.

Brexit was the be all snd end all of the 2019 election and the time in between the right had to concoct a plan to undermine the party finally stumbling on the anti semitism lie which the very worst of the party used and continue to use to keep the status quo.

Shameful really as it’s taking all meaning out of the word, used at a local level to throw at those who simply supported a free NHS!

History will look back over these recent years and the truth will be told. I can’t imagine what state we will be in when the penny finally drops.
Putting everything else to one side how do you think Labour would have done if they had just said we will get Brexit done like Johnson did?

I’m not sure myself, I don’t think the campaign was anywhere near as good as 2017.
 
In my humble opinion the Labour Party needs to run on a Pro Democracy ticket which has been it’s biggest weakness in recent years.

Work towards Keir Starmer strengths.. pointing the finger and forensically dismantling the opposition, surely he should be able to do that. This one of the lads Tory boy light schtick is no working at all.

• Proportional Representation, every vote should count, put power back into the hands of the people.

• Stop MPs from taking paid second jobs, with limited exemptions to maintain professional registrations.

• Require all MPs, Lords and parliamentary candidates to be resident, ordinarily resident and domiciled in Britain for tax.

• Put trust back into politics by giving constituents the right to sack corrupt MPs

• Abolish the House of Lords, replanning it with a smaller democratically elected 2nd house.

Pretty easy targets to select and pick off here. Johnson, Sunak, Hancock.. should be like shooting fish in a barrel.

Jeremy Corbyn and The Socialist Campaign Group should cross the floor and join the Green Party.

You're right that one of KS main strengths is forensic dismantling, but his better strength is knowing when to do that, when to attack and when not to. For example, you don't get up close and use up what fight you have when the other side are fighting themselves (Tories for a lot of 2021-22), you can sit back more and just let them do themselves damage and pick off the odd pot shot. This is good, as it does not put you in the firing line. The same as when something is going on which skews the news in the favour of the other side, this is the wrong time to fight also, as your opposition has a coat of armour (this was like what the Tories had with the vaccine rollout), then it's time to just take cover and hide out. Tactics are the no 1 most important thing.

You need to be careful what you wish for, PR could enable a group like UKIP who were polling at around 20% of votes at their peak. I would be amazed if the "far left" outnumbered the far right, and be even more amazed if they outnumbered them in the groups most likely to vote (old people). PR only works when you're losing, as you will get more say, but as you've lost you've still got no majority so it still probably doesn't work. If Labout get a big majority, the last thing they should push for is PR.

MP's shouldn't have second jobs, and should have to declare every single thing they have (money, shares, houses etc) and are getting, and this be immediately visible, and live.

All MP's should have to be from, or have lived in their seat for a min 5 years, and live there during their time as MP. I don't mean living near, in some fancy estate either, they should have to live where the middle-class live.

MP's should also have to be more reliant on public services, to force an interest in making them things better. MP's leaving should not get golden handshakes or walk into companies with great power and wealth, as a reward (bribe) for their time in office. The MP's need to be more accountable too, it's like the laws don't apply currently, in any other industry a lot of them would get locked up for bribery or fraud.

HOL needs to go, or be more representative of the people, as in no long posts, and filled with younger people, working in "normal" jobs.
 
The press for once acknowledging the purge by Starmer and the move to the right. They've known all along. But the question is how many votes does Starmer lose? I don't know; but hopefully if Labour do lose the next election the clip will show that it is Starmer who has purged and told them to leave through the door. Corbyn is just a part of this story

Andy, Starmer is for being outside the SM/CU. You really need to wake up and stop this 12d chess stuff 🤦‍♂️
You had the left in power, they lost the last two elections, after the Tories had also won the previous two (and should have been there for the taking), the centre isn't the problem, look in the mirror. You need to be realistic to the population, rather than pretend the population want's a leader like JC, as I can assure you it doesn't, as proven.

