Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Tories look set to take Hartlepool which has seen a huge turnout – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 7 in General
imageThe Tories look set to take Hartlepool which has seen a huge turnout – politicalbetting.com

All the signs are that Hartlepool is going blue by some margin and the big news is that turnout is in excess of 50% – which is huge for a by-election in a seat where fewer than 60% voted at GE2019.

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871
    Test
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871
    RobD said:

    Test

    Test message, please ignore.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    edited May 7
    First? First non-test, the real deal!

    Some question re: Hartlepool turnout, several numbers floating around.

    Could be their still digging them out? And counting up the postals?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    Second! Like Labour in Hartlepool.....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    Second! Like Labour in Hartlepool.....

    Damn, fourth. Who knew REFUK would come second.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Mr Electable seems to be a lot worse at this whole seat/vote winning thing than the guy we were told was unelectable before him...

    Almost like some people just say these things because they want them to be true rather than them actually being true.

    The reason people love centrist Labour on this board is because it offers the Tories an easy ride to power.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    We're all Tories now, Comrade.....
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    Here is a tribute to all the campaign workers, of whatever persuasion (or nationality)

    Jefferson Airplane Volunteers (Live At Woodstock 1969)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzHBr0ndKus&list=RDMM&index=7

    This was a true wake-up call at Woodstock. Ear-ly in the morning!
  • Cocky_cockneyCocky_cockney Posts: 760
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1390499024030081030?s=20

    In my lifetime I've seen two great realignments in British politics: 1979 and 1992.

    This is the third.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357
    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828

    We're all Tories now, Comrade.....

    I think we are just all united in not being Labour, which is close enough comrade!
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,306
    Councillors - after 5 Councils:

    Lab 40 (-24)
    Con 40 (+23)

    So it's gone:

    From 64-17

    To 40-40
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    Another oldie but goodie by Bonnie Raitt, that speaks to how Labour supporters must be feeling, watching their heritage voters take a hike tonight . . .

    Bonnie Raitt - Runaway
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPzcZNgVfpA&list=RDMM&index=12
  • Cocky_cockneyCocky_cockney Posts: 760
    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    UKIP was supposed to be a temporary phenomenon whilst Brexit happened.

    This proves it was not temporary and nor was it just for UKIP. The blue Labour vote is real. The tories have stormed the Red Wall. The political landscape has altered.

    So, no, not just like a pint of lager.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    The last time a Conservative was elected in Hartlepool Cliff Richard was No.1 with "Living Doll", Ben-Hur was in the cinema, Winston Churchill was alive, England had not yet won a World Cup & Tony Blair was 6. Ignore the hot takes playing it down. If it happens, it's a big deal

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1390404962665091074?s=20
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    The last time a Conservative was elected in Hartlepool Cliff Richard was No.1 with "Living Doll", Ben-Hur was in the cinema, Winston Churchill was alive, England had not yet won a World Cup & Tony Blair was 6. Ignore the hot takes playing it down. If it happens, it's a big deal

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1390404962665091074?s=20

    Cliff Richards - Living Doll
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FywWztbig9k
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Andy_JS said:

    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"

    More of those Labour to Tory switchers who are doing it because they want a more right wing Labour party....
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    Labour > UKIP/Brexit > Conservative = Realignment
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357

    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    UKIP was supposed to be a temporary phenomenon whilst Brexit happened.

    This proves it was not temporary and nor was it just for UKIP. The blue Labour vote is real. The tories have stormed the Red Wall. The political landscape has altered.

    So, no, not just like a pint of lager.
    Au contraire, I don't think it was ever temporary - there's been a right wing majority across the UK for most of the last 100 years - hence why Labour has spent so much time out of power.

    My point is that what we are seeing tonight is largely the result of UKIP going out of business.

    It's like a pub that has had 23% of beer sales be Carling for the last decade and 27% carlsberg. All of a sudden there's no Carling, so the Carling drinkers switch to Carlsberg.

    The point is there's always been a slight, 53% majority for weak, fizzy piss.
  • Cocky_cockneyCocky_cockney Posts: 760
    edited May 7

    The last time a Conservative was elected in Hartlepool Cliff Richard was No.1 with "Living Doll", Ben-Hur was in the cinema, Winston Churchill was alive, England had not yet won a World Cup & Tony Blair was 6. Ignore the hot takes playing it down. If it happens, it's a big deal

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1390404962665091074?s=20

    Yep it's massive.

    Those (eg kyf_100 below) saying it is 'just UKIP' switching to the tories are neatly forgetting that UKIP didn't exist a decade or so back. The point is that the blue Labour voters haven't returned to Labour. They are now Boris tories.

    It's a complete paradigm shift in British politics. Nothing less.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,318
    The implications for Wales are quite something considering that PC & Lab split the left vote far more in Assembly elections...
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,077
    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    You are missing the point, many of those Brexit party voters were solid former Labour voters in Hartlepool who last time couldn't quite make the journey to the Conservatives. But once they had voted for another party other than Labour over the issue of Brexit, it then became a stepping stone to voting Conservative after they had delivered Brexit. Those voters do not see this as a substitution, they see it as the choice for the party that delivered their first choice. Hence my question on the last thread about why on earth the Labour party would chose a candidate with a clear record for consistently voting against Brexit in his brief tenure as an MP between 2017 and 2019. Surely the fact that he lost his seat in 2019 was a big giveaway?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    Andy_JS said:

    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"

    More of those Labour to Tory switchers who are doing it because they want a more right wing Labour party....
    And the Kippers who used to be Labour also? Not sure how either helps your argument?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,306
    SNP maj has drifted on Betfair.

