I think my result of the night (though no one elses) was Mansfield. May only managed to take 4 bricks out the red wall in 2017. 2 had sub 1k majorities, 2 had sub 3k majorities going into this election. All now have majorities of 12,000 or more (Walsall South, Stoke South, NE Derbyshire and Mansfield). Ben Bradley has managed to turn a seat the Tories never won (came close in 1987) into a 16k majority with 64% of the vote.
It’s all rather incredible and must give CCHQ a lot of positivity that if they look after the red wall and listen to it then these people won’t go back to a Labour.
Have you done much analysis on whether these majorities were down to Labour voters staying at home or genuine switchers?
I remain broadly unconvinced that "get Brexit done" is going to be enough to keep these communities in the long run. But Labour needs to win them back rather than just assuming they'll come back.
I am pleased many of the Red Wall seats fell.
Because these constituencies & people have been ignored and taken for granted.
Even if the Tories do nothing, Labour -- for the first time in decades -- will have to think what these communities want, they will have to seal a new deal with these people.
And that is good.
I agree with you. But it has to be a real wake up call to Labour, they need to get real.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
The night tube and banning alcohol on it is the biggest achievement. It has made coming home from a night out incredibly safe. I haven't looked it up but I expect that the number of rapes, assaults and sexual assaults has gone down because of it.
Wasn't the night tube a Khan thing?
He can have alcohol, fair enough.
I don't know what the equivalent of alcohol banning would be in the country, doesn't seem like a lot to me.
No it was a Boris thing that the unions blocked for political reasons until Khan became Mayor.
Khan was finally able to secure union cooperation, whereas Johnson never could. So yes, Khan should have the credit for that one. And I do agree, it’s a genuine improvement to London life.
"Secure union cooperation" pull the other one. It was coming up to an election so they blocked it. Magically they got no concessions from Khan once he became mayor.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
The night tube and banning alcohol on it is the biggest achievement. It has made coming home from a night out incredibly safe. I haven't looked it up but I expect that the number of rapes, assaults and sexual assaults has gone down because of it.
Wasn't the night tube a Khan thing?
He can have alcohol, fair enough.
I don't know what the equivalent of alcohol banning would be in the country, doesn't seem like a lot to me.
No it was a Boris thing that the unions blocked for political reasons until Khan became Mayor.
Fair point.
So he did one good thing - my view on him has not really changed.
The kind of radical seeming changes he's promising, seems to at the moment to be very little in reality. I will not be at all surprised if in five years very little has changed. I just don't think the Tories will ever make radical change that is actually needed.
If I was the Tories, I would have Boris continue to do his showman / PR stuff that he is good at (and was good as London Mayor), and have the likes of Gove do all the proper work.
Gove is a Marmite figure, but when you speak to people in the legal profession and farming / environment types, they say he really does think about things and can enable sensible progress.
Layla Moran on Any Questions said LDs must move on from Stop Brexit to the closest relationship with the EU post Brexit
I think this is the right approach to take.
I wanted a second referendum (and thought the revoke without one policy was unnecessarily divisive), but we will be out of the EU soon and I don't think there will be much apetite from many to revisit the idea within the next 20 years. On the other hand, promising a closer relationship than what Johnson eventually agrees is likely to be sensible both economically and politically for the Lib Dems.
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
The night tube and banning alcohol on it is the biggest achievement. It has made coming home from a night out incredibly safe. I haven't looked it up but I expect that the number of rapes, assaults and sexual assaults has gone down because of it.
Wasn't the night tube a Khan thing?
He can have alcohol, fair enough.
I don't know what the equivalent of alcohol banning would be in the country, doesn't seem like a lot to me.
No it was a Boris thing that the unions blocked for political reasons until Khan became Mayor.
Fair point.
So he did one good thing - my view on him has not really changed.
The kind of radical seeming changes he's promising, seems to at the moment to be very little in reality. I will not be at all surprised if in five years very little has changed. I just don't think the Tories will ever make radical change that is actually needed.
If I was the Tories, I would have Boris continue to do his showman / PR stuff that he is good at (and was good as London Mayor), and have the likes of Gove do all the proper work.
Gove is a Marmite figure, but when you speak to people in the legal profession and farming / environment types, they say he really does think about things and can enable sensible progress.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
Tories won't lose votes in England by standing up to the SNP.
Scotland will go into a hyper-ventilating hissy fit. But they won't be able to keep that up for five years - much as they might like it to distract from issues like the SNP's record on education being talked about.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
No it’s a bit broader than that. The current policy platform isn’t the platform of a party that’s going to win a second term. There’s compromises to be made with reality. Blair got that - though arguably overcompensated and did too little with his first landslide.
My hope is that Rayner will compromise and move to the right, not further to the left.
If that means Momemtum and half the membership go, then so be it.
I think the Labour membership really does not appreciate the dire situation Labour is in. It needs to make changes quickly and prepare early for GE2024 if it wants to come back.
She'd have to get elected first. She needs the vote of sufficient Momentumites to beat RLB. There aren't enough votes from the soft left rightwards.
40% of the membership voted against Corbyn in 2016, it's possible (I hope) that the many that left under Corbyn might return.
I intend to join for the first time to vote for the non-Corbynite candidate.
Do you think it will be 1v1 or many candidates as per 2015?
I would anticipate 3 or 4 candidates. The challenge for the likes of Jess is likely to be getting onto the ballot under the new rules.
