Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour: time to turn blue?

SystemSystem Posts: 12,169
edited July 2020 in General
imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour: time to turn blue?

What became of Maurice Glasman? Only those of us with a tendency to don the proverbial political anorak will recall the name, but Maurice (now Lord) Glasman was once the intellectual guru du jour for Labour. With roots in the Living Wage campaign and community organization, Glasman coined the term Blue Labour, a profound policy reaction to the perceived human emptiness of Blairism and the Third Way.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Top piece RB.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Oh was that a first?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    edited July 2020
    Double posting of text in the article.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Undone by the new thread yet again...

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Discussed briefly last night. At first I didn't believe it.
    So how will we explain away the greater differential between the amended figures and excess deaths over the soon to be revised figure?
    I doubt we'll have to, it'll be a tiny change on the overall number. More significant now that deaths are so low.
    Why is Hancock so excited by the development?
    He is?
    He's called for an urgent review.
    Because its been flagged by an academic that there's a problem in the data that may account for more than 10% of current daily deaths (and logically will continue to account for an ever higher proportion of daily deaths).

    Should he not call for an urgent review after its revealed there's a problem in the data?
    Except there is no "problem in the data" at all, according to PHE. One of their senior officials is directly quoted by The Guardian today, stating quite explicitly that they've decided to count Covid deaths in this way on purpose:


    Dr Susan Hopkins, Public Health England’s incident director, said: “Although it may seem straightforward, there is no WHO agreed method of counting deaths from COVID-19. In England, we count all those that have died who had a positive COVID-19 test at any point, to ensure our data is as complete as possible.

    source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/17/matt-hancock-calls-urgent-inquiry-phe-covid-19-death-figures


    This is total insanity. You might just as well rake through the life of Auntie Doris with a fine toothed comb after she kicks the bucket, discover that she had a minor shunt in her Austin Allegro in 1977, and add her to the road traffic death stats as a consequence.

    There are no comprehensive statistics for this pandemic which can be trusted. The hospital Covid death numbers are probably reliable, but tell us nothing about deaths in other settings. Covid death stats outside of hospital are useless, first of all because of PHE's stupidity and secondly because many (probably a majority) of the Covid deaths were certified according to the best guesses of the relevant physicians and without being confirmed by a positive test result. The overall excess death numbers aren't a panacea either, because we've no idea what proportion of those were caused by Covid and what proportion may have been caused by the consequences of Covid (such as patients being denied treatment or being too scared to seek it.)

    We know that Covid has been bad, but we've no idea exactly how bad, and we may never learn the truth. This will probably suit the authorities in the long run. If it could be conclusively established that we had torched the economy and condemned tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of people to an early grave from other causes - mass poverty, undiagnosed and untreated cancers, and all the rest - such that the collateral damage turned out to be hugely worse than that from Covid itself, then a lot of very uncomfortable questions might have to be answered. As it is, we're left to shrug our shoulders and say "dunno."
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    @TheScreamingEagles @PBModerator the article badly needs editing of double-text and I wonder if some of the text is missing as it seems to jump from the double-part to a conclusion awkwardly.

    Interesting article @rottenborough - you make a good point that some serious change is needed.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,773
    Great article.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,138
    edited July 2020
    At the last general election Labour got just 32% with C2 working class voters and they are now the Tories base, 47% of them voted Tory, voters who are socially conservative and pro hard Brexit are not going to vote for Starmer Labour.

    It should focus on poor DE voters with whom Labour got 39% and who are the most economically left still and also could make inroads with pro Remain ABs and C1s with whom the Tories got a lower voteshare than C2s

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    If that's the case should we not get back to normal?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Is he really the last survivor of the BoB (RAF aircrew presumably)? Inevitable, but sad nontheless.

    https://twitter.com/RAFBBMF/status/1284110332810670081?s=20
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,368

    Undone by the new thread yet again...


    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Discussed briefly last night. At first I didn't believe it.
    So how will we explain away the greater differential between the amended figures and excess deaths over the soon to be revised figure?
    I doubt we'll have to, it'll be a tiny change on the overall number. More significant now that deaths are so low.
    Why is Hancock so excited by the development?
    He is?
    He's called for an urgent review.
    Because its been flagged by an academic that there's a problem in the data that may account for more than 10% of current daily deaths (and logically will continue to account for an ever higher proportion of daily deaths).

    Should he not call for an urgent review after its revealed there's a problem in the data?
    Except there is no "problem in the data" at all, according to PHE. One of their senior officials is directly quoted by The Guardian today, stating quite explicitly that they've decided to count Covid deaths in this way on purpose:


    Dr Susan Hopkins, Public Health England’s incident director, said: “Although it may seem straightforward, there is no WHO agreed method of counting deaths from COVID-19. In England, we count all those that have died who had a positive COVID-19 test at any point, to ensure our data is as complete as possible.

    source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/17/matt-hancock-calls-urgent-inquiry-phe-covid-19-death-figures


    This is total insanity. You might just as well rake through the life of Auntie Doris with a fine toothed comb after she kicks the bucket, discover that she had a minor shunt in her Austin Allegro in 1977, and add her to the road traffic death stats as a consequence.

    There are no comprehensive statistics for this pandemic which can be trusted. The hospital Covid death numbers are probably reliable, but tell us nothing about deaths in other settings. Covid death stats outside of hospital are useless, first of all because of PHE's stupidity and secondly because many (probably a majority) of the Covid deaths were certified according to the best guesses of the relevant physicians and without being confirmed by a positive test result. The overall excess death numbers aren't a panacea either, because we've no idea what proportion of those were caused by Covid and what proportion may have been caused by the consequences of Covid (such as patients being denied treatment or being too scared to seek it.)

