|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 11:10:13 GMT 1
I disagree. I think the point here is that there are now considerable swathes of the working class who no longer see or recognize Labour as he party of the working class. It's seen as the party of the middle class. That is looking to who now makes up its leadership, its membership and those who are now looking to vote for it. And that has seen a shift. I have seen a small sample of this myself; the difference in the voting patterns between my friends back home in the UK and those who I have met here in Stuttgart. It is the latter; the well off, with good careers and good jobs that have turned to Labour. My friends from the UK however, who do not find themselves in that situation, now look to the Conservatives. I just get the impression that there are parts of the UK that Labour in its current guise aren't going to be able to reach out to. That they do not understand them and have no desire to either. Small things matter and whilst you and many others may not care about such things an awful lot of people can't be doing with someone who has no issue singing IRA songs but can't bring himself to sing the national anthem. Labour at this current time are alien to an awful lot of people in the UK, that is why we are seeing such numbers of the working class turn to the Tories. Once again. As a percentage of that class labours highest share proportionally was in the DE category. Such numbers of working class turning to tories is marginally more than those professional classes turning en masse to Labour. The difference in absolute vote share in 2017 was 2.4% or 800k. Your anecdotes aside sure numbers of working class are turning to the Tories. Perhaps some of them because of slights regarding the singing of IRA songs and for sure labour needs to do more to win these people's votes. There's no doubt of that. But the gaps you are trying to claim are simply not there. It's around 500k swing voters which decide parliamentary majorities or the largest parties. The only current reliable indicator of voting intention is age not class. Labour is much a party of the working class as it is middle class. That's healthy if it wants to secure a majority. But when looking to the working class you can not simply look to the DE category. When looking to the working class as a whole, that YouGov information shows us that more working class voters voted Tory than Labour or? Isn't that how you read it? Also... A 2017 Ipsos MORI poll, also using the ABC1 and C2DE grades, showed the same pattern, concluding that “the middle classes swung to Labour, while working classes swung to the Conservatives”.So if Labour are still looking to position themselves as the party of the working class, how does that work, how does that happen? Considering the majority of the working class who voted voted for someone else. Considering polls show the the working classes swung to the Conservatives rather then remain with Labour. And again; look to its leadership, look to who now makes up the majority of its membership. Its is the middle class. I think there are many on the left who really find this difficult to understand and accept but this is what is happening. And to many of us, seeing how things are currently playing out, it is no surprise. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 11:42:14 GMT 1
"Mr Umunna insisted he did not believe he and the other MPs should quit their seats and hold by-elections, as demanded by shadow chancellor John McDonnell. He said: 'In a parliamentary democracy you elect a person and then their party after." Pretty disingenuous from Umunna. As we already know, monkeys with either blue or red rosettes would be shoe-ins in a large number of constituencies. Very poor argument to justify staying on. Pure obfuscation. I see in the news that Derek Hatton is back into the fold and re-admitted to Labour. Perhaps he'll fancy going up against one of 'em if they can bring them around to the idea of a by-election... Just to add, see no issue with asking them to take part in a by-election and I don't think a good few should be worried about doing so either as most represent areas that voted to remain. I think that will give them some protection come a by-election. Considering Labour's position on Brexit is all over the place, consider Corbyn is clearly against the EU (he's no longer fooling anyone); I'm not sure Labour would be able to win back the seat as easily as those who are asking for a by-election might think.
|
|
|
Post by keithb123 on Feb 19, 2019 11:43:21 GMT 1
Boils down to the fact that this is tha latest play from a handful of MPs who have never accepted Corbyn as Labour leader. No way we will get the Tories out with Corbyn at the helm. WE?
