if they're aligned with Corbyn?
Its as Classic Mechanic said up there. Neither the Blairite nor the Corbynite wing really speaks to that traditional Labour electorate anymore.So why are the grassroots abandoning Labour for UKIP if they're aligned with Corbyn?
That was a gratuitous troll I admit.Oh shut up.
That's the point I'm trying to make. The fact that membership has gone up doesn't mean things are going well for Labour. Corbyn is preaching to the choir.the small bunch of people who are labour members are not representative of the broader group of people who define themselves as labour or potential labour voters
Who is the traditional Labour electorate, though? I'm not sure they can necessarily be defined with one sweeping generalisation.Its as Classic Mechanic said up there. Neither the Blairite nor the Corbynite wing really speaks to that traditional Labour electorate anymore.
What Im about to say is largely based on educated speculation, so not exactly scientific but in my opinion there are a few different types of Labour voters: firstly you have the highly educated pure Marxists/Socialists who follow the same trend as Tony Benn, Michael Foot and now, Jeremy Corbyn - these guys value their ideological purity over electoral success; then you have centrists who have dominated the party over the last 20 years who moved the party in order to appeal to middle England voters and achieve electoral success; lastly, you have the working class types who, in post-war Britain, found representatives in Labour and the trade unions. With the decline of the old mining and manufacturing industries and reduced unionisation of the lower end jobs, the connection between them and Labour has reduced.Who is the traditional Labour electorate, though? I'm not sure they can necessarily be defined with one sweeping generalisation.
Small? He garners thousands of people in crowds and marches, the party membership has increased to the highest its ever been.the small bunch of people who are labour members are not representative of the broader group of people who define themselves as labour or potential labour voters
Oh look a few thousand people from the green party and socialist workers party have joined momentum.... thats going to offset the millions of people who voted labour before but will never do so whilst corbyn is in charge????Small? He garners thousands of people in crowds and marches, the party membership has increased to the highest its ever been.
What point is there of having parties if you're just going to be populist the entire time. Why not just do away with the idea of opposition and alternatives, and have a few rich mates who will say the right things to the media and establishment.
As opposed to the magnificent, dominant political force it'll become if Angela Eagle takes charge?Oh look a few thousand people from the green party and socialist workers party have joined momentum.... thats going to offset the millions of people who voted labour before but will never do so whilst corbyn is in charge????
Labour is finished and will become essentially a union funded momentum party on the fringes of politics if he is not gone soon
This "party membership at its highest ever/since the war/in Corbyn's lifetime" is, much like Corbyn's repeated claim to have secured an unmatched mandate, pure bollocks. Membership stood at almost 700,000 as recently as the late 70s, and topped 800,000 in the 60s. According to the Labour General Secretary as of about ten minutes ago, it's now at 515,000. It will very likely keep growing as the pro- and anti-Corbyn factions continue to recruit, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.Small? He garners thousands of people in crowds and marches, the party membership has increased to the highest its ever been.
What point is there of having parties if you're just going to be populist the entire time. Why not just do away with the idea of opposition and alternatives, and have a few rich mates who will say the right things to the media and establishment.
true... the party is probably finished either wayAs opposed to the magnificent, dominant political force it'll become if Angela Eagle takes charge?
Would keep away from the SNP, toxic in England.true... the party is probably finished either way
better 150 or so mp's quit and form a new new labour party with the snp and libs in a pro europe coalition and becomes the official opposition and fights for the centre whilst UKIP and the Corbynistas shout nasty stuff at each others from the sidelines and the adults (try to) play politics
possibly... but then again in a pro European type alliance it would be difficult to exclude them completely at least in an informal type arrangementWould keep away from the SNP, toxic in England.
true... the party is probably finished either way
better 150 or so mp's quit and form a new new labour party with the snp and libs in a pro europe coalition and becomes the official opposition and fights for the centre whilst UKIP and the Corbynistas shout nasty stuff at each others from the sidelines and the adults (try to) play politics
We should just bring back blair - he probably is still the best chance of getting anything left of the conservatives elected
I still love this assertion that it's the Corbynites who are all completely naive and wishful, while the centre ground is somehow a place of competence and electability within the Labour party.