    Back 2.26 / Lay 2.6
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357
    fitalass said:

    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    You are missing the point, many of those Brexit party voters were solid former Labour voters in Hartlepool who last time couldn't quite make the journey to the Conservatives. But once they had voted for another party other than Labour over the issue of Brexit, it then became a stepping stone to voting Conservative after they had delivered Brexit. Those voters do not see this as a substitution, they see it as the choice for the party that delivered their first choice. Hence my question on the last thread about why on earth the Labour party would chose a candidate with a clear record for consistently voting against Brexit in his brief tenure as an MP between 2017 and 2019. Surely the fact that he lost his seat in 2019 was a big giveaway?
    There has been a conservative majority in the Uk for at least the last century, so I'd say there's some continuity.

    In terms of realignment we are seeing a reflection of a global trend of old vs young, post-industrial hinterland vs globalised cities. Not exactly a surprise since this has been happening the last decade or more.

    All we are seeing tonight is the adding of the UKIP vote of the last few elections to the Con vote. Hardly surprising, unless you thought once Nige packed it in they were all going to vote Green?
  • Nunu3Nunu3 Posts: 167
    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.
  • Cocky_cockneyCocky_cockney Posts: 760
    kyf_100 said:

    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    UKIP was supposed to be a temporary phenomenon whilst Brexit happened.

    This proves it was not temporary and nor was it just for UKIP. The blue Labour vote is real. The tories have stormed the Red Wall. The political landscape has altered.

    So, no, not just like a pint of lager.
    Au contraire, I don't think it was ever temporary - there's been a right wing majority across the UK for most of the last 100 years - hence why Labour has spent so much time out of power.

    My point is that what we are seeing tonight is largely the result of UKIP going out of business.

    It's like a pub that has had 23% of beer sales be Carling for the last decade and 27% carlsberg. All of a sudden there's no Carling, so the Carling drinkers switch to Carlsberg.

    The point is there's always been a slight, 53% majority for weak, fizzy piss.
    No idea what your beer analogies are about, sorry.

    Glorious revisionism from you. 1997-2010 Tony Blair's Labour was in power and you're taking your weak piss if you think that was a right wing majority. Cameron wasn't right wing. It was a coalition Gov't with the LibDems.

    And Boris' capture of the Red Wall isn't about being 'Right Wing' which is such a 1950's outmoded way of thinking. This is about a realignment. Former natural Labour voters are aligning with the Conservatives. Boris has planted his brand of politics in the north, a populism that has captured old school right and left. He's a pickpocket of some renown.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,819

    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    UKIP was supposed to be a temporary phenomenon whilst Brexit happened.

    This proves it was not temporary and nor was it just for UKIP. The blue Labour vote is real. The tories have stormed the Red Wall. The political landscape has altered.

    So, no, not just like a pint of lager.
    When people thought UKIP would be temporary, I doubt they meant that world view would just die with Brexit. I think the belief that these voters would ‘return home’ to the Tories was precisely the belief behind the idea UKIP would be a temporary phenomenon in British politics.

    I’m not surprised by tonight’s results (so far). Starmer’s Labour is bland nothingness. Most voters likely have no idea what the hell he stands for. They can reshuffle the shadow cabinet and blame people like Dodds all they like, it won’t actually change the crux of the problem. Even Blair in 1997 stood for something.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357

    Andy_JS said:

    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"

    More of those Labour to Tory switchers who are doing it because they want a more right wing Labour party....
    And the Kippers who used to be Labour also? Not sure how either helps your argument?
    I think the point is that the voters didn't change, their parties did.

    "I'm big, it's the pictures that got small".
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,306
    Con gain Harlow

    Con 20 (+7)
    Lab 12 (-7)
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited May 7
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    edited May 7
    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
  • Cocky_cockneyCocky_cockney Posts: 760
    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"

    More of those Labour to Tory switchers who are doing it because they want a more right wing Labour party....
    And the Kippers who used to be Labour also? Not sure how either helps your argument?
    I think the point is that the voters didn't change, their parties did.

    "I'm big, it's the pictures that got small".
    Nice try. But to you a tsunami is merely a ripple.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,417
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
    Ah, I hadn't appreciated "won a massive mandate" meant "lost".
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    Looking forward to the dawn and beyond . . .

    Warren Zevon - Werewolves Of London
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qae25976UgA&list=RDMM&index=8

    Johnny Cope · Planxty
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeIufFgQf44
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,417
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
    Ah, I hadn't appreciated "won a massive mandate" meant "lost".
    Well Jezza claimed he won.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,306
    Redditch:

    Con 25 (+7)
    Lab 4 (-7)
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    Result within 60 to 90 minutes according to Hartlepool returning officer on Sky News.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,819
    The whole ‘centrist vs left wing’ argument in Labour misses the point. There is no point in putting up a candidate from either of these wings if they are either toxic and unelectable like Corbyn was, or bland and increasingly appearing to be unelectable as Starmer is looking to be.