    We know that Covid has been bad, but we've no idea exactly how bad, and we may never learn the truth. This will probably suit the authorities in the long run. If it could be conclusively established that we had torched the economy and condemned tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of people to an early grave from other causes - mass poverty, undiagnosed and untreated cancers, and all the rest - such that the collateral damage turned out to be hugely worse than that from Covid itself, then a lot of very uncomfortable questions might have to be answered. As it is, we're left to shrug our shoulders and say "dunno."
    Please stop hyperventilating.

    What has happened is that PHE have set a super-inclusive definition of death from COVID outside hospitals. Which means 6 or so deaths per day. Maybe.

    There will be no perfectly accurate numbers for any health crisis. Anywhere in the world. Ever. All numbers have their issues.

    The number to judge the crisis on is, in the long term, the excess deaths figure. which will include non-COVID deaths caused by the response.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    If that's the case should we not get back to normal?
    Arguably. But then you run the risk of lots of people getting very ill (they can'y stop that), thereby overloading the health systems, and then people DO die in numbers. Back to square one.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Very good header, thank you. Personally I hope Labour do not go that way. I wouldn't like it. I'd probably resign my membership. But then again, I would still vote for them and so if I'm typical of the new woke metro base, and going "blue" would win back the oiks, perhaps this means it does make sense for the party in electoral terms.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Who was going to Barcelona for a weekend

    Catalonia reports 1,111 new positives for COVID-19, of which 195 correspond to the Segrià region, 346 to the city of Barcelona and 67 to L'Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), according to data released this Friday by the Department of Health . 69.5% of the cases (772) are in the Barcelona Metropolitan Area, which covers the health regions of Barcelona, Metropolitana Norte and Metropoliana Sur
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    edited July 2020
    deleted -- misread
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    Deaths on a rolling 7 day basis have almost trebled in Texas and more than doubled in Florida since the start of the month and are trending even higher so while I agree the prognosis for hospitalised patients has certainly improved I don't think I would be quite as sanguine as you are.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    nichomar said:

    Who was going to Barcelona for a weekend

    Catalonia reports 1,111 new positives for COVID-19, of which 195 correspond to the Segrià region, 346 to the city of Barcelona and 67 to L'Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), according to data released this Friday by the Department of Health . 69.5% of the cases (772) are in the Barcelona Metropolitan Area, which covers the health regions of Barcelona, Metropolitana Norte and Metropoliana Sur

    That's REALLY bad. Do they know what caused it? Spain has had one of the most draconian lockdowns already. And this will further shaft their tourist economy

    I was planning a brief holiday in the Algarve with my wifelet.

    But can I risk tit? Whereever you go there's a chance you might get stuck in a lockdown
  • TresTres Posts: 2,702

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    If that's the case should we not get back to normal?
    Back to normal just guarantees overwhelmed ICUs.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    Yipee!! My first header.

    Thanks Mike.

    Needs a bit of editing, old bean.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    Deaths on a rolling 7 day basis have almost trebled in Texas and more than doubled in Florida since the start of the month and are trending even higher so while I agree the prognosis for hospitalised patients has certainly improved I don't think I would be quite as sanguine as you are.
    I'm just quoting verbatim. And it was a reliable source, CNN or something. I'll try and find it again

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Corbyn was shit. Unbelievable that Labour members could have been self indulgent enough to elect him. Don't blame me, I voted against him, twice. FWIW I still think he was better than Johnson, but I accept that many decent people thought otherwise.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    HELP!! Mike, TSE? There is a mistake in the header.

    Some of the text is repeated twice.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482
    edited July 2020

    HELP!! Mike, TSE? There is a mistake in the header.

    Some of the text is repeated twice.

    Strictly speaking it's only repeated once. :lol:

    Good article btw.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    Top piece RB.

    Thanks. Although I think some of the text has ended up being repeated twice.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,002
    Great article, and unusually on topic I think this article reflects some of the same things

    https://twitter.com/alexburnsNYT/status/1284116980304314368
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,368
    LadyG said:

    nichomar said:

    Who was going to Barcelona for a weekend

    Catalonia reports 1,111 new positives for COVID-19, of which 195 correspond to the Segrià region, 346 to the city of Barcelona and 67 to L'Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona), according to data released this Friday by the Department of Health . 69.5% of the cases (772) are in the Barcelona Metropolitan Area, which covers the health regions of Barcelona, Metropolitana Norte and Metropoliana Sur

    That's REALLY bad. Do they know what caused it? Spain has had one of the most draconian lockdowns already. And this will further shaft their tourist economy

    I was planning a brief holiday in the Algarve with my wifelet.

    But can I risk tit? Whereever you go there's a chance you might get stuck in a lockdown
    There is growing evidence that the primary vector of COVID infection is travel writers in black cabs. There are millions of them....
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675

    HELP!! Mike, TSE? There is a mistake in the header.

    Some of the text is repeated twice.

    Can you vanilla message me your original piece and I'll update the thread header.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Here it is


    "Dr Varon admits he's "thrown the kitchen sink" at trying to find new ways of beating this virus.

    "And now he thinks there's a game-changer.

    He and a group of medical colleagues from five different hospitals across America have created a cocktail of commonly but separately-used drugs they're calling the Math+ protocol - and the combination is having some staggering results."

    "No-one needs to die from coronavirus any more," he said.

    "This won't cure you of coronavirus but it can stop the build-up of problems which can lead to you needing a ventilator and when that happens, your chances of survival are only about 20%.

    "Putting someone on a ventilator is like signing their death warrant.