The pathetic, insipid coup shows that the Labour party as a whole is massively incompetent from top to bottom. The fecking coup made Corbyn himself look like some kind of scheming political mastermind in comparison considering just how badly executed it was. The Corbynistas may not be the adults playing politics, but neither is the inept, equally incompetent centre-ground of the Labour party.
I think one of the lines of attack that was so successful for the Tories last GE was painting a labour government as needing the SNP for support and therefore allowing them to dictate things and possibly call a second referendum.Would keep away from the SNP, toxic in England.
When ironically its the conservatives (who said the scots had to vote to remain in the UK to stay in the EU) and the EU referendum that is probably going to drive a second Scottish referendum.I think one of the lines of attack that was so successful for the Tories last GE was painting a labour government as needing the SNP for support and therefore allowing them to dictate things and possibly call a second referendum.
Blairtire scrum is a bit much butWhen I criticised the party leadership I was labelled as a ‘Red Tory’ and ‘Blairite scum’.
If it looks like a Tory, sounds like a Tory, and quacks like a Tory, then it probably is a Tory.Studies have shown that socially conservative Settlers were more likely than other values groups to mention immigration, toughness on welfare, standing up for our country, Europe (either a referendum or pulling out) and fiscal responsibility. All the things Corbyn is weak on.
Don't know if his parole officer will give him enough time off.We should just bring back blair - he probably is still the best chance of getting anything left of the conservatives elected
If you read the whole thing (and the link to the actual report I posted a page or so ago), it's quite clear that many were long time Labour voters. A hell of a lot of seats that won't be won unless they're voting Labour.Blairtire scrum is a bit much but
If it looks like a Tory, sounds like a Tory, and quacks like a Tory, then it probably is a Tory.
Don't know if his parole officer will give him enough time off.
Excellent article. I think 'we' are going to have to learn this lesson the hard way though, it's hard to see how Jeremy is going to go from the current situation.https://medium.com/@Layo_91/how-mid...oyed-the-labour-party-8256e707ec01#.25y77zcfc
How Middle Class Liberals Destroyed The Labour Party
In his comprehensive report into why Labour lost the 2015 General Election, Jon Cruddas broke down the electorate into 3 broad but distinct groups — the affluent, socially liberal Pioneers, pragmatic Prospectors and socially conservative Settlers. Last May Labour suffered badly at the hands of two of these groups (The Prospectors and The Settlers). It was only the Pioneers who embraced Miliband’s message;
“…the Pioneers who currently make up 34 per cent of voters. They are spread evenly through different age groups. Pioneers are socially liberal and more altruistic than most voters. They are at home in metropolitan modernity and its universalist values. As the name suggests they value openness, creativity, self-fulfilment and self-determination. They are more likely to vote according to their personal ideals and principles such as caring and justice. They tend to be better off and to have been to university. They now make up a large majority of the Labour Party membership.”
These were my people, they lived in my circles and made up my social world. On the surface, the Pioneers were Labour’s greatest strength, but the in fact they were Labour’s Achilles heel. This is because the progressive middle class had one great fallibility, self-indulgence. It was these people who last summer destroyed the Labour Party.
As it became clear that my CLP was on the verge of nominating Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, I stood up and pleaded with them to learn the lessons from our defeat. I argued that we needed a candidate who will win us seats from Nuneaton to Dover to Great Yarmouth. Outside of our middle class liberal bubble, Labour was becoming a toxic brand. We were becoming seen as a Party solely for the liberal elite. Therefore we needed to look outwards and challenge these assumptions, not indulge them. We needed a Labour leader who can win back those who thought we weren’t credible in running the economy. We needed a leader who would listen to socially conservative voters worried about immigration, and challenge their assumptions that we have an ‘open door’ policy. Basically, we needed to win over voters who didn’t scoff at The Sun or dismiss the Daily Mail. Here we were, a stone’s throw from Goldsmith’s university, in the heart of metropolitan inner London — Labour will always win here.