    I agree that this realignment is in part, motivated by age. Many of these areas the Tories are doing well in are areas that are becoming older. The younger voters aren’t coming home, which makes things a lot more difficult for Labour regardless who is leader and whether or not they are a ‘centrist.’
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Another Green gain from Labour:

    "Britain Elects
    @BritainElects
    Westoe (South Tyneside) council result:

    Grn: 51.2% (+42.0)
    Lab: 31.0% (-13.1)
    Con: 17.8% (+1.0)

    No UKIP (-29.9) as prev.

    Grn GAIN from Lab"

    More of those Labour to Tory switchers who are doing it because they want a more right wing Labour party....
    And the Kippers who used to be Labour also? Not sure how either helps your argument?
    I think the point is that the voters didn't change, their parties did.

    "I'm big, it's the pictures that got small".
    Nice try. But to you a tsunami is merely a ripple.
    Not quite. My thesis is simply that there's always been a mushy, right-leaning patriotic consensus in the UK.

    2015 fought on PR terms would have delivered us a Con/UKIP pact.

    My point is quite simple, if you add up the Con + Ukip vote of tonight, you'd end up with the same result as you might have in 2015.

    Nothing has changed, except UKIP has gone out of business.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    edited May 7
    fitalass said:

    kyf_100 said:

    All I'm really seeing here is a lot of UKIP > Con transfers, hardly the seismic shift some people on here are talking about.

    It's like a bunch of people rocking up to their favourite Spoons and finding Carling is out so switching to Carlsberg instead. It's not a change of preferences, it's a substitution.

    why on earth the Labour party would chose a candidate with a clear record for consistently voting against Brexit in his brief tenure as an MP between 2017 and 2019. Surely the fact that he lost his seat in 2019 was a big giveaway?
    When you write "Labour Party" wasn't the candidate imposed from the centre and not selected locally?

    In which case "Keir Starmer" may be the more appropriate party to ask?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    At least my example was a prime minister in this millennium. Labour will win if they tack to the center. Otherwise they'll be stuck in the wilderness.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
    Ah, I hadn't appreciated "won a massive mandate" meant "lost".
    Okay smart arse, 2010 or is Gordon Brown some kind of communist?

    2015?

    Centrism has been losing for Labour for years

    I took your 'properly embraced' with good will as being Blair but if we want to be picky and funny about it what is your argument then?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871
    edited May 7

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
    Ah, I hadn't appreciated "won a massive mandate" meant "lost".
    Okay smart arse, 2010 or is Gordon Brown some kind of communist?

    2015?

    Centrism has been losing for Labour for years

    I took your 'properly embraced' with good will as being Blair but if we want to be picky and funny about it what is your argument then?
    2010 and 2015 were a "properly embraced left wing manifesto"? Anyway, in both elections they lost.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007
    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    At least my example was a prime minister in this millennium. Labour will win if they tack to the center. Otherwise they'll be stuck in the wilderness.
    Blairs 3 terms were almost secured in the first election (Conservative weakness added) he is from the last century.

    All example from this century show the exact opposite of what you are saying.

    Centrism electoral wilderness going left coming out of it.

    The evidence is once again here tonight.

    Blair is no more a magic answer than Atlee is, the evidence of how people vote in the modern day is here in recent elections not ones from leader selected in previous centuries, you just want Labour to stay right because it is easy to beat.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 54,871

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    At least my example was a prime minister in this millennium. Labour will win if they tack to the center. Otherwise they'll be stuck in the wilderness.
    Blairs 3 terms were almost secured in the first election (Conservative weakness added) he is from the last century.

    All example from this century show the exact opposite of what you are saying.

    Centrism electoral wilderness going left coming out of it.

    The evidence is once again here tonight.

    Blair is no more a magic answer than Atlee is, the evidence of how people vote in the modern day is here in recent elections not ones from leader selected in previous centuries, you just want Labour to stay right because it is easy to beat.
    That's because the other party was better at centrism in those elections. Appealing to the extremes does nothing.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,819
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    This. It’s also the reason why the argument ‘Labour needs to be just like Blue Labour’ is misguided. Under Corbyn, Labour’s answer to this appeared to be to focus on economic issues as an area which potentially both of these groups could agree. It was executed with some degree of success in 2017, but was disastrously executed in 2019.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    Corbyn 2017.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    At least my example was a prime minister in this millennium. Labour will win if they tack to the center. Otherwise they'll be stuck in the wilderness.
    Blairs 3 terms were almost secured in the first election (Conservative weakness added) he is from the last century.

    All example from this century show the exact opposite of what you are saying.

    Centrism electoral wilderness going left coming out of it.

    The evidence is once again here tonight.

    Blair is no more a magic answer than Atlee is, the evidence of how people vote in the modern day is here in recent elections not ones from leader selected in previous centuries, you just want Labour to stay right because it is easy to beat.
    You remind me of UvdL, except that where she sees "more EU" as the solution to every problem, you see "more left wing".
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,357
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    What's the coalition? Both understanding that they are poor.

    The new coalition can be formed vs boomers (who own 57% of all wealth) vs everyone else, e.g. millennials owning 3% of all wealth.

    The new coalition will be old vs young, but it might take another election cycle or two.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    More than half of the Conservatives' council seats so far are gains

    https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/1390507846866022400?s=20
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    2019 ?
    Ah, I hadn't appreciated "won a massive mandate" meant "lost".
    Okay smart arse, 2010 or is Gordon Brown some kind of communist?

    2015?

    Centrism has been losing for Labour for years

    I took your 'properly embraced' with good will as being Blair but if we want to be picky and funny about it what is your argument then?
    2010 and 2015 were a "properly embraced left wing manifesto"? Anyway, in both elections they lost.
    ?!