I think a close relationship is probably the right avenue to go down for Labour and the Lib Dems.
I feel that Labour should probably make a bigger deal out of concerns about immigration. I'm not saying they should go towards attacking immigrants or some of the other things the Tories have said but I do think they should acknowledge concerns that have been raised.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
The night tube and banning alcohol on it is the biggest achievement. It has made coming home from a night out incredibly safe. I haven't looked it up but I expect that the number of rapes, assaults and sexual assaults has gone down because of it.
Wasn't the night tube a Khan thing?
He can have alcohol, fair enough.
I don't know what the equivalent of alcohol banning would be in the country, doesn't seem like a lot to me.
No it was a Boris thing that the unions blocked for political reasons until Khan became Mayor.
Khan was finally able to secure union cooperation, whereas Johnson never could. So yes, Khan should have the credit for that one. And I do agree, it’s a genuine improvement to London life.
"Secure union cooperation" pull the other one. It was coming up to an election so they blocked it. Magically they got no concessions from Khan once he became mayor.
I think it boils down to the fact that they didn’t trust Johnson (him being fundamentally untrustworthy and all that) and felt that his agenda was to fundamentally undermine their pay and conditions.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Ah but Brexit got over 50% of the vote in 2016. The SNP have never managed over 50% of the Scottish vote in an Indyref or a general election.
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
TBF, that’s better than we expect of him now and more than Corbyn would have achieved as PM.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
Tories won't lose votes in England by standing up to the SNP.
Scotland will go into a hyper-ventilating hissy fit. But they won't be able to keep that up for five years - much as they might like it to distract from issues like the SNP's record on education being talked about.
I think that may be somewhat confusing Scotland and the SNP.
SNP has more hissy fits than the kettle in my local burger van.
"Voice of Scorrrtland" when meaning 'every person in Scotland' is a bit of posturing.
I believe that at one point someone in the SNP had the slightly more rational position of waiting to see how it played out.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
Oh and Labour should oppose Scottish independence, I can't see how they recover there without doing that. Why would you vote for Labour if they support independence, when you can vote for the much more successful SNP instead?
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Brexit Referendum *did* achieve that threshold.
The referendum did, I meant the election we had this last week. How can the SNP get a referendum without continuously electing people that support one?
Being a grandmother at 37, to most people, indicates you've screwed up somewhere. It's not fair but it is true.
This is a post-war societal change. It wasn't that uncommon once for teenage men and women to marry and start a family, and women in their late twenties were categorised as "older mothers". Now you have graduates starting families in their thirties and those who gave birth in their teens are assumed to be degenerate or scroungers.
That's what she'd have to overcome. It would be a drag on her when the entire country was assessing her, not just one seat.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
What are they going to do about it? If they wanted a 2nd IndyRef that should have done a deal with Corbyn and hoped he wasn’t so useless
If they decide to hold a referendum without Westminster approval - what can Johnson actually do to stop it? The Hyufd option of military action? Courts? Scottish courts are quite funny in their interpretation of laws and the Supreme Court has no love for the government. Suspend Holyrood? Good luck with that.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
Labour really need to shut up with the standard response of the Tories are going to kill the country, all my constituents are scared shit of this. Just seen Thornberry doing the same on Sky.
Again, you are basically telling all these voters in the North. You are wrong, you are morons. Its same as EU referendum with the thick racist leavers are wrong.
They need instead to be humble and say we didn't listen. We need to get back to our roots, listen to what the people in these communities want, what issues they have and why they decided they couldn't vote for us this time.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Ah but Brexit got over 50% of the vote in 2016. The SNP have never managed over 50% of the Scottish vote in an Indyref or a general election.
So your point is that if the SNP achieve over 50% of the vote in something they will then be allowed their referendum?
The Tories will just keep shifting the goalposts, they won't allow one to happen.
Labour really need to shut up with the standard response of the Tories are going to kill the country, all my constituents are scared shit of this. Just seen Thornberry doing the same on Sky.
Again, you are basically telling all these voters in the North. You are wrong, you are morons. Its same as EU referendum with the thick racist leavers are wrong.
They need instead to be humble and say we didn't listen. We need to get back to our roots, listen to what the people in these communities want, what issues they have and why they decided they couldn't vote for us this time.
Thornberry is bloody awful and doesn't get it. If she's the next Labour leader, God help us all.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Ah but Brexit got over 50% of the vote in 2016. The SNP have never managed over 50% of the Scottish vote in an Indyref or a general election.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
What are they going to do about it? If they wanted a 2nd IndyRef that should have done a deal with Corbyn and hoped he wasn’t so useless
If they decide to hold a referendum without Westminster approval - what can Johnson actually do to stop it? The Hyufd option of military action? Courts? Scottish courts are quite funny in their interpretation of laws and the Supreme Court has no love for the government. Suspend Holyrood? Good luck with that.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
As Spain showed in Catalonia, nationalists can be overruled
I will remain extremely unconvinced that Johnson actually plans to make the country better until I actually see some progress. To this date I remain convinced he is only here to win elections.
You don't have to look much further than London for that, when most of his policies have come unravelled since he left. His biggest achievement in London is probably not completely destroying it.
The night tube and banning alcohol on it is the biggest achievement. It has made coming home from a night out incredibly safe. I haven't looked it up but I expect that the number of rapes, assaults and sexual assaults has gone down because of it.