    "Finally, we have an option and I think it's going to work."

    https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-houston-doctor-says-were-heading-to-pure-hell-as-covid-19-cases-spike-in-texas-12020307


    Some more detail on it here:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/17/coronavirus-deaths-stubbornly-low-us-new-cases-soar/
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,316

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    If that's the case should we not get back to normal?
    Two problems with that:

    1) If getting back to normal boosts the infection rate to the point that you overwhelm your ICU facilities, then people will start dying.

    2) A Covid-19 infection appears to have serious long term negative effects on a significant fraction of those infected with it.

    The combination of the two (both of which are very bad for your economy, naturally) suggests that we aren’t getting back to normal any time soon.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Happening.

    5m locked down, again, in Barcelona

    https://twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/1284125955414343687?s=20
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    edited July 2020

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,466

    Undone by the new thread yet again...


    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Discussed briefly last night. At first I didn't believe it.
    So how will we explain away the greater differential between the amended figures and excess deaths over the soon to be revised figure?
    I doubt we'll have to, it'll be a tiny change on the overall number. More significant now that deaths are so low.
    Why is Hancock so excited by the development?
    He is?
    He's called for an urgent review.
    Because its been flagged by an academic that there's a problem in the data that may account for more than 10% of current daily deaths (and logically will continue to account for an ever higher proportion of daily deaths).

    Should he not call for an urgent review after its revealed there's a problem in the data?
    Except there is no "problem in the data" at all, according to PHE. One of their senior officials is directly quoted by The Guardian today, stating quite explicitly that they've decided to count Covid deaths in this way on purpose:


    Dr Susan Hopkins, Public Health England’s incident director, said: “Although it may seem straightforward, there is no WHO agreed method of counting deaths from COVID-19. In England, we count all those that have died who had a positive COVID-19 test at any point, to ensure our data is as complete as possible.

    source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/17/matt-hancock-calls-urgent-inquiry-phe-covid-19-death-figures


    This is total insanity. You might just as well rake through the life of Auntie Doris with a fine toothed comb after she kicks the bucket, discover that she had a minor shunt in her Austin Allegro in 1977, and add her to the road traffic death stats as a consequence.

    There are no comprehensive statistics for this pandemic which can be trusted. The hospital Covid death numbers are probably reliable, but tell us nothing about deaths in other settings. Covid death stats outside of hospital are useless, first of all because of PHE's stupidity and secondly because many (probably a majority) of the Covid deaths were certified according to the best guesses of the relevant physicians and without being confirmed by a positive test result. The overall excess death numbers aren't a panacea either, because we've no idea what proportion of those were caused by Covid and what proportion may have been caused by the consequences of Covid (such as patients being denied treatment or being too scared to seek it.)

    We know that Covid has been bad, but we've no idea exactly how bad, and we may never learn the truth. This will probably suit the authorities in the long run. If it could be conclusively established that we had torched the economy and condemned tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of people to an early grave from other causes - mass poverty, undiagnosed and untreated cancers, and all the rest - such that the collateral damage turned out to be hugely worse than that from Covid itself, then a lot of very uncomfortable questions might have to be answered. As it is, we're left to shrug our shoulders and say "dunno."
    Please stop hyperventilating.

    What has happened is that PHE have set a super-inclusive definition of death from COVID outside hospitals. Which means 6 or so deaths per day. Maybe.

    There will be no perfectly accurate numbers for any health crisis. Anywhere in the world. Ever. All numbers have their issues.

    The number to judge the crisis on is, in the long term, the excess deaths figure. which will include non-COVID deaths caused by the response.
    You are right, but I think there is a perception out there that somehow England is performing worse than say Scotland or NI, and that this is due to Government decisions and mishandling (in reality the policies across the UK are fairly closely aligned in the things that make a difference). If this way of counting data has been artificially inflating the England death figures, especially in the recent weeks as the number drop, even if it is only a small inflation, it still has had important consequences. It is of course not a trivial question to answer, but I have wondered for a while about the deaths out of hospital. Who and where are they? Are they at home? But if so ill with Covid, why are they not in the largely empty hospitals? Are they in care homes? Just not seeing enough data.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,247
    edited July 2020

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Interesting bit of demographic change context.

    The total number of miners involved with the Mineworkers Pension Fund as pensioners or deferred pensioners fell from 225k to around 143k between 2012 and 2019.
    https://www.mps-pension.org.uk/scheme-publications-and-factsheets

    Slipping into history, and they all need to notice.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,680
    I always felt that the whole 'Blue Labour' thing was a way for middle-class racists to feel better about themselves by pointing out that the oiks shared their bigotry. (Rod Liddle once declared himself a disciple.)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    I've updated the thread header now and removed the duplicate text. Apologies for any confusion.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,947
    Good article! Blue Labour sounds a bit like how Scottish Labour think and act. It hasn’t worked well for them!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Even a broken clock can be right.

    Just because what suits us also suits our enemy does not mean we shouldn't do it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    @LadyG that doesn't explain it. In Houston Texas deaths are tracking hospitalisations just as they were at the start of the epidemic. In fact, over the last month the hospitalisations death rate has increased - from 6.5% to 6.9% of hospital admissions dying.

    In Georgia you are seeing a absolutely plummeting Hospitalisation Death rate.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,958

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited July 2020
    To illustrate the point here is Texas daily deaths vs Georgia daily deaths






    Compared to their daily cases






    Pretty much identical surges in cases. Absolutely not identical surge in deaths.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    A really good piece, right on the money. In other words I agree!
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Even a broken clock can be right.

    Just because what suits us also suits our enemy does not mean we shouldn't do it.
    Good attempt Philip, but no, that doesn't wash. 52% of the population, including yourself are useful idiots. You can't call yourself patriots because you have done the bidding of a foreign despot who is most definitely hostile. The same bunch of idiots have also been very useful to another bunch of non-military hostile nationalists- those of the Scottish variety. Our enemies must love you. You are the equivalents of the appeasers of the 1930s.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    LadyG said:

    Happening.

