|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Dec 13, 2019 16:54:27 GMT 1
Who knows where Johnson will lead the Tory party, it’s not as though he has any discernible political principles. I suspect he’s more centrist than he’s pretended to be for the past 3 years though.
I think the Tories won by having a simple message. ‘Get Brexit done’ chimed with the electorate. Even remainders (like me) didn’t want months or years of continuing deadlock and paralysis.
What was the Labour message? Fudge and confusion with spending proposals that were literally incredible.
And their rank and file knew Corbyn was a liability. When I told their canvasser that I was very reluctant to vote Labour because of Corbyn the best response he could think of was to say that Corbyn was elderly and wouldn’t serve a full term as PM!
I know that Johnson is also unpopular, but the English working class love a toff and that Eton and Oxbridge veneer served him well and made him appear more prime ministerial despite his many faults.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 16:55:02 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by SouthStandShrew on Dec 13, 2019 16:55:02 GMT 1
love or hate him boris put a message across and people voted for him. apart from the SNP the opposition partys failed to put a message across that people voted for in enough numbers to form a coalition goverment or majority the opposition partys need to be a credable opposition who hold the goverment to account and develop a more choerent credable set of policies that people will vote for. the chalenge for the goverment is to deliver a brexit that is fair to us and fair to the eu , unify the country improve social care, safeguard the nhs ,improve education , create sustainable jobs ,tackle the environment and reduce this awful knife crime Sadly correct. Pretty basic manifesto and a clear message. Labour manifesto good but what was needed here was a clear direction on Brexit, another vote on a deal was a bad bad choice which cost us. McDonnell etc to blame.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Dec 13, 2019 17:01:45 GMT 1
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 17:21:24 GMT 1
Post by venceremos on Dec 13, 2019 17:21:24 GMT 1
Very interesting pieces, those. Fascinating to see the change in yesterday's result under PR and that New Zealand model also addresses the complaint regarding local constituency representatives. I saw an eye-opening graphic online showing the effects of boundary changes on political power. I can't remember where it was modelling (London possibly?) but the votes cast remained unchanged, all that changed were the constituency boundaries. Control shifted between political parties, including the Lib Dems, depending only on where the boundary lines were drawn. It's startling how fragile and subject to manipulation our "representative" democracy is. And before anyone says it, this is not a gripe against yesterday's result in particular. It's unfortunately true of all our national elections. One day, not too far off I hope …..
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 17:50:17 GMT 1
Post by Red Rose In Exile on Dec 13, 2019 17:50:17 GMT 1
PR is without a doubt far fairer.
However with such a majority it would be like turkeys voting for Christmas!!
(I did not vote labour either!!)
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 18:14:51 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by cheggersdrinkspop on Dec 13, 2019 18:14:51 GMT 1
I find it strange to hear Corbyn's supporters still trying to promote the Labour manifesto, which at this moment in time is about as worthless as the paper I wipe my a##e on, as all manifestos are when you lose, and blaming Brexit alone for the loss. When will they realise it wasn't all about Brexit, it was about lots of things that are wrong. There are serious misgivings about Labour at the moment, bullying and aggression against people who do not support the socialist stance, anti semitism, divided leadership, policies and manifestos that the general public don't believe, and these are quotes from Labour politicians today, incidentally, some who have now lost their jobs from a party who promised the nation so much. Being defeated so heavily by a party who promised one thing, and that is because they have no choice, and led by a bungling toff makes it even worse, you couldn't make it up.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 18:22:09 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by SouthStandShrew on Dec 13, 2019 18:22:09 GMT 1
I find it strange to hear Corbyn's supporters still trying to promote the Labour manifesto, which at this moment in time is about as worthless as the paper I wipe my a##e on, as all manifestos are when you lose, and blaming Brexit alone for the loss. When will they realise it wasn't all about Brexit, it was about lots of things that are wrong. There are serious misgivings about Labour at the moment, bullying and aggression against people who do not support the socialist stance, anti semitism, divided leadership, policies and manifestos that the general public don't believe, and these are quotes from Labour politicians today, incidentally, some who have now lost their jobs from a party who promised the nation so much. Being defeated so heavily by a party who promised one thing, and that is because they have no choice, and led by a bungling toff makes it even worse, you couldn't make it up. You think all Labour voters welcome aggression? Course the party has splits, as did the Tories. Something's in the manifesto were OTT (Broadband) however also some things even some Tories have seen to favour Rail network being renationalised. Course Brexit wasn't the only reason no one said it was?