Wasn't the night tube a Khan thing?
He can have alcohol, fair enough.
I don't know what the equivalent of alcohol banning would be in the country, doesn't seem like a lot to me.
No it was a Boris thing that the unions blocked for political reasons until Khan became Mayor.
Fair point.
So he did one good thing - my view on him has not really changed.
The kind of radical seeming changes he's promising, seems to at the moment to be very little in reality. I will not be at all surprised if in five years very little has changed. I just don't think the Tories will ever make radical change that is actually needed.
If I was the Tories, I would have Boris continue to do his showman / PR stuff that he is good at (and was good as London Mayor), and have the likes of Gove do all the proper work.
Gove is a Marmite figure, but when you speak to people in the legal profession and farming / environment types, they say he really does think about things and can enable sensible progress.
I know Nick Palmer says that. My father, who works on animal welfare and biohazards, disagrees. You think I hate Gove? Compared to his comments mine rank as a generous tribute.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
What does end austerity mean? Labour shout it a lot but I have never heard any concrete things from them that define ending austerity.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Ah but Brexit got over 50% of the vote in 2016. The SNP have never managed over 50% of the Scottish vote in an Indyref or a general election.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Labour will never win with significant nationalization plans and handing power back to the Unions that was for the 70’s.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
What are they going to do about it? If they wanted a 2nd IndyRef that should have done a deal with Corbyn and hoped he wasn’t so useless
If they decide to hold a referendum without Westminster approval - what can Johnson actually do to stop it? The Hyufd option of military action? Courts? Scottish courts are quite funny in their interpretation of laws and the Supreme Court has no love for the government. Suspend Holyrood? Good luck with that.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
As Spain showed in Catalonia, nationalists can be overruled
Aaand after a sensible few days Hyufd is back on the sauce.
Labour really need to shut up with the standard response of the Tories are going to kill the country, all my constituents are scared shit of this. Just seen Thornberry doing the same on Sky.
Again, you are basically telling all these voters in the North. You are wrong, you are morons. Its same as EU referendum with the thick racist leavers are wrong.
They need instead to be humble and say we didn't listen. We need to get back to our roots, listen to what the people in these communities want, what issues they have and why they decided they couldn't vote for us this time.
Thornberry is bloody awful and doesn't get it. If she's the next Labour leader, God help us all.
[any of the field of candidates] is bloody awful and doesn't get it. If they're the next Labour leader, God help us all.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
What does end austerity mean? Labour shout it a lot but I have never heard any concrete things from them that define ending austerity.
I think it's basically about investing in public services properly, I think restoring youth centres.
They need to go into communities and ask them what the impacts of austerity are - and then listen and do that.
What Johnson is proposing is keeping most of the cuts but doing a bit into the NHS.
On a procedural note for the Labour Leadership election process, Labour's NEC is I think down to just 6 members due to all the general election resignations.
One other point on Labour. Should they be able to lead a coalition in 2024 I am not convinced the Corbynite membership will be able to live with the compromises. I was amazed that the Tories and Liberals managed a full term; but I think it will be more tricky for this flavour of Labour member.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
Because the Scots voted against Sindy, and Sturgeon has not achieved 50% + 1 of the votes, despite the interminable cantankerous wibbling.
Then we should have no Brexit since Johnson didn't achieve 50% of the vote either.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
Ah but Brexit got over 50% of the vote in 2016. The SNP have never managed over 50% of the Scottish vote in an Indyref or a general election.
True. They got 49.97% in 2015.
No cigar.....
:-D
You can bet your grandma's smalls that if that margin was the other way the SNP would be riding it to Banbury Cross like a Cockhorse.
I should say what I have seen from the likes of Nandy, Flint and Smeeth. They managed to get the right balance of response.
Nandy is good -- but she was the de facto leader of the Labour Leaver MPs in the last Parliament and it is hard to escape the conclusion that she fecked up massively.
Right, I'm on Lisa Nandy for next Labour leader. It has to be aomeone who can talk Northern Leave - Len McCluskey says so. It has to be a woman, because identity politics. It has to be someone who isn't a blithering idiot, because surely it has to be? Therefore Nandy. 10 to 1, which seems to me value if not outstanding value, but I'm on for the fun of being right when it happens rather than the vast profits which might accrue from my £5 stake.
The best thing Labour can do is drop the whole identity politics bollocks. It’s patronising, condescending and, on occasion, downright sinister.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Labour will never win with significant nationalization plans and handing power back to the Unions that was for the 70’s.
I don't think I proposed any nationalisation there did I?
I think the railways are the only one they should offer - and only as leases expire. The infrastructure is already publicly owned.
More broadly I agree with you, Labour went too far and they need to scale it back significantly. But I do think they should/can be more left than Blair, but not much.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
What does invest in small business even mean? You want the government to take a stake in small businesses?
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Labour will never win with significant nationalization plans and handing power back to the Unions that was for the 70’s.
Not that convinced of that. There are examples around of where the current impression of things does not match the reality only a couple of decades ago.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
What does invest in small business even mean? You want the government to take a stake in small businesses?
No I mean invest to help them, sorry I wrote that wrong. Stay well away from the 10% shares stuff and all that crap.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
Tories won't lose votes in England by standing up to the SNP.