There is a massive difference between these two statements:
1) Actively being in favour of being outside the SM/CU
2) Accepting that pushing for SM/CU membership (now) is a 100% vote killer to most who voted brexit

As a 100% remainer, probably more than anyone else I know, and someone who would vote for SM/CU 100/100 you need to accept that that no Labour MP should be mentioning the SM/ CU now, even those who were all for it pre the referendum like Starmer was/ is, and he was/ is a lot more pro-EU/ SMA/ CU than Corbyn was. Thankfully Starmer realises this problem from a tactical point.

Again, you're being ideological, and it wouldn't have worked in a mathematical sense for 2020 to now, as we hadn't left and proven it to fail. I of course knew it was going to fail (like most on here it seems, and yourself), but you forget that a lot of people are thick, and they don't seem to like to trust the consensus of expert opinion anymore. They need to be punched in the face, for them to see reality. Of course he could now change direction, or put SM/CU in the manifesto, but it seems risky and will poll worse, which I imagine they've done some research into. Sure, most people in the UK probably do want SM/CU membership, as a percentage, but it doesn't mean that works as a net vote winner for Labour, or would have for the last 3 or next 2 years. A deal with much closer ties, could get us close to something resembling SMA/ CU, and open the door for future membership, but the time for opening the old wounds is not now.
 
A lot of people I speak to say Corbyn was a reason not to vote Labour. It might free them up to do so now he is gone from the party.
Pretty much every single person I know from my forces days (90% have been out for 10-15 years plus) voted against Corbyn, they didn't give a toss where that vote went, as long as it didn't go to him. They all saw the polar opposite of that to be the Tories, so that's where they went. During the referendum and in the lead in to the 2019 election they were all sharing anti-Corbyn posts on facebook. He really riled up a lot of people for some reason. To be fair mind, looking back, I think most of them were racist, and they (wrongly) associated the left with giving money to foreigners for nothing, and getting nothing in return.

Nearly all of them from red wall seats too, and were from labour families when they were younger and were all pro Blair, even with the 2003 Iraq war etc. They effectively were more happy with the war than Corbyn, I can't make much sense in that from a retrospective view, but they're and odd bunch, like many, it's hard to figure out how they think when your views are polar opposites.
 
Owen Jones is just a nodding dog and a hypocrite.

View attachment 55385
That article was 3 years ago roofie1. A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then. The leopard has changed it spots since then. 3 years ago I had a little faith in Starmer then but that faith has well and truly dissipated over the last couple of years. I say that as a person who helped vote him into the position he is now.
 
Putting everything else to one side how do you think Labour would have done if they had just said we will get Brexit done like Johnson did?

I’m not sure myself, I don’t think the campaign was anywhere near as good as 2017.
I think Labour would have cleaned up with get brexit done, Corbyn had been anti Brexit his whole career up to that point and would have been more trusted to deliver over a formerly pro Europe Boris Johnson. The case could have been made for a soft brexit and both sides of leave/remain could have accepted that.

No idea why they didn’t just struck with the 2017 manifesto tbh, corporation tax needed to be explained more thoroughly for the many self employed folks on the tools.. but of a blind spot that imo. Talk of Palestine didn’t need to happen right then and talk of free internet came across as a pie in the sky bribe for not leaving the EU
 
Interesting take in the guardian that explains why Starmer/labour are doing what they're doing.

I'm not an expert by any stretch but I think there's probably a lot of truth to it, if so isn't it depressing that the country is basically held in thrall to a minority of xenophobes?

Our system is ****ed.

 
Irrelevant really. The people I am talking to have no idea about that, or care. They just wouldn't vote for Labour with JC in it.
It’s not irrelevant at the trust has gone. Those folks who wouldn’t vote for Labour with JC in it.. do they rate Starmer as a credible alternative to Sunak. Will they vote for a party with Dianne Abbot in it? The people I speak to are very much of the opinion that Labour is shyte. So either vote Conservative as at least they get things done or will not be voting for another Party as they feel so deeply betrayed by Labour over a number of issues.. but mainly Brexit and Corbyn.
 