    Brown is a smidgen away from Blair politically and Ed may be left himself but he was under strict orders of the progress wing of the party (Blairs fan club)

    Aside from 2017 and 2019 Labours position has been firmly decided by those on the right on the party.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    Corbyn 2017.
    So, all the Labour needs is the exact same coalition as 2017, combined with a monumentally unpopular Conservative leader, and then it will end up only about 60 seats short of a majority.

    "One more heave" eh comrades.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,819
    I don’t think Tories want Labour to be more to the right as part of some plot to keep them out of power. I think many want the right to have a total dominance over the political consensus, and so any perceived embrace of ideas that challenge this is viewed in negative terms.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,077
    MikeL said:

    SNP maj has drifted on Betfair.

    Back 2.26 / Lay 2.6

    I placed a bet on the SNP not getting a majority a few weeks ago, just as I did back in 2016. So now we wait to see if the reports of a higher turnout at the Holyrood elections will favour them as most pundits predict, will that higher turnout help them in those marginal seats they are defending or targeting?
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,264
    rcs1000 said:

    I think this evening's results are both massively significant... and impermanent.

    The Conservatives have scooped up the UKIP/BXP vote. That's a lot of DNV/WNV/ex-Lab voters who have gone to them. And that's a great achievement, which bodes well for them keeping the "Red Wall" seats in 2024.

    But there is also a reminder here. Labour won these seats because their denizens felt that they had been forgotten and left behind by the party of government. (That party, most of the time, being the Conservative Party.) They have given the Conservatives a chance, because the Conservatives delivered Brexit and delivered vaccines.

    But go back a mere fifteen years. In many cases these places gave the LibDems a chance. And when the LibDems did nothing for them, then dumped them like third period French.

    Having an external enemy - the EU, the metropolitan elite, the woke - helps. But it isn't the same as jobs and homes and flourishing shops and safe streets. Akron, Ohio loved that Trump spoke to them. But to win these voters long term, you don't need just to speak to them, you need to turn their lives and their communities around.

    Winning is easy. Governing and maintaining a coalition is harder.

    Robert, I'd agree with you that tonight's numbers are impermanent, but one aspect of tonight is permanent: voting Tory is now clearly on the map.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007
    kyf_100 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    What's the coalition? Both understanding that they are poor.

    The new coalition can be formed vs boomers (who own 57% of all wealth) vs everyone else, e.g. millennials owning 3% of all wealth.

    The new coalition will be old vs young, but it might take another election cycle or two.
    Yes, I think that's probably right. And that was the hidden subtext of my last header.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    At least my example was a prime minister in this millennium. Labour will win if they tack to the center. Otherwise they'll be stuck in the wilderness.
    Blairs 3 terms were almost secured in the first election (Conservative weakness added) he is from the last century.

    All example from this century show the exact opposite of what you are saying.

    Centrism electoral wilderness going left coming out of it.

    The evidence is once again here tonight.

    Blair is no more a magic answer than Atlee is, the evidence of how people vote in the modern day is here in recent elections not ones from leader selected in previous centuries, you just want Labour to stay right because it is easy to beat.
    You remind me of UvdL, except that where she sees "more EU" as the solution to every problem, you see "more left wing".
    I am a numbers guy, just going with the numbers.

    I had to sit here and listen to the unelectable jibes but all the evidence is showing centrism is actually less electable (for Labour)

    I am supposed to ignore evidence showing I am right?

    Centrism is less electable, the numbers agree with me.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,819
    kyf_100 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    What's the coalition? Both understanding that they are poor.

    The new coalition can be formed vs boomers (who own 57% of all wealth) vs everyone else, e.g. millennials owning 3% of all wealth.

    The new coalition will be old vs young, but it might take another election cycle or two.
    My thinking as well. At the moment because of how big boomers are as a generation, anything that challenges the current economic settlement is going to struggle to win elections.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Labour really thought we would forget about their Brexit betrayal. As you sow, so you shall reap.

    It's not just about Brexit. The problem is white working-class provincial voters don't have much in common with big city metropolitanistas and vice versa. I'm not sure how they can keep that coalition of voters together.
    Spot on.

    If the Labour Party embraces the provincial WWC vote, they risk losing the globalist, metropolitan elite to the LibDems.

    Simply they need to step back and ask what's the coalition that gets to 40%?
    Corbyn 2017.
    So, all the Labour needs is the exact same coalition as 2017, combined with a monumentally unpopular Conservative leader, and then it will end up only about 60 seats short of a majority.

    "One more heave" eh comrades.
    Hah the idiots are talking about taking some inspiration from the closest they have come to success for years...

    What they need to do is more of this centrism nonsense that is currently losing them votes, clearly the right answer but they must not be doing it properly!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007
    TimT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think this evening's results are both massively significant... and impermanent.

    The Conservatives have scooped up the UKIP/BXP vote. That's a lot of DNV/WNV/ex-Lab voters who have gone to them. And that's a great achievement, which bodes well for them keeping the "Red Wall" seats in 2024.

    But there is also a reminder here. Labour won these seats because their denizens felt that they had been forgotten and left behind by the party of government. (That party, most of the time, being the Conservative Party.) They have given the Conservatives a chance, because the Conservatives delivered Brexit and delivered vaccines.

    But go back a mere fifteen years. In many cases these places gave the LibDems a chance. And when the LibDems did nothing for them, then dumped them like third period French.