Scotland will go into a hyper-ventilating hissy fit. But they won't be able to keep that up for five years - much as they might like it to distract from issues like the SNP's record on education being talked about.
I think that may be somewhat confusing Scotland and the SNP.
SNP has more hissy fits than the kettle in my local burger van.
"Voice of Scorrrtland" when meaning 'every person in Scotland' is a bit of posturing.
I believe that at one point someone in the SNP had the slightly more rational position of waiting to see how it played out.
I wonder if Johnson might try some radical constitutional change - perhaps something to do with the House of Lords
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
What are they going to do about it? If they wanted a 2nd IndyRef that should have done a deal with Corbyn and hoped he wasn’t so useless
If they decide to hold a referendum without Westminster approval - what can Johnson actually do to stop it? The Hyufd option of military action? Courts? Scottish courts are quite funny in their interpretation of laws and the Supreme Court has no love for the government. Suspend Holyrood? Good luck with that.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
Good luck getting anyone to campaign for No in a sham referendum. Given they had a choice in 2014 it’ll look ridiculous if they hold their own one sided referendum. It should be a once in a generation choice.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
What does end austerity mean? Labour shout it a lot but I have never heard any concrete things from them that define ending austerity.
I think it's basically about investing in public services properly, I think restoring youth centres.
They need to go into communities and ask them what the impacts of austerity are - and then listen and do that.
What Johnson is proposing is keeping most of the cuts but doing a bit into the NHS.
This ambiguity is Labours problem. They can not define what ending austerity means, in the campaign Corbyn could not say how he was going to end homelessness or poverty or create 100 of thousands of green jobs.
Whereas Boris "get brexit done by enacting my oven ready deal - 31st Jan, 20,000 more police, 50,000 extra nurses by a set date."
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
It was Ed Miliband who crashed the car. He lost Scotland, and he introduced the leadership election reforms, from which a lot of consequences followed, including Brexit.
It is a pity the voters of Doncaster North did not make Ed pay the price of his many failings.
Ed should be put out to grass, together with some sturdy keepers to make sure he doesn't set anything else on fire.
And wtf is he doing representing Doncaster in any case, he is 100 per cent Londoner.
If my friends are anything to go by, Corbynites are learning all the wrong lessons.
"What can we do? The voters are stupid. They don't want socialism. They want to be governed by the elite. Fuck the voters."
Oozing contempt for Britons.
I can see Labour deciding to go for purity rather than electability. They might be doomed. Heh.
Maybe get some new friends? Nobody in my largely left wing social circle spouts shite like that.
To be fair it's not all of them, but it is a couple, and they are the most politically committed (they go on marches and demos). So they are the people who will elect the new leader.
It's grim for Labour.
One of them is a smart artist in her 50s. Very well read. Phd. Etc.
She was convinced that Corbyn would win, even though I spent 20 minutes over drinks, recently, trying to show her the plentiful evidence that he was likely to lose. She just kept shaking her head and saying things like "youthquake".
If my friends are anything to go by, Corbynites are learning all the wrong lessons.
"What can we do? The voters are stupid. They don't want socialism. They want to be governed by the elite. Fuck the voters."
Oozing contempt for Britons.
I can see Labour deciding to go for purity rather than electability. They might be doomed. Heh.
And when you get outside the London bubble. I have just had lunch with a life long Labour supporter. They were absolutely outraged at Momentum types, basically saying they are the same idiots gluing themselves to buses aren't they and compared them to the animal right protesters of the 80/90s.
They see them as privilege southerners who care only about very niche issues and also it isn't the way to convince people by a) aggression action and b) telling everybody they are just wrong.
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
Tories won't lose votes in England by standing up to the SNP.
Scotland will go into a hyper-ventilating hissy fit. But they won't be able to keep that up for five years - much as they might like it to distract from issues like the SNP's record on education being talked about.
I think that may be somewhat confusing Scotland and the SNP.
SNP has more hissy fits than the kettle in my local burger van.
"Voice of Scorrrtland" when meaning 'every person in Scotland' is a bit of posturing.
I believe that at one point someone in the SNP had the slightly more rational position of waiting to see how it played out.
I wonder if Johnson might try some radical constitutional change - perhaps something to do with the House of Lords
I can see sense in giving both the HoL and the devolution law a complete service. Both are a bit disfunctional.
Therese Coffey said the Government would block indyref2 for its full five year term
I just don't see how this is a tenable position.
What are they going to do about it? If they wanted a 2nd IndyRef that should have done a deal with Corbyn and hoped he wasn’t so useless
If they decide to hold a referendum without Westminster approval - what can Johnson actually do to stop it? The Hyufd option of military action? Courts? Scottish courts are quite funny in their interpretation of laws and the Supreme Court has no love for the government. Suspend Holyrood? Good luck with that.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
Good luck getting anyone to campaign for No in a sham referendum. Given they had a choice in 2014 it’ll look ridiculous if they hold their own one sided referendum.
And that would stop them because...?
I think actually the smart move, if deeply cynical, would be to offer a referendum but on terms the SNP won’t accept. For example, only over 18s allowed to vote, a minimum 45% threshold of the total electorate for any change to be binding on Parliament, plus a tight spending limit and only one organisation allowed to campaign on each side. Plus, the government allowed to fact-check all campaign statements (e.g. on currency, EU membership, customs union, deficit spending) for free.
Then when the SNP reject those terms, Johnson can just say, ‘well, you don’t care about a chance at independence, do you?’