    5m locked down, again, in Barcelona

    https://twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/1284125955414343687?s=20

    Masks didn't do any good there then
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    I've updated the thread header now and removed the duplicate text. Apologies for any confusion.

    Speaking of confusion, how are you coming along with the brief re: my claim, on behalf of the Great State of West West Virginia? I entrusted this legal work to you, yet have heard nothing for years - is this common practice at the English Bar (or is it Pub)?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    MattW said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Interesting bit of demographic change context.

    The total number of miners involved with the Mineworkers Pension Fund as pensioners or deferred pensioners fell from 225k to around 143k between 2012 and 2019.
    https://www.mps-pension.org.uk/scheme-publications-and-factsheets

    Slipping into history, and they all need to notice.
    Yes I was taking liberties a bit. A lot of ex mining areas have seen a lot of demographic change with new housing attracting more of the kind of people who like to live in the countryside (ie Tories). So there's a fair amount of that and not just ex miners voting Tory. As you note, a lot of the ex miners are not in a position to vote for anyone anymore, God rest their souls.
  • LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Alistair said:

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    @LadyG that doesn't explain it. In Houston Texas deaths are tracking hospitalisations just as they were at the start of the epidemic. In fact, over the last month the hospitalisations death rate has increased - from 6.5% to 6.9% of hospital admissions dying.

    In Georgia you are seeing a absolutely plummeting Hospitalisation Death rate.
    Fair enough. That is confusing, and it does undermine the statement by that Texan doctor. Maybe his miracle cure doesn't cure quite so miraculously

    There is,. nonetheless, evidence that medics are getting much better at treating the most severe cases. They've learned to avoid ventilators, for instance. That must be a factor in "better" American death rates despite soaring case loads.

    Perhaps the Texan deaths are severely co-morbid people? Mayhap the virus has got into care homes? It would be interesting to see the age profile in Texas.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,555
    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I don't think so. To a quite astonishing extent Blair presented himself as lacking any sense of the resonance of the past, tradition, attachment to place, old fashioned culture, kitchen sink loyalties. How this is possible for an Anglican/Catholic family man with roots in Fettes, Oxford, the Bar and the Labour party In have no idea. It was his greatest weakness, leading directly to a complete misreading of the Middle East and other failures too.

    Blue Labour would surely have a greater grasp of the significance of the past and our inherited culture.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
    I would go so far as to say that it is now in the interest of Labour in England (Scottish Labour being a failed rump which can be ignored) for the Union to end. It would remove their SNP problem and leave them needing to make fewer gains to win.

    Boris Johnson, on the other hand, will want to stonewall demands for a second referendum for as long as possible. I don't think he's bothered about the Union, so much as the concern that breaking it will break him too. And, of course, Scotland is a useful stick with which to beat Starmer.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    MattW said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Interesting bit of demographic change context.

    The total number of miners involved with the Mineworkers Pension Fund as pensioners or deferred pensioners fell from 225k to around 143k between 2012 and 2019.
    https://www.mps-pension.org.uk/scheme-publications-and-factsheets

    I can't imagine Covid has been kind to those ex-miners suffering from pneomoconiosis either.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,885
    edited July 2020
    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I don't think so. To a quite astonishing extent Blair presented himself as lacking any sense of the resonance of the past, tradition, attachment to place, old fashioned culture, kitchen sink loyalties. How this is possible for an Anglican/Catholic family man with roots in Fettes, Oxford, the Bar and the Labour party In have no idea. It was his greatest weakness, leading directly to a complete misreading of the Middle East and other failures too.

    Blue Labour would surely have a greater grasp of the significance of the past and our inherited culture.

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
    You two are almost implying that Mr Starmer's approach should be to cut loose SLAB - and perhaps the Welsh too - and make it a mor epurely English party, though one which is more akin to Orwell and Blake than some other interpretations of English culture.

    Edit: just seen @BlackRook 's post a moment ago. Quite.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    kinabalu said:

    Very good header, thank you. Personally I hope Labour do not go that way. I wouldn't like it. I'd probably resign my membership. But then again, I would still vote for them and so if I'm typical of the new woke metro base, and going "blue" would win back the oiks, perhaps this means it does make sense for the party in electoral terms.

    I think we can agree that this is a misstep from you. Calling them oiks. Nothing serious and god knows enough Lab types are thinking it but probably best not to display it on a website forum.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I think a lot of traditional working class Labour voters felt that Blair ignored their concerns in order to chase marginal voters down South. Labour's loss of working class support really accelerated under Blair.
    Plus of course there have always been working class Tories (eg Alf Garnet) so it's not as if Labour can, should, or has to get all working class people to vote for it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I don't think so. To a quite astonishing extent Blair presented himself as lacking any sense of the resonance of the past, tradition, attachment to place, old fashioned culture, kitchen sink loyalties. How this is possible for an Anglican/Catholic family man with roots in Fettes, Oxford, the Bar and the Labour party In have no idea. It was his greatest weakness, leading directly to a complete misreading of the Middle East and other failures too.

    Blue Labour would surely have a greater grasp of the significance of the past and our inherited culture.
    Then what's the Blue all about?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
    I would go so far as to say that it is now in the interest of Labour in England (Scottish Labour being a failed rump which can be ignored) for the Union to end. It would remove their SNP problem and leave them needing to make fewer gains to win.