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 18:59:38 GMT 1
Post by zenfootball2 on Dec 13, 2019 18:59:38 GMT 1
Very interesting pieces, those. Fascinating to see the change in yesterday's result under PR and that New Zealand model also addresses the complaint regarding local constituency representatives. I saw an eye-opening graphic online showing the effects of boundary changes on political power. I can't remember where it was modelling (London possibly?) but the votes cast remained unchanged, all that changed were the constituency boundaries. Control shifted between political parties, including the Lib Dems, depending only on where the boundary lines were drawn. It's startling how fragile and subject to manipulation our "representative" democracy is. And before anyone says it, this is not a gripe against yesterday's result in particular. It's unfortunately true of all our national elections. One day, not too far off I hope ….. when looking at this election with PR you do get a wider spread of the votes the liberal democrates winning 65 seats is striking but equally the greens getting 17 seats and the brexit party getting 13 seats you would get a more diverse spread of views represented in our parliment . the striking thing is the SNP would lose there dominance in scotland and lose 22 seats.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 20:09:33 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by cheggersdrinkspop on Dec 13, 2019 20:09:33 GMT 1
I find it strange to hear Corbyn's supporters still trying to promote the Labour manifesto, which at this moment in time is about as worthless as the paper I wipe my a##e on, as all manifestos are when you lose, and blaming Brexit alone for the loss. When will they realise it wasn't all about Brexit, it was about lots of things that are wrong. There are serious misgivings about Labour at the moment, bullying and aggression against people who do not support the socialist stance, anti semitism, divided leadership, policies and manifestos that the general public don't believe, and these are quotes from Labour politicians today, incidentally, some who have now lost their jobs from a party who promised the nation so much. Being defeated so heavily by a party who promised one thing, and that is because they have no choice, and led by a bungling toff makes it even worse, you couldn't make it up. You think all Labour voters welcome aggression? Course the party has splits, as did the Tories. Something's in the manifesto were OTT (Broadband) however also some things even some Tories have seen to favour Rail network being renationalised. Course Brexit wasn't the only reason no one said it was? I didn't say anything, I was merely saying what Labour Politicians (now redundant) were saying today on the media.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 20:38:35 GMT 1
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2019 20:38:35 GMT 1
Who knows where Johnson will lead the Tory party, it’s not as though he has any discernible political principles. I suspect he’s more centrist than he’s pretended to be for the past 3 years though. I think the Tories won by having a simple message. ‘Get Brexit done’ chimed with the electorate. Even remainders (like me) didn’t want months or years of continuing deadlock and paralysis. What was the Labour message? Fudge and confusion with spending proposals that were literally incredible. And their rank and file knew Corbyn was a liability. When I told their canvasser that I was very reluctant to vote Labour because of Corbyn the best response he could think of was to say that Corbyn was elderly and wouldn’t serve a full term as PM! I know that Johnson is also unpopular, but the English working class love a toff and that Eton and Oxbridge veneer served him well and made him appear more prime ministerial despite his many faults. Agree with all of this
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 20:44:59 GMT 1
Post by SeanBroseley on Dec 13, 2019 20:44:59 GMT 1
Happy to agree to disagree Stutty - we usually end up doing that. My reality of being in the Labour party and being an active member is that Momentum is one of the sources of extra volunteers (along with Unison. There is no way , in any meaningful meaning of the phrase that it has "taken over".