That would, as I say, be deeply cynical but as Johnson is deeply cynical he might well do it.
Of course, that presupposes he doesn’t want Scottish independence. This may be a bold presupposition given how hard it would make removing the Tories from power in England...
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
About as likely as Jezza watching the Queen's speech on Christmas morning....
I think it's true Corbyn has been smeared, I think it's true he's fundamentally probably a decent man.
But the reality is the media are going to attack Labour and demonise whoever the leader is. A more competent and well run leadership team with better PR would have worked around that. Corbyn and his lot were never interested.
I think it's true Corbyn has been smeared, I think it's true he's fundamentally probably a decent man.
But the reality is the media are going to attack Labour and demonise whoever the leader is. A more competent and well run leadership team with better PR would have worked around that. Corbyn and his lot were never interested.
That woman is absolutely ghastly. Snobbish, shrill, patronising and woke, all at once.
I think it's true Corbyn has been smeared, I think it's true he's fundamentally probably a decent man.
But the reality is the media are going to attack Labour and demonise whoever the leader is. A more competent and well run leadership team with better PR would have worked around that. Corbyn and his lot were never interested.
The claims that Corbyn is unique in being attacked is just utter garbage.
Boris is loathed by large parts of the media, he is constantly attacked for things he has written in the past (often taken out of context) and of course over his part in the Leave campaign. Just look at the last week of the campaign, Andrew Neil "attack video" and photo-gate.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
They didn't win in 2015 with exactly that type of manifesto.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
They didn't win in 2015 because they were again too London centric and they refused to condemn austerity.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
Of those 8 things you list 1 is the de facto position at the moment (railways), 6 of them are effectively the same as Boris' policies and 1 (tuition fees) will be dealt with when (as I expect) Boris reduces interest rates on tuition fees as part of the implementation of the review of HE finances.
This ambiguity is Labours problem. They can not define what ending austerity means, in the campaign Corbyn could not say how he was going to end homelessness or poverty or create 100 of thousands of green jobs.
Whereas Boris "get brexit done by enacting my oven ready deal - 31st Jan, 20,000 more police, 50,000 extra nurses by a set date."
I completely agree with you, which is why Labour needs to go into these communities and find out what these things mean to them so they can articulate them.
Labour has spent far too long telling people what they want, they need to actually ask them - as the current strategy is failing big time.
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
About as likely as Jezza watching the Queen's speech on Christmas morning....
Otoh HMQ did used to be on in the morning on the wireless.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Labour will never win with significant nationalization plans and handing power back to the Unions that was for the 70’s.
I don't think I proposed any nationalisation there did I?
I think the railways are the only one they should offer - and only as leases expire. The infrastructure is already publicly owned.
More broadly I agree with you, Labour went too far and they need to scale it back significantly. But I do think they should/can be more left than Blair, but not much.
You didn’t but anyone over fifty will remember what it was like with union meeting in canteens and voting with intimidation in public. BR was crap as were the other public utilities the way forward is not back to the future.
I think it's true Corbyn has been smeared, I think it's true he's fundamentally probably a decent man.
But the reality is the media are going to attack Labour and demonise whoever the leader is. A more competent and well run leadership team with better PR would have worked around that. Corbyn and his lot were never interested.
That woman is absolutely ghastly. Snobbish, shrill, patronising and woke, all at once.
Watching Eddie Spheroids and especially Alan Johnson on ITV on GE night reminded me of the decent Southam Observer wing of the Labour party. What we have now is this....its a conspiracy, its all smears, its Rupert Murdoch, its the Illuminati...Jack Straw you are a warmonger...Tony Blair is evil.
Of those 8 things you list 1 is the de facto position at the moment (railways), 6 of them are effectively the same as Boris' policies and 1 (tuition fees) will be dealt with when (as I expect) Boris reduces interest rates on tuition fees as part of the implementation of the review of HE finances.
You did remember to vote Tory, didn't you?
You think Johnson will tackle tuition fees? I highly doubt it.
Is it bad that these things are similar to what Johnson is proposing? I don't think Johnson will actually follow through on any of them - that's the point.
I'm sure Labour can do a bit more to differentiate itself - but the whole point was that the left has moved, Labour needs to realise that and understand it.
And Johnson isn't ending austerity, he's leaving the majority of the cuts in place.
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
About as likely as Jezza watching the Queen's speech on Christmas morning....
Otoh HMQ did used to be on in the morning on the wireless.
So Jezza watches the radio? No wonder the electorate rejected him.
I have read a lot of Labour supporters concluding that without Corbyn, and with a rational Brexit policy, they could win next time (or certainly the time after that). “One more heave”.
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
Labour can win on a similar platform to 2017 (slightly less radical even) but not with a Corbynite, they just don't get it.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Labour will never win with significant nationalization plans and handing power back to the Unions that was for the 70’s.
I don't think I proposed any nationalisation there did I?
I think the railways are the only one they should offer - and only as leases expire. The infrastructure is already publicly owned.
More broadly I agree with you, Labour went too far and they need to scale it back significantly. But I do think they should/can be more left than Blair, but not much.
You didn’t but anyone over fifty will remember what it was like with union meeting in canteens and voting with intimidation in public. BR was crap as were the other public utilities the way forward is not back to the future.
I think you make a fair point but that individual policy does poll well and is one of the ones they can actually explain reasonably competently.