    Having an external enemy - the EU, the metropolitan elite, the woke - helps. But it isn't the same as jobs and homes and flourishing shops and safe streets. Akron, Ohio loved that Trump spoke to them. But to win these voters long term, you don't need just to speak to them, you need to turn their lives and their communities around.

    Winning is easy. Governing and maintaining a coalition is harder.

    Robert, I'd agree with you that tonight's numbers are impermanent, but one aspect of tonight is permanent: voting Tory is now clearly on the map.
    That's fair: there is no circumstance where Labour can simply take these votes for granted again.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    Way Off-Topic - Wondering what's the top priority at Foggy Bottom these days? Same old same old!

    Politico.com - Diplomats to Biden: Don’t give the plum Europe posts to donors and allies
    President Joe Biden is expected to release his first batch of political nominees for ambassadorships in the coming weeks. “Right now, every post has significance,” a former officer warns.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/06/biden-diplomats-europe-ambassadors-485593

    Haven't actually read a word of this beyond the headline.

    But can tell you this much. The President of the United States, and I mean ANYONE who is POTUS - must to some extent, typically quite large, use the post of Ambassador for domestic political as well as foreign policy purposes.

    Washington did it, Lincoln did it, Roosevelt (both of em) did it, they ALL do it. And often for good reasons, with respect to getting good things done AND preventing bad things from happening at home.

    Lincoln put a first-rate man in London as American Minister in 1861 when it was THE most critical post in the diplomatic corps (some would say it still is). He set political hacks or problems (Simon Cameron Secretary of War > Minister to Russia fit both categories) to many other capitals. To get them out of the way or kick them upstairs or both.

    POTUS needs this flexibility.

    It is the duty of the Foreign Service to supply highly qualified, dedicated and connected (in their assigned stations AND back at State Dept) to make sure that ex-Senator Snort is kept reasonably on track AND out of trouble (to extent humanly possible).

    Politically speaking, its also a good idea for fundraising to have some prizes to be able to hand out to top donors. That's one reason why vast majority of US Minsters & Ambassadors to UK and France have been VERY rich people. Another reason is that the cost of much ambassadorial pomp & circumstance - no small thing in diplomacy - has been born by . . . guess who . . . the ambassadors.

    Which is somewhat helpful when the diplomats and their minders at Foggy Bottom have to justify the cost of the Foreign Service establishment here & abroad AND the entire foreign aid budget.

    Of course you cannot - or at least should not - put the kind of clowns that Trumpsky dispatched hither and yon (including the Court of St James) to hand out MAGA hats and advance the Putinist agenda abroad as well as at home.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828

    I don’t think Tories want Labour to be more to the right as part of some plot to keep them out of power. I think many want the right to have a total dominance over the political consensus, and so any perceived embrace of ideas that challenge this is viewed in negative terms.

    Obviously having the 2 parties espousing the same views as you hold is also nice but the obvious consequence of this is people abandoning Tory Mk 2 party.

    I don't expect people to embrace the idea of an opposition party offering different ideas out of some love of democracy or anything like that.

    I just expect some honesty about it being less electable than Labour offering a left wing platform in a political discussion based on the available evidence.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,264
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    Indeed, it is listening to the voters, rather than telling them they are stupid or evil if they don't sign up for your (outdated) dogma.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,077
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Quite simple, its because as far as those Red Wall voters are concerned, nothing has changed with the Labour Leadership. Corbyn may have been to the left of Starmer on the political scale, but they are both seen as metrocentric politicians who like the current Westminster Lobby live in a bubble that simple doesn't get or understand the rest of the UK. Take it from someone who lives in Scotland, when I hear the Westminster lobby talk about what is going on in Scotland, I feel like I have entered the twilight zone, and its a zone they have not even bothered to read up on. Seen plenty of comments from London/Westminster journalists this week giving their opinions on the Scottish elections, both lazy and embarrassing, but also frequently inadvertantly explaining why Sturgeon and her Government get a free pass when it comes to proper scrutiny or criticism for its failures.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    TimT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    Indeed, it is listening to the voters, rather than telling them they are stupid or evil if they don't sign up for your (outdated) dogma.
    Isn't that exactly what is happening tonight?

    Labour has done exactly that to get tummy rubs from the right wing press and as a result Labour voters have gone elsewhere.

    40% guy didn't do that, which is how he got to 40%.

    It is the centrists who have been scaring voters away, look at Starmer losing compared to Corbyn's low point.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    Labour already down 38 councillors. My assessment of them being down 200-250 (posted several days ago) may prove to be not too far off the pace.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    So long as your obsession is with not being "centrist" Labour, which you have hilariously managed to define as support for Saudi Arabia, you will continue to fail the people say you love.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    fitalass said:

    MikeL said:

    SNP maj has drifted on Betfair.

    Back 2.26 / Lay 2.6

    I placed a bet on the SNP not getting a majority a few weeks ago, just as I did back in 2016. So now we wait to see if the reports of a higher turnout at the Holyrood elections will favour them as most pundits predict, will that higher turnout help them in those marginal seats they are defending or targeting?
    Yer a cagey one, lassie! Asked you last night, and you were the Oracle of Deeside (or thereabouts). Not that I'm criticizing!

    My own thought is that, in this climate, rising turnout floats a lot of boats, and helps all parties, helping to balance & cancel out differentials. Like what happened in US last year.