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 11:46:17 GMT 1
Nobody outside the party cares whose responsibility it is - and a lot within it might not either. The point is the story was hugely damaging to Labour and a true leader in waiting would have recognised that and made sure he was very publicly seen to be on Berger's side. He didn't because he lacks that vision and, I suspect, won't risk upsetting the faction he leads. Lost count of the amount of times he has called for any abuse or aggressive discourse to stop. And once again the responsibility of disciplinary matters lies with the General Secretary and NEC. Not the leaders office. Unless of course you are suggesting that the leaders office take this into their own hands and break with regulation and rule. I'm simply suggesting that a leader with an eye on the wider electorate, rather than the internal workings of his party, would have recognised this was of much wider interest and he needed to be seen to be acting, rather than mouthing platitudes. It couldn't be left as an internal disciplinary matter, whatever the bloody regs say. Whether we like it or not, PR is part of politics and Labour's handling of PR is dreadful. How did the story of Hatton rejoining emerge on the day the seven MPs left? That was unbelievably inept. Corbyn's political instincts appear to be as tone deaf as May's, which takes some doing. I'm sure some will say that doesn't matter; it's not real politics, not the real issue. But these things shape public perceptions and impressions. They absolutely do matter, far more than most policy pronouncements or parliamentary/Question Time bish-bash, because it's the image that sticks in people's minds. The next batch of polls will make interesting reading and I'll be surprised if they don't make even more uncomfortable reading for Labour.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 11:47:11 GMT 1
No way we will get the Tories out with Corbyn at the helm. WE? …. the people.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 11:58:32 GMT 1
And by not caring can carry on using the same club. By not thinking Corbyn is considered a leader of a faction within the Labour Party. This is something repeated in CLPs throughout the country. The right wing has been used to calling the shots and making decisions away from democratic accountability and contrary to party rules. The influx of new party members in 2016 leads to a change of Chair and Secretary and the. The right wing oscillate between boycotting meetings so they are not quorate or disrupting meetings so they cannot continue. Having seen that that a few times over the last 12 months The benefit of doubt is given far less readily. But it’s all about Corbyn and his faction. Sure. Nobody outside the Labour party sees what goes on inside it - in fact I know several party members who don't see that. Why should they be interested? What they care about is what Labour presents to them. So, yes, it is all about Corbyn and his faction to the country at large, because that's who and what is at the head of the party. I'm amazed you think it would ever be different.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Feb 19, 2019 12:28:40 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by keithb123 on Feb 19, 2019 12:31:29 GMT 1
Last time I checked I was "a people"
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 12:56:14 GMT 1
Indeed these are not trivial matters. It’s called class politics - which are never trivial. If they were trivial there wouldn’t be a civil war currently in the Labour Party instigated by the right using whatever weapon comes to hand. Maybe I'm just not getting this, so are you saying it has nothing to do with the direction the Labour party are talking on Brexit, has nothing to do with the antisemitism in the party, its not that many within the party now see it as toxic because of the abuse and intimidation that people are saying is now happening within the party? This is all down to their 'puppet masters' who deem it better they are out than in and because of funding each is compliant and made the decision to leave? You are saying the reasons they are leaving are untrue or that they using them as an excuse to leave? Or have I missed something? Like the campaign for a second referendum - as Gina Miller helpfully told us - it is everything to do with stopping a Labour Government being elected on anything like the 2017 manifesto.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 12:58:09 GMT 1
That is the problem in a nutshell with the Labour Right It's exactly what Abbott and her supporters do. Time and time again. So that isn't just confided to the Labour right. The left of the Labour party and its supporters are more than happy to do the same. And reports about abuse and bullying have become a constant since Corbyn became leader and seemingly emboldened the far left to get involved and look to shape the party to their will. I started off by thinking that there is an alternative to fighting fire with fire. There is not because it is relentless.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Feb 19, 2019 13:03:18 GMT 1
We have basically been left with a choice of voting for people who hate the poor or people who hate the Jews.
I am not sure neither the poor nor the Jews are to blame.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 13:04:04 GMT 1
And by not caring can carry on using the same club. By not thinking Corbyn is considered a leader of a faction within the Labour Party. This is something repeated in CLPs throughout the country. The right wing has been used to calling the shots and making decisions away from democratic accountability and contrary to party rules. The influx of new party members in 2016 leads to a change of Chair and Secretary and the. The right wing oscillate between boycotting meetings so they are not quorate or disrupting meetings so they cannot continue. Having seen that that a few times over the last 12 months The benefit of doubt is given far less readily. But it’s all about Corbyn and his faction. Sure. Nobody outside the Labour party sees what goes on inside it - in fact I know several party members who don't see that. Why should they be interested? What they care about is what Labour presents to them. So, yes, it is all about Corbyn and his faction to the country at large, because that's who and what is at the head of the party. I'm amazed you think it would ever be different. People believe what they are shown. I’m stating what I have seen and experienced. I’ll continue doing that.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 13:12:12 GMT 1
Maybe I'm just not getting this, so are you saying it has nothing to do with the direction the Labour party are talking on Brexit, has nothing to do with the antisemitism in the party, its not that many within the party now see it as toxic because of the abuse and intimidation that people are saying is now happening within the party? This is all down to their 'puppet masters' who deem it better they are out than in and because of funding each is compliant and made the decision to leave? You are saying the reasons they are leaving are untrue or that they using them as an excuse to leave? Or have I missed something? Like the campaign for a second referendum - as Gina Miller helpfully told us - it is everything to do with stopping a Labour Government being elected on anything like the 2017 manifesto. OK, I think I get it now. So despite what they point to (Brexit, antisemitism, the abuse within the party) you believe that this is all a smokescreen and their real intentions are purely and simply to stop Labour winning a general election.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 13:13:38 GMT 1
Nobody outside the Labour party sees what goes on inside it - in fact I know several party members who don't see that. Why should they be interested? What they care about is what Labour presents to them. So, yes, it is all about Corbyn and his faction to the country at large, because that's who and what is at the head of the party. I'm amazed you think it would ever be different. People believe what they are shown. I’m stating what I have seen and experienced. I’ll continue doing that. I respect that. I'm simply saying that other people might be seeing and experiencing something quite different. I don't see Corbyn or May as leaders capable of appreciating or acting upon that.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 13:15:48 GMT 1
Last time I checked I was "a people" Haha, wrong sort
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 13:17:42 GMT 1
It's exactly what Abbott and her supporters do. Time and time again. So that isn't just confided to the Labour right. The left of the Labour party and its supporters are more than happy to do the same. And reports about abuse and bullying have become a constant since Corbyn became leader and seemingly emboldened the far left to get involved and look to shape the party to their will. I started off by thinking that there is an alternative to fighting fire with fire. There is not because it is relentless. Yeah, I suspect that's what Umunna and the Labour right are thinking too...