It was all the other stuff that was bad, a very, very limited example of public sector involvement like that could go down fine. But no more.
Those pictures of Boris sounding triumphant in Sedgefield must be a dagger to the heart of Labour. That's like Corbyn holding a victory rally in Dorset. Bad news for Labour - you think all those people who switched this election will automatically change back at the next one. I don't think they will. Especially so if Labour are mad enough to elect another Corbynista - which they will, by the way. The party membership will make that absolutely certain.
Plus, you know you've got a problem when David Lammy is starting to be a voice of moderation in your party.
A crushing defeat so richly deserved, which I thought was nigh on impossible (despite the evidence I was hearing from Dudley North) - but - it could have and really should have been much worse for Labour.
But still. I reckon they're out of power for at least another 10 years. Considering Boris is a lucky general too, it could be more than that.
If my friends are anything to go by, Corbynites are learning all the wrong lessons.
"What can we do? The voters are stupid. They don't want socialism. They want to be governed by the elite. Fuck the voters."
Oozing contempt for Britons.
I can see Labour deciding to go for purity rather than electability. They might be doomed. Heh.
I wonder if Boris has it in him to be brutal. Pour the help into those seats that voted for him. Those that voted Labour - twist in the breeze. Grimsby turned into the great arts centre of the north. With a fast rail link to London and freeport status.
The three seats in Hull that voted Labour get fuck all. They can look across the Humber with the words of Jim Bowen ringing in their ears. "Look at what you could have won...."
See if lessons get learned. "They fuck you up, your mum and dad who still vote Labour...."
Of those 8 things you list 1 is the de facto position at the moment (railways), 6 of them are effectively the same as Boris' policies and 1 (tuition fees) will be dealt with when (as I expect) Boris reduces interest rates on tuition fees as part of the implementation of the review of HE finances.
You did remember to vote Tory, didn't you?
You think Johnson will tackle tuition fees? I highly doubt it.
Is it bad that these things are similar to what Johnson is proposing? I don't think Johnson will actually follow through on any of them - that's the point.
I'm sure Labour can do a bit more to differentiate itself - but the whole point was that the left has moved, Labour needs to realise that and understand it.
And Johnson isn't ending austerity, he's leaving the majority of the cuts in place.
Johnson absolutely will tackle tuition fees; why should he support academics when they don't vote for him? The recent review of HE funding gives him the opportunity to do this and I believe he will take it.
Guardian reporting the left wing slate is RLB leader, Burgon deputy.
RLB @ 5 seems value
I agree (I said as much earlier).
NB David Herdson’s important point from a couple of weeks back that it is now hard to get on the ballot paper. Rebecca Long-Bailey would definitely make it that far.
Of those 8 things you list 1 is the de facto position at the moment (railways), 6 of them are effectively the same as Boris' policies and 1 (tuition fees) will be dealt with when (as I expect) Boris reduces interest rates on tuition fees as part of the implementation of the review of HE finances.
You did remember to vote Tory, didn't you?
You think Johnson will tackle tuition fees? I highly doubt it.
Is it bad that these things are similar to what Johnson is proposing? I don't think Johnson will actually follow through on any of them - that's the point.
I'm sure Labour can do a bit more to differentiate itself - but the whole point was that the left has moved, Labour needs to realise that and understand it.
And Johnson isn't ending austerity, he's leaving the majority of the cuts in place.
Johnson absolutely will tackle tuition fees; why should he support academics when they don't vote for him? The recent review of HE funding gives him the opportunity to do this and I believe he will take it.
Yeah I'll believe it when I see it.
I seem to be the very rare leftie actually prepared to be pragmatic about this defeat. If Labour just talks to itself I may have to abstain next time around.
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
On the basis that Labour first needs a Kinnock type strong leader, who started out with credibility on the left and proceeded to strong arm the party around to a more voter-friendly orientation, you have to say that if McDonnell were up for it he'd be pretty well qualified. When he's done they can switch to Stella Creasy as next Labour PM.
I think a close relationship is probably the right avenue to go down for Labour and the Lib Dems.
I feel that Labour should probably make a bigger deal out of concerns about immigration. I'm not saying they should go towards attacking immigrants or some of the other things the Tories have said but I do think they should acknowledge concerns that have been raised.
Isn't the worry that Boris with a big majority will look at the close relationship option, that doesn't leave a lot of room for Labour or the Lib Dems to operate.
I think the best Brexit policy for both parties is now to just accept whatever the Tories come up with and put the issue to bed. I don't think the country wants it reopened once we're out. There isn't any political mileage in continuing to campaign for remain or rejoin and if (as I expect) the Tories occupy the close relationship ground it's probably best for Labour to just ignore the issue entirely and move onto domestic policies where they go back and think about what working people want from their government.
McDonnell - "I've done my bit, we need to move on"
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
The way back for Labour is for McDonnell to have a Damascene conversion and to face up to Momentum. "I was wrong. We were wrong. The solutions we proposed were not acceptable to the voters. We cannot turn back the clock. We now have to look for twenty-first century solutions to twenty-first century problems, if we are to gain power again. And we have to, because the Tories do not even accept they are problems. Meanwhile, millions suffer, with no party effecting change to better their lives..."