    But of course some differentials will remain, and can make the difference in close situations. Esp when bet like your could turn on a single seat, constituency OR list.

    Kind like how New York State has just lost one seat - the last one apportioned #435 - by just 89 residents to Minnesota.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    fitalass said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Quite simple, its because as far as those Red Wall voters are concerned, nothing has changed with the Labour Leadership. Corbyn may have been to the left of Starmer on the political scale, but they are both seen as metrocentric politicians who like the current Westminster Lobby live in a bubble that simple doesn't get or understand the rest of the UK. Take it from someone who lives in Scotland, when I hear the Westminster lobby talk about what is going on in Scotland, I feel like I have entered the twilight zone, and its a zone they have not even bothered to read up on. Seen plenty of comments from London/Westminster journalists this week giving their opinions on the Scottish elections, both lazy and embarrassing, but also frequently inadvertantly explaining why Sturgeon and her Government get a free pass when it comes to proper scrutiny or criticism for its failures.
    Corbyn held Hartlepool twice.

    The problem is Starmer and centrism.

    CWU did some polling on Hartlepool

    https://twitter.com/liamyoung/status/1379208239942922242?lang=en

    ____________________________________________________
    CWU Hartlepool by-election poll: Conservative 49%, Labour 42%. More importantly shows massive support for transformative policies (69% support free broadband, 67% more investment in public services, 57% support renationalising Royal Mail)
    ______________________________________________________

    The people of Hartlepool want left wing policies not empty centrism.

    Quite frankly if they aren't going to get left wing policies from a Labour government they may as well vote Tory and get some investment from them as a reward instead.

    Both paths lead to investment, only one requires the trouble of having to vote for Labour so that one is probably preferable for Labour...

    But, spilt milk an all :)

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    But those "others" are the Palestinians!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007

    fitalass said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Quite simple, its because as far as those Red Wall voters are concerned, nothing has changed with the Labour Leadership. Corbyn may have been to the left of Starmer on the political scale, but they are both seen as metrocentric politicians who like the current Westminster Lobby live in a bubble that simple doesn't get or understand the rest of the UK. Take it from someone who lives in Scotland, when I hear the Westminster lobby talk about what is going on in Scotland, I feel like I have entered the twilight zone, and its a zone they have not even bothered to read up on. Seen plenty of comments from London/Westminster journalists this week giving their opinions on the Scottish elections, both lazy and embarrassing, but also frequently inadvertantly explaining why Sturgeon and her Government get a free pass when it comes to proper scrutiny or criticism for its failures.
    Corbyn held Hartlepool twice.

    The problem is Starmer and centrism.

    CWU did some polling on Hartlepool

    https://twitter.com/liamyoung/status/1379208239942922242?lang=en

    ____________________________________________________
    CWU Hartlepool by-election poll: Conservative 49%, Labour 42%. More importantly shows massive support for transformative policies (69% support free broadband, 67% more investment in public services, 57% support renationalising Royal Mail)
    ______________________________________________________

    The people of Hartlepool want left wing policies not empty centrism.

    Quite frankly if they aren't going to get left wing policies from a Labour government they may as well vote Tory and get some investment from them as a reward instead.

    Both paths lead to investment, only one requires the trouble of having to vote for Labour so that one is probably preferable for Labour...

    But, spilt milk an all :)

    Do you really believe that Corbyn would have won Hartlepool this time around? Given Boris delivered Brexit, and delivered vaccines.

    (I'd just like to gauge the depth of your delusion.)
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    Big mystery — why did Starmer go to Bath. where he was manhandled out of a pub? It's one of the biggest LD vs Con areas in the country, with Labour having very little support.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited May 7
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    So long as your obsession is with not being "centrist" Labour, which you have hilariously managed to define as support for Saudi Arabia, you will continue to fail the people say you love.
    The Labour right have been big Saudi supporters for a while, if you are going to criticise the left opposing the occupation of Palestine it is also fair me to criticise their Israeli and Saudi support.

    Or are only left wing people allowed to be criticised for their foreign policy views?

    Labour has done more successfully (without looking into the distant past) recently on the left and worse in the centre, if Labour wants to win and help people then it needs to be on the left.

    The evidence is very clear tonight, on the left wing low point Starmer is losing badly. Centrism does not work electorally for Labour.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007
    Just as a matter of interest @TheJezziah, why did Corbyn in 2019 do worse than Milliband in 2015 or Brown in 2010?

    What were his secret centrist tendencies that dragged him down?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,007
    rcs1000 said:

    Just as a matter of interest @TheJezziah, why did Corbyn in 2019 do worse than Milliband in 2015 or Brown in 2010?

    What were his secret centrist tendencies that dragged him down?

    Of Blair in 2005 or Blair in 2001 or Blair in 1997.

    Come to mention it, the only person that Corbyn 2019 seemed to beat was... ummm...

    Fuck me. He was beaten by Foot in 1983, who managed 209 seats against Corbyn's 202.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    North of England is like West Virginia + western Pennsylvania (outside of Pittsburgh) just with funnier accents and fewer guns. And no working coal mines.

    At the turn of the millennium WV & western PA was still mostly Democratic turf, way that North of England was still mostly Labour region.

    The times they are a changing. Already have in the Mountain State & western PA. Appear to be heading same trajectory in North of England.