That article was 3 years ago roofie1. A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then. The leopard has changed it spots since then. 3 years ago I had a little faith in Starmer then but that faith has well and truly dissipated over the last couple of years. I say that as a person who helped vote him into the position he is now.
Its not about the article - its pointing out the hypocracy of the chameleon Owen Jones.
The little lacky of the liberal establishment blows with the wind of his ideological masters.
 
Interesting take in the guardian that explains why Starmer/labour are doing what they're doing.

I'm not an expert by any stretch but I think there's probably a lot of truth to it, if so isn't it depressing that the country is basically held in thrall to a minority of xenophobes?

Our system is ****ed.

‘The Hero Voters’ - folks want to vote for a leader and Keir Starmer is not that. He has a complete lack of awareness skin to Jo Swanson and combined with that he is a complete and utter wet wipe.. he makes Ed Miliband look like a tough guy! He’s fake and weak and everyone can see it.. no point lying to ourselves. He is not going to make the cut.
 
I'm not an expert by any stretch but I think there's probably a lot of truth to it, if so isn't it depressing that the country is basically held in thrall to a minority of xenophobes?
It's more depressing that people still think that people voted leave just because they are xenophobes.

People that voted leave but didn't vote labour in 2019 because labour wanted to remain will have been a big proportion of people that defected. I personally know many people that voted leave that had all sorts of reasons for leaving and aren't racist/xenophobic/stupid or whatever other insult you are still throwing their way.

We've left now so it's a straight up contest between two (historically ideologically opposed) parties. Those people that wanted to vote Labour but prioritised Brexit will return to Labour because the Tories have dug themselves into a hole they can't get out of, not because they are attracted by anything Starmer is offering. If the Tories can get themselves out of the hole by the time of the election then giving people the choice of Tory or Red Tory might not be enough to get people to switch back. Labour's entire strategy is built on the Tories not being able to dig themselves out.

All of this nonsense about the country being centre-right and people not changing much so won't vote for a left-leaning party is utter nonsense. Brexit alone showed how far people are willing to change if someone offers them something to change for. Swathes of Labour's core voters voted for the Tories or another Brexit party which was completely against their usual politics for a single issue. People will change if you give them a reason to. Being as bland as can be isn't a tactic. It's being scared to tell people what you believe in.

Say what you want about Corbyn but I knew what his opinion on the majority of topics would be because he was outspoken about what he believed was right. I knew what he believed in and he was consistent with it. I know nothing about what Starmer believes. I know he will say what he thinks people want to hear and he will do what he can to win but sadly that also means he will do things that negatively impact people if it's a vote winner. I don't think that politicians should be win at all costs. It isn't a sport. It is too important to just come down to winning or losing. Doing what is right should trump that. If he is asking us to vote for him and his party then we should know what we are voting for. I might not agree with anything the Tories say or do but I know I can trust them. Sounds weird when we know they are a bunch of liars and charlatans but if you vote Tory then you know they are going to look after their donors, the wealthy and big businesses and de-fund public services. Voting Labour now seems like nothing but blind optimism that Starmer's current bull**** might be the lies and he might return to his leadership promises after all. That's the problem with being a liar. We don't know which things they say are truth or lies so we can't believe any of it.
 
It's more depressing that people still think that people voted leave just because they are xenophobes.

People that voted leave but didn't vote labour in 2019 because labour wanted to remain will have been a big proportion of people that defected. I personally know many people that voted leave that had all sorts of reasons for leaving and aren't racist/xenophobic/stupid or whatever other insult you are still throwing their way.

Not everyone who voted for brexit is a xenophobe but it played a significant part in the result. To deny that is delusional. Every survey shows the most important issue to brexiters was immigration. A fear of foreigners (stoked by the likes of Farage) was absolutely key to the result. I know there were other reasons, but that was the Biggie.

I know it's an uncomfortable truth for some, but tough. It's not like it wasn't highlighted very clearly at the time.

The other stuff you've just put words into my mouth.
 