On the basis that Labour first needs a Kinnock type strong leader, who started out with credibility on the left and proceeded to strong arm the party around to a more voter-friendly orientation, you have to say that if McDonnell were up for it he'd be pretty well qualified. When he's done they can switch to Stella Creasy as next Labour PM.
I think a close relationship is probably the right avenue to go down for Labour and the Lib Dems.
I feel that Labour should probably make a bigger deal out of concerns about immigration. I'm not saying they should go towards attacking immigrants or some of the other things the Tories have said but I do think they should acknowledge concerns that have been raised.
Isn't the worry that Boris with a big majority will look at the close relationship option, that doesn't leave a lot of room for Labour or the Lib Dems to operate.
I think the best Brexit policy for both parties is now to just accept whatever the Tories come up with and put the issue to bed. I don't think the country wants it reopened once we're out. There isn't any political mileage in continuing to campaign for remain or rejoin and if (as I expect) the Tories occupy the close relationship ground it's probably best for Labour to just ignore the issue entirely and move onto domestic policies where they go back and think about what working people want from their government.
Guardian reporting the left wing slate is RLB leader, Burgon deputy.
RLB @ 5 seems value
I agree (I said as much earlier).
NB David Herdson’s important point from a couple of weeks back that it is now hard to get on the ballot paper. Rebecca Long-Bailey would definitely make it that far.
Given the result do you think they may be tempted to change the rules?
Guardian reporting the left wing slate is RLB leader, Burgon deputy.
RLB @ 5 seems value
I agree (I said as much earlier).
NB David Herdson’s important point from a couple of weeks back that it is now hard to get on the ballot paper. Rebecca Long-Bailey would definitely make it that far.
Given the result do you think they may be tempted to change the rules?
To make it harder to meaningfully change? Probably.
If my friends are anything to go by, Corbynites are learning all the wrong lessons.
"What can we do? The voters are stupid. They don't want socialism. They want to be governed by the elite. Fuck the voters."
Oozing contempt for Britons.
I can see Labour deciding to go for purity rather than electability. They might be doomed. Heh.
I wonder if Boris has it in him to be brutal. Pour the help into those seats that voted for him. Those that voted Labour - twist in the breeze. Grimsby turned into the great arts centre of the north. With a fast rail link to London and freeport status.
The three seats in Hull that voted Labour get fuck all. They can look across the Humber with the words of Jim Bowen ringing in their ears. "Look at what you could have won...."
See if lessons get learned. "They fuck you up, your mum and dad who still vote Labour...."
I'd have hoped that the Golden Age of Boris would amount to a bit more than rampant pork-barrel politics. But perhaps the cupboard really is that bare.
Comments
That might be true but I think it would also mean no second term. They need to learn from New Labour.
It's not just Corbyn, it's the team around him, it's the entire machine of the party that needs to change.
Starmer might not win - but he will probably get rid of most of that. My concern with Rayner is she won't.
All these Momentum activists can honestly piss off, if all they did was result in Labour losing three million votes.
Gove is a Marmite figure, but when you speak to people in the legal profession and farming / environment types, they say he really does think about things and can enable sensible progress.
I wanted a second referendum (and thought the revoke without one policy was unnecessarily divisive), but we will be out of the EU soon and I don't think there will be much apetite from many to revisit the idea within the next 20 years. On the other hand, promising a closer relationship than what Johnson eventually agrees is likely to be sensible both economically and politically for the Lib Dems.
Labour seem convinced that because some polling says nationalizing all these industries is popular, that it is definitely an election winner. In the real world, when votes are actually cast, the Labour Party that won GE's did so with a much more pro-business pro-free market outlook.
Scotland will go into a hyper-ventilating hissy fit. But they won't be able to keep that up for five years - much as they might like it to distract from issues like the SNP's record on education being talked about.
I feel that Labour should probably make a bigger deal out of concerns about immigration. I'm not saying they should go towards attacking immigrants or some of the other things the Tories have said but I do think they should acknowledge concerns that have been raised.
If the Scots keep electing SNP MPs, MSPs and others in their elections and they keep winning majorities, I do not see how the British Government can keep saying no.
For what it's worth, I suspect Scotland will vote to stay again but I still think that this position cannot possibly hold.
SNP has more hissy fits than the kettle in my local burger van.
"Voice of Scorrrtland" when meaning 'every person in Scotland' is a bit of posturing.
I believe that at one point someone in the SNP had the slightly more rational position of waiting to see how it played out.
I'm not saying run on a 2015 or 2017 manifesto again, I'm just saying that there are certain policies they should keep, even in spirit.
So for example:
Deal with tuition fees - scrap the interest rate
Fix the railways - bring failing franchises into public ownership if they aren't working
Businesses - invest in small businesses
Tax rate - leave it where it is
Invest in infrastructure
End austerity
Manage immigration and listen to concerns about it
Invest in defence
These are the kinds of policies that they can win on - but they really can't go any further left than that. I think what you're confusing though is that the centre ground moves around. The centre of today is not the centre of 1997, even the Tories have moved to the left on economic policy.
The SNP are as much playing the sore losers as the Remainers have been since their own referendum loss.
I do not expect it before 2022, as I said earlier, but if the SNP win a majority in 2021 then I really do think it will be impossible to refuse such a referendum.
That’s a bigger ‘if’ than their supporters are comfortable admitting though.
Again, you are basically telling all these voters in the North. You are wrong, you are morons. Its same as EU referendum with the thick racist leavers are wrong.