    When such shifts occur, they may be temporary. But more often they are both sudden (relatively speaking) and long-lasting. Often with an emotional catalyst (depression, war, Trump, Boris) to really get the ball rolling.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,264

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    So long as your obsession is with not being "centrist" Labour, which you have hilariously managed to define as support for Saudi Arabia, you will continue to fail the people say you love.
    The Labour right have been big Saudi supporters for a while, if you are going to criticise the left opposing the occupation of Palestine it is also fair me to criticise their Israeli and Saudi support.

    Or are only left wing people allowed to be criticised for their foreign policy views?

    Labour has done more successfully (without looking into the distant past) recently on the left and worse in the centre, if Labour wants to win and help people then it needs to be on the left.

    The evidence is very clear tonight, on the left wing low point Starmer is losing badly. Centrism does not work electorally for Labour.
    Cherry picking. Labour did pretty well under Blair. Or was he some secret Corbynite?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    Just as a matter of interest @TheJezziah, why did Corbyn in 2019 do worse than Milliband in 2015 or Brown in 2010?

    What were his secret centrist tendencies that dragged him down?

    Brexit. I put the numbers up here the other day.

    The massive difference between 2017 and 2019 was people not voting Labour over Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1344031412815589383

    Voters who voted Labour in 2017 but not in 2019 were asked to list the main reason for their vote.

    The results were:

    34% ~ To get Brexit done
    18% ~ To stop Brexit
    14% ~ NHS & public services
    10% ~ Policies
    6% ~ Economy
    5% ~ Corbyn
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    Andy_JS said:

    Big mystery — why did Starmer go to Bath. where he was manhandled out of a pub? It's one of the biggest LD vs Con areas in the country, with Labour having very little support.

    One gets the distinct feeling, that these days the really smart political hacks are NOT coming or wanting to work for the Labour Party.

    Purists may see this as positive. But you really DO need some folks around who know how to make the trains run at all, let alone on time.

    Just ask the spirit of Leon!

    Trotsky that is. Who harnessed the Czarist officer corps to win the Russian Civil War for the Red Army.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,264

    North of England is like West Virginia + western Pennsylvania (outside of Pittsburgh) just with funnier accents and fewer guns. And no working coal mines.

    At the turn of the millennium WV & western PA was still mostly Democratic turf, way that North of England was still mostly Labour region.

    The times they are a changing. Already have in the Mountain State & western PA. Appear to be heading same trajectory in North of England.

    When such shifts occur, they may be temporary. But more often they are both sudden (relatively speaking) and long-lasting. Often with an emotional catalyst (depression, war, Trump, Boris) to really get the ball rolling.

    I was thinking much the same thing. Northern England (or the old coal mining areas of England in more general terms) is realigning towards populist conservatism, much as the US white blue-collar vote has.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    TimT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    So long as your obsession is with not being "centrist" Labour, which you have hilariously managed to define as support for Saudi Arabia, you will continue to fail the people say you love.
    The Labour right have been big Saudi supporters for a while, if you are going to criticise the left opposing the occupation of Palestine it is also fair me to criticise their Israeli and Saudi support.

    Or are only left wing people allowed to be criticised for their foreign policy views?

    Labour has done more successfully (without looking into the distant past) recently on the left and worse in the centre, if Labour wants to win and help people then it needs to be on the left.

    The evidence is very clear tonight, on the left wing low point Starmer is losing badly. Centrism does not work electorally for Labour.
    Cherry picking. Labour did pretty well under Blair. Or was he some secret Corbynite?
    Perhaps Jezza was the REAL Prime Minister, similar to how Trumpsky is still the REAL President?
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,077

    fitalass said:

    MikeL said:

    SNP maj has drifted on Betfair.

    Back 2.26 / Lay 2.6

    I placed a bet on the SNP not getting a majority a few weeks ago, just as I did back in 2016. So now we wait to see if the reports of a higher turnout at the Holyrood elections will favour them as most pundits predict, will that higher turnout help them in those marginal seats they are defending or targeting?
    Yer a cagey one, lassie! Asked you last night, and you were the Oracle of Deeside (or thereabouts). Not that I'm criticizing!

    My own thought is that, in this climate, rising turnout floats a lot of boats, and helps all parties, helping to balance & cancel out differentials. Like what happened in US last year.

    But of course some differentials will remain, and can make the difference in close situations. Esp when bet like your could turn on a single seat, constituency OR list.

    Kind like how New York State has just lost one seat - the last one apportioned #435 - by just 89 residents to Minnesota.
    You only have to be right once when it comes to political betting, I got it very right back in the 2017 GE. I got some delicious odds on the seats that the Scottish Conservative gained in that GE while not touching the UK wide Conservative predictions of a May majority. I thought she was totally wrong to call that election after saying she would not do it, the golden rule of self seeking politicians calling unnecessary GE's was proved right.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    rcs1000 said:

    fitalass said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Quite simple, its because as far as those Red Wall voters are concerned, nothing has changed with the Labour Leadership. Corbyn may have been to the left of Starmer on the political scale, but they are both seen as metrocentric politicians who like the current Westminster Lobby live in a bubble that simple doesn't get or understand the rest of the UK. Take it from someone who lives in Scotland, when I hear the Westminster lobby talk about what is going on in Scotland, I feel like I have entered the twilight zone, and its a zone they have not even bothered to read up on. Seen plenty of comments from London/Westminster journalists this week giving their opinions on the Scottish elections, both lazy and embarrassing, but also frequently inadvertantly explaining why Sturgeon and her Government get a free pass when it comes to proper scrutiny or criticism for its failures.
    Corbyn held Hartlepool twice.