Not everyone who voted for brexit is a xenophobe but it played a significant part in the result. To deny that is delusional. Every survey shows the most important issue to brexiters was immigration. A fear of foreigners (stoked by the likes of Farage) was absolutely key to the result. I know there were other reasons, but that was the Biggie.

I know it's an uncomfortable truth for some, but tough. It's not like it wasn't highlighted very clearly at the time.

The other stuff you've just put words into my mouth.
Opposition to immigration is not necessarily xenophobia. Some people oppose immigration because of labour market competition and a downward effect on their wages. It has little to do with the innate 'foreignness' of workers. Of course, some people are out-and-out racists, but not everyone who wants restrictions on free movement is a racist.
 
Opposition to immigration is not necessarily xenophobia. Some people oppose immigration because of labour market competition and a downward effect on their wages. It has little to do with the innate 'foreignness' of workers. Of course, some people are out-and-out racists, but not everyone who wants restrictions on free movement is a racist.
100%. I'm opposed to uncontrolled immigration (as is everyone, they just don't seem to be capable of admitting it since Brexit). Uncontrolled unskilled immigration causes the major negatives of immigration to only apply to the lowest end of the labour market (wage stagnation due to labour supply and therefore competition for jobs). The rest of us benefit because businesses keep costs down so we get cheap goods and services but I don't think the poorest people in society should be subsidising the rest of us so we can have cheap stuff. People that earn less money also tend to disproportionately consume public services (school, health, police, social work, housing, benefits etc) so immigration at that level costs us more. Immigration to fill skills we don't have in the country (doctors, nurses etc) is completely different although I would still argue that much, much more should be done to train our own as a priority but that takes significant time. There is a high demand for people wanting to emigrate to the UK. We can prioritise people that have the skills which we are lacking rather than having to turn away those people because we have to keep numbers manageable due to an influx of people that we have no control over that have the same skills as people we already have.

I understand why the EU insists on Freedom of Movement. Its entire raison d'etre is cheap costs for global businesses to make it competitive with Asia and the US. It's a neo-liberal state which is there to serve big business. They don't care if the UK has wage stagnation if it means that costs for businesses will be cheaper. They don't care about high youth unemployment across southern europe. That sort of thing benefits businesses because more competition for jobs means lower wages. The UK would have remained within the EU if the EU could offer what we previously had but without FoM but that is a red line for the EU.
 
Opposition to immigration is not necessarily xenophobia. Some people oppose immigration because of labour market competition and a downward effect on their wages. It has little to do with the innate 'foreignness' of workers. Of course, some people are out-and-out racists, but not everyone who wants restrictions on free movement is a racist.
True. But a lot of it is.

And many of those campaigning to leave specifically targeted the xenophobes (as they continue to do so in government).
 
It’s not irrelevant at the trust has gone. Those folks who wouldn’t vote for Labour with JC in it.. do they rate Starmer as a credible alternative to Sunak. Will they vote for a party with Dianne Abbot in it? The people I speak to are very much of the opinion that Labour is shyte. So either vote Conservative as at least they get things done or will not be voting for another Party as they feel so deeply betrayed by Labour over a number of issues.. but mainly Brexit and Corbyn.

From my experience with the people I have spoken to rate Starmer and are a bit sick of Sunak, even though some of them live in his constituency. They have no trust issues with Starmer on their radar. Abbot has been off the radar for some time - maybe because she is of the left of the party and has been silenced somewhat? But I don't think she would put them off. These people want some change and the only credible alternative is Labour.
 
Reeve against capital gains tax rises

Labour criticised Sunak for paying less tax (because his earnings came through CGT) but won't increase capital gains tax 🤔

And if that wasn't tory enough they've just admitted Labour is the party of low taxes (literally the Tories line) so basically more underfunded public services whoever you vote


Or maybe she is just saying they are the party of low taxes because we have the highest taxes in 70 years? Something has to give? I aren't sure Labour could come into the next election saying they are the party of high taxes and expect anything other than an election defeat.
 
Back
Top