They need instead to be humble and say we didn't listen. We need to get back to our roots, listen to what the people in these communities want, what issues they have and why they decided they couldn't vote for us this time.
The Tories will just keep shifting the goalposts, they won't allow one to happen.
And finally, can I request that the Tories keep Jacob Rees-Mogg permanently locked up?
It has been very pleasant for everyone these last few weeks when he has been caged & out of sight (except possibly for the voters of NE Somerset).
(Yes, I know that’s not quite what he said.)
They need to go into communities and ask them what the impacts of austerity are - and then listen and do that.
What Johnson is proposing is keeping most of the cuts but doing a bit into the NHS.
"What can we do? The voters are stupid. They don't want socialism. They want to be governed by the elite. Fuck the voters."
Oozing contempt for Britons.
I can see Labour deciding to go for purity rather than electability. They might be doomed. Heh.
You can bet your grandma's smalls that if that margin was the other way the SNP would be riding it to Banbury Cross like a Cockhorse.
I think the railways are the only one they should offer - and only as leases expire. The infrastructure is already publicly owned.
More broadly I agree with you, Labour went too far and they need to scale it back significantly. But I do think they should/can be more left than Blair, but not much.
By done your bit, you mean crashed the clown car so badly you oversaw the worst Labour GE performance since the 1930s....
Whereas Boris "get brexit done by enacting my oven ready deal - 31st Jan, 20,000 more police, 50,000 extra nurses by a set date."
It is a pity the voters of Doncaster North did not make Ed pay the price of his many failings.
Ed should be put out to grass, together with some sturdy keepers to make sure he doesn't set anything else on fire.
And wtf is he doing representing Doncaster in any case, he is 100 per cent Londoner.
It's grim for Labour.
One of them is a smart artist in her 50s. Very well read. Phd. Etc.
She was convinced that Corbyn would win, even though I spent 20 minutes over drinks, recently, trying to show her the plentiful evidence that he was likely to lose. She just kept shaking her head and saying things like "youthquake".
Now she tells me she is in "shock".
I mean, what can you do?!
They see them as privilege southerners who care only about very niche issues and also it isn't the way to convince people by a) aggression action and b) telling everybody they are just wrong.
I think actually the smart move, if deeply cynical, would be to offer a referendum but on terms the SNP won’t accept. For example, only over 18s allowed to vote, a minimum 45% threshold of the total electorate for any change to be binding on Parliament, plus a tight spending limit and only one organisation allowed to campaign on each side. Plus, the government allowed to fact-check all campaign statements (e.g. on currency, EU membership, customs union, deficit spending) for free.
Then when the SNP reject those terms, Johnson can just say, ‘well, you don’t care about a chance at independence, do you?’
That would, as I say, be deeply cynical but as Johnson is deeply cynical he might well do it.
Of course, that presupposes he doesn’t want Scottish independence. This may be a bold presupposition given how hard it would make removing the Tories from power in England...
We're utterly doomed.
I think it's true Corbyn has been smeared, I think it's true he's fundamentally probably a decent man.
But the reality is the media are going to attack Labour and demonise whoever the leader is. A more competent and well run leadership team with better PR would have worked around that. Corbyn and his lot were never interested.
Boris is loathed by large parts of the media, he is constantly attacked for things he has written in the past (often taken out of context) and of course over his part in the Leave campaign. Just look at the last week of the campaign, Andrew Neil "attack video" and photo-gate.
You did remember to vote Tory, didn't you?
Labour has spent far too long telling people what they want, they need to actually ask them - as the current strategy is failing big time.
This may be coloured by my experience of the CPS which is that it contains more than its fair share of incompetent lazy morons, from the top down.
Is it bad that these things are similar to what Johnson is proposing? I don't think Johnson will actually follow through on any of them - that's the point.
I'm sure Labour can do a bit more to differentiate itself - but the whole point was that the left has moved, Labour needs to realise that and understand it.
And Johnson isn't ending austerity, he's leaving the majority of the cuts in place.
It was all the other stuff that was bad, a very, very limited example of public sector involvement like that could go down fine. But no more.
The other thing is bus services, do more on that.
Plus, you know you've got a problem when David Lammy is starting to be a voice of moderation in your party.
A crushing defeat so richly deserved, which I thought was nigh on impossible (despite the evidence I was hearing from Dudley North) - but - it could have and really should have been much worse for Labour.
But still. I reckon they're out of power for at least another 10 years. Considering Boris is a lucky general too, it could be more than that.
Here's hoping
The three seats in Hull that voted Labour get fuck all. They can look across the Humber with the words of Jim Bowen ringing in their ears. "Look at what you could have won...."
See if lessons get learned. "They fuck you up, your mum and dad who still vote Labour...."
NB David Herdson’s important point from a couple of weeks back that it is now hard to get on the ballot paper. Rebecca Long-Bailey would definitely make it that far.
I seem to be the very rare leftie actually prepared to be pragmatic about this defeat. If Labour just talks to itself I may have to abstain next time around.
I think the best Brexit policy for both parties is now to just accept whatever the Tories come up with and put the issue to bed. I don't think the country wants it reopened once we're out. There isn't any political mileage in continuing to campaign for remain or rejoin and if (as I expect) the Tories occupy the close relationship ground it's probably best for Labour to just ignore the issue entirely and move onto domestic policies where they go back and think about what working people want from their government.