On the matter of working class, Minor asked a relevant question - who are they? ONS date splits people into ABC1 and C2DE, with the latter being identified at working class. The projections from 2017 suggested that Labour won the election convincingly among C2DEs under the age 54 with the Conservatives winning in big number above that age across the whole ONS range. So in 2017 if Labour had a working class problem then it is an older working class problem.
The new realities of class is that C2DE labour is much more about producing something intangible then the heavy and light industry of the past. This intangible labour includes things such as delivering pizza, collecting money for charity (chugger), inputting data and assisting at the gym. Some of this work involves business being dependent on their workers' being able to perform socially and also involves greater precarity and debt. Generally people don't vote for parties that make them afraid. Hence Labour's better performance among the working age group.
The time was the Labour didn't need to do campaigning as it was part of the communities it represented. This was a legacy of trade unions' organising role via their own social security net, friendly societies and co-operatives dating back to the late 19th centuries. As a result Labour has a tendency to just let the membership tick over on its own whereas it should be something that is pushed at all levels of the party. If someone knows a Labour Party member they are less inclined to be susceptible to "project fears. So continued recruitment and activism is important, it being especially important between elections.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 20:47:43 GMT 1
Post by SeanBroseley on Dec 13, 2019 20:47:43 GMT 1
It's like being savaged by a dead sheep. In fact Momentum mobilised people to go into all areas of any town and city. Johnson has to do this as he was in favour of a second referendum - the single most important factor in the votes Labour won not translating into the commensurate amount of seats. And look where it got you! Johnson is completely right, but of course they won’t listen to him as he’s a Blairite. The tragedy is that Labour plays their left wing games, and the country suffers. As I say listening to the likes of Alan Johnson on the issue of Remain and a second referendum has been an important difference compared to 2017. Interestingly Momentum was fully on board with that move. Blairism is irrelevant to the present situation as its economic base ended with the financial crisis.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Dec 13, 2019 20:51:02 GMT 1
And after being elected to office we start hearing about the government's policies. Earlier today Damien Green talking about an insurance solution to social care.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 21:21:22 GMT 1
Post by simianbenzoate on Dec 13, 2019 21:21:22 GMT 1
Yes. your original comment was "bizarre socialist policies". The data says they aren't bizarre to the electorate. those policies are commonplace throughout the rest of Europe. And you use "socialist" as if it's a pejorative. You could try and suggest this result was a reaction to those policies but you'd be hard pushed without a vote breakdown analysis, especially as there are very obvious and very widespread reasons cited endlessly by the anti-labour crowd - namely brexit, and the (deserved or not) toxicity of Corbyn. i daresay there were a number who were put off by the policies' scale and ambition (and arguably naivety) but i'm not sure that would have been the case had the policy been viewed on it's own rather than attached to labour - the vote for policies website shows a huge agreement with them in anonymity, and in fact agreement with tory policies was significantly below levels for labour, LD and green who all came out fairly equally. See how that translated into vote share once you add in the "stigma" of the party name!
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 21:24:51 GMT 1
Post by simianbenzoate on Dec 13, 2019 21:24:51 GMT 1
Those complaining that Labour's disastrous performance had something to do with the 'first past the post' system and proposing some kind of PR system would do well to remember the antics of the hung parliament we have had for the past two years. PR would effectively mean a perpetually hung parliament with no government able to properly implement its programme among the constantly shifting sands of party manoeuvrings. If it was a one off, yes. But, as in other countries with versions of PR, the perpetual coalitions necessary to form working governments foster an atmosphere of cooperation and bring parties together to get things done in a reasonable way; rather than swinging wildly from one end of the spectrum to the other as we do, where governments spend 4 years undoing the ideologically offensive systems the previous government put in place to then create their own, only for it to all happen again 5 or 10 years later
|
|
|
Post by simianbenzoate on Dec 13, 2019 21:26:54 GMT 1
l the chalenge for the goverment is to deliver a brexit that is fair to us and fair to the eu , unify the country improve social care, safeguard the nhs ,improve education , create sustainable jobs ,tackle the environment and reduce this awful knife crime See that's my problem. It's all well and good to argue "oh but labour would be a disaster", "SNP would just want more referendums"... But with the tories you have 9 years of PROOF. A 9 year track record of doing the exact opposite of all the things you've just listed!