    Boris Johnson, on the other hand, will want to stonewall demands for a second referendum for as long as possible. I don't think he's bothered about the Union, so much as the concern that breaking it will break him too. And, of course, Scotland is a useful stick with which to beat Starmer.
    It is another example of why Johnson is not a Conservative. He is an egotist Populist. Proper Conservatives see the Union as something worth preserving. It is yet another reason why Brexit was so fecking dumb.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I think a lot of traditional working class Labour voters felt that Blair ignored their concerns in order to chase marginal voters down South. Labour's loss of working class support really accelerated under Blair.
    Plus of course there have always been working class Tories (eg Alf Garnet) so it's not as if Labour can, should, or has to get all working class people to vote for it.
    I see thanks. I suppose that is the eggs/omelette dilemma about getting yourself elected.

    Plus I thought that Maggie was the one that accumulated working class votes with all that aspiration stuff?
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,958

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Complete lunacy but thank you for the insight.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,213
    Alistair said:

    LadyG said:

    fpt for Alister


    "Georgia continues to baffle me

    The rise that had been forming in deaths has gone away and now continues to fall. Cases started rising on the 1st of June for this new super peak. Lagged deaths should be showing up by now.

    According to news reports they are having to ship patients out of state so totally saturated is the hospital system but no rising deaths."

    ****

    There's no need for bafflement. I posted a link a few days ago, from a Texas medical centre: in essence doctors have now learned how to treat Covid very successfully, to the extent that no one - apart from the seriously co-morbid - should ever die.

    As long as the ICU is not overwhelmed, a First World hospital should now see minimal deaths.

    What doctors can't do, yet, is stop people from catching Covid, and then getting chronically/seriously ill, hence the continued rise in cases/hospitalisations.

    There is no paradox.


    @LadyG that doesn't explain it. In Houston Texas deaths are tracking hospitalisations just as they were at the start of the epidemic. In fact, over the last month the hospitalisations death rate has increased - from 6.5% to 6.9% of hospital admissions dying.

    In Georgia you are seeing a absolutely plummeting Hospitalisation Death rate.
    My wife is an artist - as some of you may know - and she was part of the "portraits for frontline healthcare workers" project. One of the people she painted was a lady called Cindy, in Atlanta, who's a pulmonary care specialist in Georgia.

    She is incredibly concerned about the healthcare system becoming overwhelmed. As @LadyG says, while you have beds to treat everyone, you can keep the death rate low. Once you get beyond healthcare capacity, then lots of people will die.

    This NPR story also tells you how close Georgia is to running out of capacity.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Governor Larry Hogan of Maryland, a Republican elected and re-elected in a very Blue state, on "Good Morning America" today at the start of his book tour - a tour that effectively is kickoff for 2024 Republican nomination.

    Hogan made one thing crystal clear: disassociating himself from the disaster - for his party, our nation & the world - that is Donald Trump.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,138
    edited July 2020

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I think a lot of traditional working class Labour voters felt that Blair ignored their concerns in order to chase marginal voters down South. Labour's loss of working class support really accelerated under Blair.
    Plus of course there have always been working class Tories (eg Alf Garnet) so it's not as if Labour can, should, or has to get all working class people to vote for it.
    Not really, even in 2005 Labour won 40% of C2s and 48% of DEs.

    By 2019 though Labour won only 32% of C2s and 39% of DEs.

    Labour's AB voteshare was virtually the same under Corbyn and Blair, 30% in 2019 and 28% in 2005, in fact Corbyn did better with the upper middle class than Blair in 2005 but far worse with the working class. C1s were the same under Blair in 2005 and Corbyn in 2019 too, 32% each


    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2005

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,914

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Who can that possibly be?
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,958
    OT: Barring an SNP collapse, Labour won't win again without significant recovery in the Red Wall, so a bit of 'blue' is what they need. I can't see Keir Starmer wanting to do that though, or - more to the point - being able to do so convincingly if he wanted.

    And thanks for a good thread header Rotten.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    edited July 2020

    LadyG said:

    Happening.

    5m locked down, again, in Barcelona

    https://twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/1284125955414343687?s=20

    Masks didn't do any good there then
    Introduced too late I think I also think they went from stage two to the new normal directly ahead of the rest of Spain missing out stage three, which had amongst other things travel restrictions.
  • TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I don't think so. To a quite astonishing extent Blair presented himself as lacking any sense of the resonance of the past, tradition, attachment to place, old fashioned culture, kitchen sink loyalties. How this is possible for an Anglican/Catholic family man with roots in Fettes, Oxford, the Bar and the Labour party In have no idea. It was his greatest weakness, leading directly to a complete misreading of the Middle East and other failures too.

    Blue Labour would surely have a greater grasp of the significance of the past and our inherited culture.
    Then what's the Blue all about?
    Blue like blue collar (and to some extent like The Blues), not blue like Conservative Blue.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,138

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
    I would go so far as to say that it is now in the interest of Labour in England (Scottish Labour being a failed rump which can be ignored) for the Union to end. It would remove their SNP problem and leave them needing to make fewer gains to win.

    Boris Johnson, on the other hand, will want to stonewall demands for a second referendum for as long as possible. I don't think he's bothered about the Union, so much as the concern that breaking it will break him too. And, of course, Scotland is a useful stick with which to beat Starmer.
    Wrong, the Tories had a majority of 155 in England at the last general election but just 80 across the UK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_England
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    Yes, this specific issue was the undoing of Ed Miliband.

    If the polls are even looking close to a hung parliament, Starmer needs to make it explicitly clear that he will never work with nor rely on the SNP for support, even if it means no government can be formed and we move to a second election
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Even a broken clock can be right.

    Just because what suits us also suits our enemy does not mean we shouldn't do it.
    Good attempt Philip, but no, that doesn't wash. 52% of the population, including yourself are useful idiots. You can't call yourself patriots because you have done the bidding of a foreign despot who is most definitely hostile. The same bunch of idiots have also been very useful to another bunch of non-military hostile nationalists- those of the Scottish variety. Our enemies must love you. You are the equivalents of the appeasers of the 1930s.
    Nonsense.