My pleas fell on deaf-ears. I watched as rational, educated individuals hugged the warm blanket of electoral myths. I watched as my comrades sank into self-indulgence. For decades the Left have hung on to the idea that amongst the large numbers of non-voters, there is a secret well of staunch left-wingers waiting on the day that we build Jerusalem. If only we had a candidate who could reach out to them. Yet there is no evidence that non-voters lean predominantly to the Left. Immediately after the election The Trade Union Congress produced a wealth of polling on the attitudes of non-voters. When asked what prevented non-voters from supporting Labour, the top 4 responses were: 35% ‘don’t know’, 30% ‘they can’t be trusted with the economy’, 23% ‘they would make it too easy for people to live on benefits’, 22% ‘they would raise taxes’. That hardly sounds like the talk of ardent social democrats.
Time and time again Scotland was used as a stick to beat pragmatism with. Yet the idea that Labour lost their seats in Scotland because they were too centrist doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. It was clear that moving to the Left in an attempt to win a handful of seats in Scotland while alienating the Tory voters we needed to win over across England, would be an act blind self-destruction. And it was. Moving to the Left in Scotland helped the Tories to portray themselves as the credible Unionist voice in Scotland. The SNP crushed Labour earlier this month. Humiliatingly, Labour are now the third biggest Party in Scotland.
Perhaps the most pervasive myth reeled out verbatim in stuffy community halls across the land was that Labour lost because they were ‘pro-austerity’. This independent inquiry into Labour’s defeat revealed that the opposite was true; the Tories didn’t win despite austerity, they won because of it. The result was brutal for the Left. Voters instead rejected Labour because they perceived the Party as anti-austerity lite. 58% agree that, ‘we must live within our means so cutting the deficit is the top priority’. Just 16% disagree. Almost all Tories and a majority of Lib Dems and Ukip voters agreed.
The idea Labour lost because they were ‘pro-austerity lite’ was a comforting falsehood for many of us on the Left. Like many liberal-lefties I believed that austerity was an unnecessary burden that hit the poorest while stunting growth. I didn’t believe we could cut our way out of recession. I too went on marches to voice my opinion in the hope that someone other the people walking next to me would listen. I don’t think anyone did.
Time and time again I was told that people voted for the Conservatives instead of Labour because they were ‘basically the same’, and this meant Labour wasn’t far enough to the Left. It was a favoured argument by a chattering-Left whose lives would be relatively untouched by tax-credit cuts or benefits caps. Why would a voter, annoyed at Labour being ‘pro-austerity lite’, disappointed they weren’t left-wing or radical enough, choose to go and vote Conservative? It is counter-intuitive, and this argument is downright illogical. To argue this point is to simply pedal wilful ignorance.
When Ed Miliband spoke the Pioneers nodded along and mostly liked what they heard. When Jeremy Corbyn spoke they hollered and cheered. Jeremy spoke the language that fired up the narrow membership. “Look at the crowds he draws! Can’t you tell that this a movement?” eager friends would tell me. A few older, wiser voices, had seen it all before, those who had seen the mass rallies of the early 80s and damning consequences of delusion. As MP John Golding recalled, when telling Michael Foot how bad the polls were. `He said, “You’re wrong. There were a thousand people at my meeting last night and they all cheered.” And I said, “There were 122,000 outside who think you’re crackers.” I didn’t want me generation to go through the experience that my parents’ did.
If you have to misrepresent the facts to make your argument then your argument is probably quite weak.Oh look a few thousand people from the green party and socialist workers party have joined momentum.... thats going to offset the millions of people who voted labour before but will never do so whilst corbyn is in charge????
Labour is finished and will become essentially a union funded momentum party on the fringes of politics if he is not gone soon