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Dec 13, 2019 22:14:16 GMT 1
l the chalenge for the goverment is to deliver a brexit that is fair to us and fair to the eu , unify the country improve social care, safeguard the nhs ,improve education , create sustainable jobs ,tackle the environment and reduce this awful knife crime See that's my problem. It's all well and good to argue "oh but labour would be a disaster", "SNP would just want more referendums"... But with the tories you have 9 years of PROOF. A 9 year track record of doing the exact opposite of all the things you've just listed! Not to mention no one can still define or agree what it is, even among those that pushed for it. Unify the country? After doing everything possible to divide it?!
|
|
Drew
Midland League Division One
Posts: 416
|
GE 2019
Dec 13, 2019 22:35:28 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by Drew on Dec 13, 2019 22:35:28 GMT 1
Yes. your original comment was "bizarre socialist policies". The data says they aren't bizarre to the electorate. those policies are commonplace throughout the rest of Europe. And you use "socialist" as if it's a pejorative. You could try and suggest this result was a reaction to those policies but you'd be hard pushed without a vote breakdown analysis, especially as there are very obvious and very widespread reasons cited endlessly by the anti-labour crowd - namely brexit, and the (deserved or not) toxicity of Corbyn. i daresay there were a number who were put off by the policies' scale and ambition (and arguably naivety) but i'm not sure that would have been the case had the policy been viewed on it's own rather than attached to labour - the vote for policies website shows a huge agreement with them in anonymity, and in fact agreement with tory policies was significantly below levels for labour, LD and green who all came out fairly equally. See how that translated into vote share once you add in the "stigma" of the party name! The policies were thoroughly rejected by the electorate as I said they would be. That's pretty much all that needs to be said.
|
|
|
Post by cheggersdrinkspop on Dec 13, 2019 23:20:51 GMT 1
Regardless of the opinions, big words that nobody understands, opinions, leanings, blah blah blah, it has panned out the way it has, and let's all unpuff our chests and get back to something much more important..........FOOTBALL
|
|
|
Post by SouthStandShrew on Dec 14, 2019 0:25:42 GMT 1
Regardless of the opinions, big words that nobody understands, opinions, leanings, blah blah blah, it has panned out the way it has, and let's all unpuff our chests and get back to something much more important..........FOOTBALL Hopefully the Euros next year should help people at least feel less divided!
|
|
|
Post by aghabullogueshrew on Dec 14, 2019 0:49:28 GMT 1
Boris won this election with one simple li(n)e, I will stop low skilled immigrants from settling permanently in this country! All the gullible working class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns thought "grreat, I can pretend I don't like Corbyn and keep out all the immigrants without looking racist! Brilliant!" I'm telling you now, every dumb, stupid idea that Boris comes up with will get through Parliament as all the new "Northern" Conservative MP's know they are only going to be there for one term and want to make it 5 years!