    The equivalent to Putin in the 1930s was Stalin.

    The EU is not equivalent to the Nazis by any means, so don't think I'm pulling a Godwin. But when it came to our European policy in the 1930s and early 1940s the interests of the UK and USSR aligned. Temporarily.

    I hold no truck with Putin, he is an evil dictator. But if our interests coincide with Putin's then so be it. I'm not doing the bidding of Putin, I'm doing what is right for the UK and if that happens to be right for Russia then so be it.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Complete lunacy but thank you for the insight.
    Sorry does it hurt? Are you one of Putin's Usefuls? I guess so. Well done mate, he must be grateful for your LACK of insight.

    Thatcher and Reagan defeated the Soviet Union. Putin is getting his revenge by having a moron in the Whitehouse, a clown in No10, damage to the EU and the likely breakup of the UK. You can reflect on the fact that you and a very gullible 52% of the population were gulled by his propaganda and have massively assisted his goals. The lunacy is with you, and you can own it as it plays out.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,213
    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    It is worth remembering that Putin doesn't really care who wins. In 2016, ploughed money into Black Lives Matter in the US, as well as into supporting the Trump campaign. The more disunited we are, the better his geopolitical position.

    You can be assured his bots are probably trying to amplify AC Grayling to the FBPE crowd, just as they are with the Farage tweets regarding migrants attempting to cross the Channel.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,390
    A very interesting header, thank you.

    However, I'm not persuaded that Blue Labour is either the right way to go, or what will happen. Starmer (and Nandy) certainly know that they need to dispel the apparently 'anti-British' rhetoric of the previous regime, and are already doing that. But I don't think they will subscribe to the rather rose-tinted, nostalgic vision implied by Blue Labour. The world has moved on, like it or not, and, for example, religious belief has continued to diminish in the majority community, and families come in all shapes and sizes now - there is no going back. And Labour members would not run with the Blue Labour nostalgia. What Nandy, in particular, is keen on is progressive values that emphasis the importance of community.

    What I think is often forgotten is that politicians should seek to change people's minds, rather than just bow to a prevailing view. For example, Labour should not give up on the Red Wall new Conservatives. They should be seeking to persuade them that voting Labour is in their individual and collective interests, and that progressive values are to their benefit, not their detriment. Not easy, I know, but we shouldn't just give up and always bend to the perceived will of the voters. That will is not preserved in aspic.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Essexit said:

    OT: Barring an SNP collapse, Labour won't win again without significant recovery in the Red Wall, so a bit of 'blue' is what they need. I can't see Keir Starmer wanting to do that though, or - more to the point - being able to do so convincingly if he wanted.

    And thanks for a good thread header Rotten.

    Thanks.

    There is also the issue of whether his activists will let him, even if he wanted to or thought it expedient.

    I mean just look at the last Lab conference. Awash with stuff and motions that can almost certainly not be described as 'blue' labour.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,702

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Anecdotally, but I've found a much quicker response from the office of my local Johnsonite MP since I started sending my messages to them in Russian.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited July 2020

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I don't think so. To a quite astonishing extent Blair presented himself as lacking any sense of the resonance of the past, tradition, attachment to place, old fashioned culture, kitchen sink loyalties. How this is possible for an Anglican/Catholic family man with roots in Fettes, Oxford, the Bar and the Labour party In have no idea. It was his greatest weakness, leading directly to a complete misreading of the Middle East and other failures too.

    Blue Labour would surely have a greater grasp of the significance of the past and our inherited culture.
    Then what's the Blue all about?
    Blue like blue collar (and to some extent like The Blues), not blue like Conservative Blue.
    Ah I see!! Crystal clear thanks - I'm putting my lack of understanding down to pre-Friday-drinking dysphoria.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,528
    I don't think "Blue Labour" is going to be relevant in the next few years.
    It came about at a time, early 2010s, when economic factors (jobs, inflation, interest rates, strikes, even crime) were not the problem they once were.
    So politics became about culture instead.
    But economic politics is going to come back, big time, post-COVID.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,885
    Sandpit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    Yes, this specific issue was the undoing of Ed Miliband.

    If the polls are even looking close to a hung parliament, Starmer needs to make it explicitly clear that he will never work with nor rely on the SNP for support, even if it means no government can be formed and we move to a second election
    Yet that would probably kill off Labour in Scotland. And Unionism more generally, as it might regain some votes for SLAB from the SCUP.

    Why call yourself a Unionist and then deny the vast majority of Scottish MPs any role in ruling the UK?

    Not that Mr Starmer has much to lose at Westminster, apart from Mr Murray.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    Who in Blue Labour would "take a knee", I wonder....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205

    Essexit said:

    OT: Barring an SNP collapse, Labour won't win again without significant recovery in the Red Wall, so a bit of 'blue' is what they need. I can't see Keir Starmer wanting to do that though, or - more to the point - being able to do so convincingly if he wanted.

    And thanks for a good thread header Rotten.

    Thanks.

    There is also the issue of whether his activists will let him, even if he wanted to or thought it expedient.

    I mean just look at the last Lab conference. Awash with stuff and motions that can almost certainly not be described as 'blue' labour.
    Like the piece. Corbyn's Labour was definitely a deep shade of red.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Even a broken clock can be right.

    Just because what suits us also suits our enemy does not mean we shouldn't do it.
    Good attempt Philip, but no, that doesn't wash. 52% of the population, including yourself are useful idiots. You can't call yourself patriots because you have done the bidding of a foreign despot who is most definitely hostile. The same bunch of idiots have also been very useful to another bunch of non-military hostile nationalists- those of the Scottish variety. Our enemies must love you. You are the equivalents of the appeasers of the 1930s.
    Nonsense.