    The problem is Starmer and centrism.

    CWU did some polling on Hartlepool

    https://twitter.com/liamyoung/status/1379208239942922242?lang=en

    ____________________________________________________
    CWU Hartlepool by-election poll: Conservative 49%, Labour 42%. More importantly shows massive support for transformative policies (69% support free broadband, 67% more investment in public services, 57% support renationalising Royal Mail)
    ______________________________________________________

    The people of Hartlepool want left wing policies not empty centrism.

    Quite frankly if they aren't going to get left wing policies from a Labour government they may as well vote Tory and get some investment from them as a reward instead.

    Both paths lead to investment, only one requires the trouble of having to vote for Labour so that one is probably preferable for Labour...

    But, spilt milk an all :)

    Do you really believe that Corbyn would have won Hartlepool this time around? Given Boris delivered Brexit, and delivered vaccines.

    (I'd just like to gauge the depth of your delusion.)
    He would do better than Starmer (struggle to do worse), although nobody (mostly) wanted Corbyn to go on, people wanted a new leader to build on the policies that had been successful not turn all the voters off by becoming a bad Blair impression.

    Now let me gauge your delusion, do you really believe a left wing Labour leader wouldn't be doing better than Starmer right now?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    edited May 7
    Just got dark about half hour ago in Seattle, am starting to yawn.

    Hope I won't have to stay up TOO much longer for the Hartlepool result!
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,264

    TimT said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    So I wonder why Tony Blairs political analysis will ever be taken seriously again...

    We not only got another leader but one he liked and wanted being guided by his fan club within the party.

    This could not be more what Blair wanted outside of personally leading the party.

    20 points ahead?!

    20 points ahead?!

    Tony you are a few decades behind the country, you need to take up something less taxing like golf or crossword puzzles.

    Centrism is an electoral joke.

    Is it? Johnson seems to be doing pretty good with centrism.
    For the Labour party it is, also feel free to argue with me here but I don't think Johnsons appeal comes from being a centrist.
    The last time Labour properly embraced centrism it won massive majorities.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    But being stuck in the last century is exactly what led Blair to being so disastrously wrong in his comments I mentioned above!

    We need to move on from leaders selected in the past century because the electorate has moved on!

    What Labour are doing now, which is going hilariously wrong is embracing centrism.

    If Labour wants to win votes centrism is suicide as we can clearly see on the evidence. Stop talking with regards to what you want and look at the actual evidence instead.
    The last time they properly embraced a left wing manifesto they won a massive mandate.

    When was that, 50 years ago?
    Your example is from a leader selected decades ago as well, the world has massive massively changed since Blairs original massive victory which combined with Conservative weakness gave him the next couple.

    Atlee, Wilson, Blair, all are about as relevant as each other given the passage of time.

    But instead of arguing how many decades ago counts and how many doesn't why don't we just look at evidence we have from right now in 2021?

    Labour being centrist is a huge vote loser, it is much preferred by Tories on here that Labour is centrist. Call me cynical but are you sure it isn't just because you prefer the Tories to have an easy ride?

    Hung parliament up against a lefty or easy historical gains against a centrist, I can understand why so many Tories are desperate for Labour to keep centre.
    Labour lost big under Corbyn and now looks likely to lose big under Starmer.
    Ahh right when is Starmer getting a hung parliament then?

    If the left can get big losses and hung parliaments then where is the centrist hung parliament?

    Also how come the centrist is losing from the low point of the left wing person?

    It is almost as if all these things add up to a centrist being less electable than a left winger.
    I think the talk of centrist vs left wing is a bonkers one.

    The question is what works? What makes peoples' lives better? What is it people are crying out for?

    That's not left vs right; it's a pragmatic focus on peoples' problems rather than an obsession with (for example) Palestine.
    The reason we got 40% is because we brought in left wing ideas to make people lives better rather than the usual Labour obsession with supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia nonsense you get with centrist Labour.

    I know, I know, but you don't like it.

    That is fine.

    Labour got that 40% without YOUR vote. Labour left wing ideas to improve peoples lives are very unpopular on this forum but capable of getting 40% in the real world.

    Centrist Labour is nowhere near capable of doing that.
    Stop defining yourself by who you are not, and start defining yourself by what you will do for others.

    So long as your obsession is with not being "centrist" Labour, which you have hilariously managed to define as support for Saudi Arabia, you will continue to fail the people say you love.
    The Labour right have been big Saudi supporters for a while, if you are going to criticise the left opposing the occupation of Palestine it is also fair me to criticise their Israeli and Saudi support.

    Or are only left wing people allowed to be criticised for their foreign policy views?

    Labour has done more successfully (without looking into the distant past) recently on the left and worse in the centre, if Labour wants to win and help people then it needs to be on the left.

    The evidence is very clear tonight, on the left wing low point Starmer is losing badly. Centrism does not work electorally for Labour.
    Cherry picking. Labour did pretty well under Blair. Or was he some secret Corbynite?
    Perhaps Jezza was the REAL Prime Minister, similar to how Trumpsky is still the REAL President?
    LOLz. On a different subject, do you get the 17-year cicadas that we are due any moment, or is that just an East Coast thing?

    Apparently, the weather has delayed there appearance (do you say 'appearance' when it is really their noise you notice?)
This discussion has been closed.