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 14, 2019 2:55:37 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by welshdan on Dec 14, 2019 2:55:37 GMT 1
Yes. your original comment was "bizarre socialist policies". The data says they aren't bizarre to the electorate. those policies are commonplace throughout the rest of Europe. And you use "socialist" as if it's a pejorative. You could try and suggest this result was a reaction to those policies but you'd be hard pushed without a vote breakdown analysis, especially as there are very obvious and very widespread reasons cited endlessly by the anti-labour crowd - namely brexit, and the (deserved or not) toxicity of Corbyn. i daresay there were a number who were put off by the policies' scale and ambition (and arguably naivety) but i'm not sure that would have been the case had the policy been viewed on it's own rather than attached to labour - the vote for policies website shows a huge agreement with them in anonymity, and in fact agreement with tory policies was significantly below levels for labour, LD and green who all came out fairly equally. See how that translated into vote share once you add in the "stigma" of the party name! The policies were thoroughly rejected by the electorate as I said they would be. That's pretty much all that needs to be said. Thoroughly rejected by the electoral setup. Strange how Boris got a resounding thumbs up with 13 million votes but labour were thoroughly rejected with 10 million votes. Boris has won a massive majority and can do pretty much what he wants now but at least acknowledge most of the difference is in seats not number of votes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2019 5:00:02 GMT 1
l the chalenge for the goverment is to deliver a brexit that is fair to us and fair to the eu , unify the country improve social care, safeguard the nhs ,improve education , create sustainable jobs ,tackle the environment and reduce this awful knife crime See that's my problem. It's all well and good to argue "oh but labour would be a disaster", "SNP would just want more referendums"... But with the tories you have 9 years of PROOF. A 9 year track record of doing the exact opposite of all the things you've just listed! BOOM 💥 I bloody love ❤️ this post . To me it says everything you need to know . Simple , to the point , excellent.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Dec 14, 2019 8:17:08 GMT 1
l the chalenge for the goverment is to deliver a brexit that is fair to us and fair to the eu , unify the country improve social care, safeguard the nhs ,improve education , create sustainable jobs ,tackle the environment and reduce this awful knife crime See that's my problem. It's all well and good to argue "oh but labour would be a disaster", "SNP would just want more referendums"... But with the tories you have 9 years of PROOF. A 9 year track record of doing the exact opposite of all the things you've just listed! i agree with the points you have made but i would imagine the list is what most people would wont there goverment to do. however as you rightly point out they had had 9 years to improve things and they have failed to do so.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Dec 14, 2019 11:22:48 GMT 1
I can understand, though not agree with, the loathing, of many Labour members, for the "rich" and the "privileged" in society, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the evident disdain some have for traditional Labour voters. One poster on here has described them as "gullible working-class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns" and one does wonder whether calling someone "gullible" is the right way to reclaim their votes in the future. In an essentially democratic system, politics is not only about policies, important though they obviously are, it is about achieving power to deploy those policies, is it not?
The Labour Party needs to decide whether the socialist purity of their policies is more important than winning votes - in short did Labour lose because its policies were too extreme, or not sufficiently socialst? Only the Labour Party members can answer that fundamental question, and I await the result of their deliberations with interest.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Dec 14, 2019 12:28:38 GMT 1
Who knows where Johnson will lead the Tory party, it’s not as though he has any discernible political principles. I suspect he’s more centrist than he’s pretended to be for the past 3 years though. I think the Tories won by having a simple message. ‘Get Brexit done’ chimed with the electorate. Even remainders (like me) didn’t want months or years of continuing deadlock and paralysis. What was the Labour message? Fudge and confusion with spending proposals that were literally incredible. And their rank and file knew Corbyn was a liability. When I told their canvasser that I was very reluctant to vote Labour because of Corbyn the best response he could think of was to say that Corbyn was elderly and wouldn’t serve a full term as PM! I know that Johnson is also unpopular, but the English working class love a toff and that Eton and Oxbridge veneer served him well and made him appear more prime ministerial despite his many faults. At least with parliament we get to vote again in five years. We struggled through all those Thatcher years and we can get through this. As you say, Boris may well be more centralist than we have seen recently, depends on his minders and backers though. But he doesn't need the extreme right wing to support him now, will he somehow unite the Conservative party? Maybe his ego will see him wanting to be thought well of. He has delivered, and might keep if he is good for them, a number of traditional Labour seats. Labour must learn the lessons, not simply blame Corbyn: Keep it simple and don't introduce new policies and spending during the election.