    The equivalent to Putin in the 1930s was Stalin.

    The EU is not equivalent to the Nazis by any means, so don't think I'm pulling a Godwin. But when it came to our European policy in the 1930s and early 1940s the interests of the UK and USSR aligned. Temporarily.

    I hold no truck with Putin, he is an evil dictator. But if our interests coincide with Putin's then so be it. I'm not doing the bidding of Putin, I'm doing what is right for the UK and if that happens to be right for Russia then so be it.
    They are not "our" interests. The breakup of the UK is not "our" interest (though you seem to think that is OK), and neither is the certain economic damage. The reason why Putin wanted it, was because he saw it as a way to cause maximum damage the EU and the UK without actual war. He was right. I think his geopolitical view might carry more weight than yours.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Complete lunacy but thank you for the insight.
    Sorry does it hurt? Are you one of Putin's Usefuls? I guess so. Well done mate, he must be grateful for your LACK of insight.

    Thatcher and Reagan defeated the Soviet Union. Putin is getting his revenge by having a moron in the Whitehouse, a clown in No10, damage to the EU and the likely breakup of the UK. You can reflect on the fact that you and a very gullible 52% of the population were gulled by his propaganda and have massively assisted his goals. The lunacy is with you, and you can own it as it plays out.
    No. Russia is a rather impotent powerless backwater, propped up by past glories and the oil price. They're trying to meddle in our affairs because they're not powerful enough to actually achieve anything on their own, hence their attempts to snoop on our scientists.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I think a lot of traditional working class Labour voters felt that Blair ignored their concerns in order to chase marginal voters down South. Labour's loss of working class support really accelerated under Blair.
    Plus of course there have always been working class Tories (eg Alf Garnet) so it's not as if Labour can, should, or has to get all working class people to vote for it.
    Not really, even in 2005 Labour won 40% of C2s and 48% of DEs.

    By 2019 though Labour won only 32% of C2s and 39% of DEs.

    Labour's AB voteshare was virtually the same under Corbyn and Blair, 30% in 2019 and 28% in 2005, in fact Corbyn did better with the upper middle class than Blair in 2005 but far worse with the working class. C1s were the same under Blair in 2005 and Corbyn in 2019 too, 32% each


    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2005

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2019-election
    Yes but Labour support among C2s and DEs declined by 10-11pp between 97-05 while their support among ABs went down just 3pp. I think a lot of working class people especially in traditional Labour-voting ex industrial areas had high hopes of a Labour government after the disasters of Thatcherism, and were disappointed that Labour didn't do more for them.
  • HYUFD said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    Keir Starmer's ability to get into No.10 may end up depending critically on his ability to persuade Middle England of the merits of having a minority Labour Government propped up by, and acting at the beck and call of, Scottish Nationalism.

    If Labour can't demonstrate that it has a good chance of reaching an overall Parliamentary majority on its own - and bear in mind at this juncture that it hasn't come anywhere close to this since Blair retired - then it has a serious problem.
    In something of a cleft stick then.

    If the long term strategy is winning in England, it inevitably suggests giving up on Scotland as those hypothetical ex miners gone blue aren't going to have much truck with making concessions to Nicola. Tbf Labour's current strategy in Scotland fairly reeks of giving up.

    As I recall it Blue Labour was entirely concerned with the psyche of the English working class, so its resurgence as an idea would make sense in this context.
    I would go so far as to say that it is now in the interest of Labour in England (Scottish Labour being a failed rump which can be ignored) for the Union to end. It would remove their SNP problem and leave them needing to make fewer gains to win.

    Boris Johnson, on the other hand, will want to stonewall demands for a second referendum for as long as possible. I don't think he's bothered about the Union, so much as the concern that breaking it will break him too. And, of course, Scotland is a useful stick with which to beat Starmer.
    Wrong, the Tories had a majority of 155 in England at the last general election but just 80 across the UK

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_England
    Those two points are not contradictory.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,213
    edited July 2020
    Essexit said:

    OT: Barring an SNP collapse, Labour won't win again without significant recovery in the Red Wall, so a bit of 'blue' is what they need. I can't see Keir Starmer wanting to do that though, or - more to the point - being able to do so convincingly if he wanted.

    And thanks for a good thread header Rotten.

    That's probably, but not necessarily true.

    It's possible we see - as has happened in the US - that Labour becomes not just the party of the city centres, but of the suburbs too (v. bad news for the LDs, if true, of course).

    In that scenario, it's not Northern, formerly-industrial, towns that go from Blue to Red, but places like Hazel Grove.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Who in Blue Labour would "take a knee", I wonder....

    Not me for sure.

    I would need several assistants to help me back to my feet again!
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Nigelb said:
    I just got back from a sally forth in the northern suburbs of Atlanta. In a restaurant, a drug store and a supermarket, I must have encountered upwards of 30-40 people. I counted 2 without masks.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Even a broken clock can be right.

    Just because what suits us also suits our enemy does not mean we shouldn't do it.
    Good attempt Philip, but no, that doesn't wash. 52% of the population, including yourself are useful idiots. You can't call yourself patriots because you have done the bidding of a foreign despot who is most definitely hostile. The same bunch of idiots have also been very useful to another bunch of non-military hostile nationalists- those of the Scottish variety. Our enemies must love you. You are the equivalents of the appeasers of the 1930s.
    Nonsense.

    The equivalent to Putin in the 1930s was Stalin.

