This is nonsense if you look at it in the context of Starmer. For there to be a centre in the long run you have to swing between left and right. It's a two party system and whether you like to admit it or not, we are in a position where the right have a party and the centre has a party so the average is centre right. Labour has to be left for the 2 party system to work otherwise we are perpetually stuck on the right. Voters only have two choices so you can either move to them (which is what Starmer is doing) or let them come to you. We've had 13 years of the Tories and they have dug themselves into a hole so big they can't escape so anyone standing against them will win. It is the perfect opportunity to move left, not right. Moving right is a mental decision for the party to make if it wants to do what the Labour party is supposed to do which is representing the workers. Moving right is leaving the workers behind and representing the same people the Tories represent. The only reason the party would do that is because they care more about winning than actually doing what they are supposed to do. They are making the country worse in the long run by doing it because it is perpetuating right wing politics. You can talk about pragmatism all you want but it is really selfishness and cowardice.
Roofie is right though, centre doesn't exist. It's about 2 ways of doing things. You can't be in the middle on those things. The only reason the centre exists is because it is the middle of two different things but you can't choose that as an option. You might think that in the long run you want a mix of the two but you have to understand how it skews if one of the two parties takes that position. If you are wondering then look across the pond because that is what happens with 2 parties stuck on the right. Once the left most party tries chasing right voters then the only place for the right most party to go is further right.
Not really, but it depends on whether you think of it as exactly centre (which I don't, as it's not possible), or relatively central, with an average balance. This is what I suppose is what we may initially need to accept, perceive to accept or just keep quiet on certain aspects so no position is known. It's hard to be shot at, when they don't know where you're at.
You can hold the centre (and win) and then move the party left, and retain the power. What you can't do is start left and win, as it doesn't ever win, it has never won, so you end up with right, and then further right, which has happened for most of post-2010.
You're right that it is a two-party system, of course it is, either the right wins or the centre wins, that's the problem when the voter balance sits centre or right of centre. Left doesn't win when there's more right than left, and loads in the centre, its never won, and will be a long while before it does, unfortunately.
The deck is not fairly stacked to have Labour left and Tory right, as the media is to the right. There are not enough left media influencing older voters (who turn out), it's not a fair fight, and the other side has a lot more weapons in its arsenal. You can't enter this fight thinking it's fair, it's not. I really wish it was, but pretending so is just putting heads in the sand and means things will get worse.
You're right the Tories are in a hole, Starmers done well to let them keep digging, and not offered any sort of ladders out, so they can come back at him. They have zero to go at him or Labour with, it's been almost perfect tactics and panned out almost exactly as I suggested they should do it. You don't need to fight the other side, whilst they're so insistent on friendly fire, just hid it out and pick off what's left when the time comes.
I know what you're saying, that now could be a chance to move further left, but timing this now is absolutely certainly bad for election chances, by that I mean worse than current predictions which are good. The best tactic is to retain that buffer, up until the last 6 months or so, when the manifestos are due, then you know what you have to play with. No need to show any cards when there are still cards to be dealt.
Labour isn't fighting the workers, and when they get in power they will get supported better. Labour has zero control over the workers immediate future as they're still fighting the massive seat deficit in the last election. It's not like Labour have 400 seats now, they have like 200. Also, they can't risk striking a rod for their own back, as when they come into power things are going to be ****, for a while and not everyone can be helped, it's not possible in the current circumstances. Pandemics, war, inflation etc = pain, and it's not possible to escape that. Sure you can lesson some of the pain, and put that on others instead, but it's hard to put that on the others when they still have a majority.
The USA sits right, as the people sit right, they don't even want to be left and the right has more power there than it even does here. The USA sitting right has been massively fuelled my major growth from zero, over the last 100 years etc. They want to dominate the world, and this is being fuelled by them actually having the ability to do it.
Labour will take centre left (like they did when they last won), albeit they may seem more centre or not deny they're appealing to the centre. Then the Tories will have to move to the middle to get some votes, Sunak is already doing this, to some degree, compared to BJ and Truss etc. It's not like the Tories can leave the EU again, and move us further right, we've already left and it's a proven mess. There's not really much further right to go, and all that does is lose them even more votes. Sunak isn't as daft as the last two, and they might have largely even given up on this next election and may be looking more at what they can do for 2030 or whenever it is.