|
|
|
Post by SouthStandShrew on Dec 14, 2019 12:29:49 GMT 1
I can understand, though not agree with, the loathing, of many Labour members, for the "rich" and the "privileged" in society, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the evident disdain some have for traditional Labour voters. One poster on here has described them as "gullible working-class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns" and one does wonder whether calling someone "gullible" is the right way to reclaim their votes in the future. In an essentially democratic system, politics is not only about policies, important though they obviously are, it is about achieving power to deploy those policies, is it not? The Labour Party needs to decide whether the socialist purity of their policies is more important than winning votes - in short did Labour lose because its policies were too extreme, or not sufficiently socialst? Only the Labour Party members can answer that fundamental question, and I await the result of their deliberations with interest. As a Labour party member and a Corbyn man I'll be holding my nose and voting Starmer in the leadership election. Going for Momentum's already wanted Burgon wouldn't be a great idea. Given the drubbing we have just had that said id ideally want Andy Burnham but the mayor role up here is a easy gig mostly.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 14, 2019 12:36:36 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by armchairfan on Dec 14, 2019 12:36:36 GMT 1
I can understand, though not agree with, the loathing, of many Labour members, for the "rich" and the "privileged" in society, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the evident disdain some have for traditional Labour voters. One poster on here has described them as "gullible working-class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns" and one does wonder whether calling someone "gullible" is the right way to reclaim their votes in the future. In an essentially democratic system, politics is not only about policies, important though they obviously are, it is about achieving power to deploy those policies, is it not? The Labour Party needs to decide whether the socialist purity of their policies is more important than winning votes - in short did Labour lose because its policies were too extreme, or not sufficiently socialst? Only the Labour Party members can answer that fundamental question, and I await the result of their deliberations with interest. As a Labour party member and a Corbyn man I'll be holding my nose and voting Starmer in the leadership election. Going for Momentum's already wanted Burgon wouldn't be a great idea. Given the drubbing we have just had that said id ideally want Andy Burnham but the mayor role up here is a easy gig mostly.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 14, 2019 12:37:20 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by armchairfan on Dec 14, 2019 12:37:20 GMT 1
I can understand, though not agree with, the loathing, of many Labour members, for the "rich" and the "privileged" in society, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the evident disdain some have for traditional Labour voters. One poster on here has described them as "gullible working-class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns" and one does wonder whether calling someone "gullible" is the right way to reclaim their votes in the future. In an essentially democratic system, politics is not only about policies, important though they obviously are, it is about achieving power to deploy those policies, is it not? The Labour Party needs to decide whether the socialist purity of their policies is more important than winning votes - in short did Labour lose because its policies were too extreme, or not sufficiently socialst? Only the Labour Party members can answer that fundamental question, and I await the result of their deliberations with interest. As a Labour party member and a Corbyn man I'll be holding my nose and voting Starmer in the leadership election. Going for Momentum's already wanted Burgon wouldn't be a great idea. Given the drubbing we have just had that said id ideally want Andy Burnham but the mayor role up here is a easy gig mostly.
|
|
|
GE 2019
Dec 14, 2019 12:38:10 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by armchairfan on Dec 14, 2019 12:38:10 GMT 1
I can understand, though not agree with, the loathing, of many Labour members, for the "rich" and the "privileged" in society, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the evident disdain some have for traditional Labour voters. One poster on here has described them as "gullible working-class voters in the Midlands and Northern towns" and one does wonder whether calling someone "gullible" is the right way to reclaim their votes in the future. In an essentially democratic system, politics is not only about policies, important though they obviously are, it is about achieving power to deploy those policies, is it not? The Labour Party needs to decide whether the socialist purity of their policies is more important than winning votes - in short did Labour lose because its policies were too extreme, or not sufficiently socialst? Only the Labour Party members can answer that fundamental question, and I await the result of their deliberations with interest. As a Labour party member and a Corbyn man I'll be holding my nose and voting Starmer in the leadership election. Going for Momentum's already wanted Burgon wouldn't be a great idea. Given the drubbing we have just had that said id ideally want Andy Burnham but the mayor role up here is a easy gig mostly.
|
|