    The EU is not equivalent to the Nazis by any means, so don't think I'm pulling a Godwin. But when it came to our European policy in the 1930s and early 1940s the interests of the UK and USSR aligned. Temporarily.

    I hold no truck with Putin, he is an evil dictator. But if our interests coincide with Putin's then so be it. I'm not doing the bidding of Putin, I'm doing what is right for the UK and if that happens to be right for Russia then so be it.
    They are not "our" interests. The breakup of the UK is not "our" interest (though you seem to think that is OK), and neither is the certain economic damage. The reason why Putin wanted it, was because he saw it as a way to cause maximum damage the EU and the UK without actual war. He was right. I think his geopolitical view might carry more weight than yours.
    If the Scots and English have different aims then the peaceful breakup of the UK is in our interest. This country has always been most successful when it attempts to move forward democratically and not attempt to subjugate people.

    I couldn't care less if is suits his interests, he's the leader of a failed tinpot minor and inconsequential state. Its like worrying about the interests of the late Mugabe.
  • I don't think "Blue Labour" is going to be relevant in the next few years.
    It came about at a time, early 2010s, when economic factors (jobs, inflation, interest rates, strikes, even crime) were not the problem they once were.
    So politics became about culture instead.
    But economic politics is going to come back, big time, post-COVID.

    Did you live in a different early 2010s than I did? The tail end of the biggest financial crash since the Great Depression? Inflation and deflation jockeying in turn for which we were most worried about? Unemployment doubling? A deficit crisis across Europe? Those early 2010s?
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    I am baffled as to why separating the UK from the European Union is beneficial to Russia.

    What holds Putin in check is not the EU, but NATO. There is no way an independent Britain is going to renege on its commitments there any more than a UK inside the EU would.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Good piece. Instinctively, and of course I have no instinct from what drives Lab voters, wouldn't Blue Lab be in favour of Tony Blair?

    I think a lot of traditional working class Labour voters felt that Blair ignored their concerns in order to chase marginal voters down South. Labour's loss of working class support really accelerated under Blair.
    Plus of course there have always been working class Tories (eg Alf Garnet) so it's not as if Labour can, should, or has to get all working class people to vote for it.
    I see thanks. I suppose that is the eggs/omelette dilemma about getting yourself elected.

    Plus I thought that Maggie was the one that accumulated working class votes with all that aspiration stuff?
    I think that working class Tories loved Thatcher but in Labour voting areas (especially in Scotland and the North of England) she was generally loathed. She was quite a marmite politician!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,213
    Tim_B said:

    Nigelb said:
    I just got back from a sally forth in the northern suburbs of Atlanta. In a restaurant, a drug store and a supermarket, I must have encountered upwards of 30-40 people. I counted 2 without masks.
    Fingers crossed the CV-19 moving average for Atlanta starts heading down again.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,240

    I don't think "Blue Labour" is going to be relevant in the next few years.
    It came about at a time, early 2010s, when economic factors (jobs, inflation, interest rates, strikes, even crime) were not the problem they once were.
    So politics became about culture instead.
    But economic politics is going to come back, big time, post-COVID.

    The other issue that that values are massively age-dependent; the really values-driven votes (the 2016 referendum and the 2017/19 elections) had a massive age gradient from young/remain/left to old/leave/right.

    Whilst it's a truism that people become more right-wing as they get older, that's much easier to understand in an economic sense than a social sense. Without wishing anyone dead, hitching your wagon to the desires of the older voter (which is what Blue Labour and Red Tory do on average) isn't necessarily a winning long-term strategy.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Nice piece (but as noted below, some text appears twice). It's a tough one. But if the Tories can persuade ex miners that Boris Johnson has their best interests at heart then it shouldn't be impossible for Labour to find a way to assemble an election-winning coalition.

    I don't believe any ex-miners thought Johnson has their best interests at heart. What they did know was that Corbyn was not for them. They thought a clown better than a Marxist. A crap choice, but one that had to be made.
    Ironic then, that they should side with Mr Putin's Russian trolls.
    Indeed. Putin has been having lots of laughs at us over the last few years. It is a massive irony that so many people who voted for Leave believe themselves to be patriotic, when in reality they were advancing the foreign policy agenda of a hostile power.
    Another great way for Labour and the Lib Dems to avoid ever facing the responsibility of governing again is for them to keep obsessing with conspiracy theories about why plebs didn't do as they were told in 2016.
    Er, I have been a Conservative (a proper one) for most of my adult life, so I do not necessarily hold any view with respect to Labour or Lib Dems. However, you are, as the Donald might say WRONG: "The plebs" did do as they were told, only the bloke who was telling them what to do is an ex member of the KGB (and I am not referring to Mr Corbyn who I am sure has never had any dealings with that organisation).
    Complete lunacy but thank you for the insight.
    Sorry does it hurt? Are you one of Putin's Usefuls? I guess so. Well done mate, he must be grateful for your LACK of insight.

    Thatcher and Reagan defeated the Soviet Union. Putin is getting his revenge by having a moron in the Whitehouse, a clown in No10, damage to the EU and the likely breakup of the UK. You can reflect on the fact that you and a very gullible 52% of the population were gulled by his propaganda and have massively assisted his goals. The lunacy is with you, and you can own it as it plays out.
    No. Russia is a rather impotent powerless backwater, propped up by past glories and the oil price. They're trying to meddle in our affairs because they're not powerful enough to actually achieve anything on their own, hence their attempts to snoop on our scientists.
    Oh dear, you really don't understand the threat posed by a despot with a grievance do you? particularly one that has a very large (if outdated) military. Clearly no sense of history. I feel for you though, it must be difficult to accept that you have been duped by a foreign power, when you delude yourself about patriotism. People who desperately wanted to believe in appeasement must have felt the same
This discussion has been closed.