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Feb 19, 2019 13:17:47 GMT 1
All this and car plant closures too ….. haven't we been this way before!? Welcome to our bright future!
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 13:28:00 GMT 1
And McDonnell crying out for people to stand in the by-elections he hopes to force against these seven. What timing...
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 13:30:49 GMT 1
Like the campaign for a second referendum - as Gina Miller helpfully told us - it is everything to do with stopping a Labour Government being elected on anything like the 2017 manifesto. OK, I think I get it now. So despite what they point to (Brexit, antisemitism, the abuse within the party) you believe that this is all a smokescreen and their real intentions are purely and simply to stop Labour winning a general election. I have absolutely no doubt that the last part of what you write is 100 per cent correct. The route by which they chose the tools to do that is something for the historians to pore over. Berger raised concerns about anti-semitism during Blair’s leadership. There is no conflict between saying that views are sincerely held and the purpose to which they are put and the effect that they have are quite different. However, in this case we can be clear that the aim is to stop, and I will be specific again because it is an important distinction- a Labour Government elected on anything like the 2017 manifesto.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 13:32:39 GMT 1
And McDonnell crying out for people to stand in the by-elections he hopes to force against these seven. What timing... The only people who can force a by election are the electorate in each constituency - specifically 10 per cent of the electorate.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 13:34:18 GMT 1
OK, I think I get it now. So despite what they point to (Brexit, antisemitism, the abuse within the party) you believe that this is all a smokescreen and their real intentions are purely and simply to stop Labour winning a general election. I have absolutely no doubt that the last part of what you write is 100 per cent correct. The route by which they chose the tools to do that is something for the historians to pore over. Berger raised concerns about anti-semitism during Blair’s leadership. There is no conflict between saying that views are sincerely held and the purpose to which they are put and the effect that they have are quite different. However, in this case we can be clear that the aim is to stop, and I will be specific again because it is an important distinction- a Labour Government elected on anything like the 2017 manifesto. Well I'm not sue I can go along with that but its food for thought and appreciate you clarifying for me your point of view...
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 13:35:41 GMT 1
And McDonnell crying out for people to stand in the by-elections he hopes to force against these seven. What timing... The only people who can force a by election are the electorate in each constituency - specifically 10 per cent of the electorate. So very much possible I would think. More twists and turns to come then...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 14:03:41 GMT 1
Once again. As a percentage of that class labours highest share proportionally was in the DE category. Such numbers of working class turning to tories is marginally more than those professional classes turning en masse to Labour. The difference in absolute vote share in 2017 was 2.4% or 800k. Your anecdotes aside sure numbers of working class are turning to the Tories. Perhaps some of them because of slights regarding the singing of IRA songs and for sure labour needs to do more to win these people's votes. There's no doubt of that. But the gaps you are trying to claim are simply not there. It's around 500k swing voters which decide parliamentary majorities or the largest parties. The only current reliable indicator of voting intention is age not class. Labour is much a party of the working class as it is middle class. That's healthy if it wants to secure a majority. But when looking to the working class you can not simply look to the DE category. When looking to the working class as a whole, that YouGov information shows us that more working class voters voted Tory than Labour or? Isn't that how you read it? Also... A 2017 Ipsos MORI poll, also using the ABC1 and C2DE grades, showed the same pattern, concluding that “the middle classes swung to Labour, while working classes swung to the Conservatives”.So if Labour are still looking to position themselves as the party of the working class, how does that work, how does that happen? Considering the majority of the working class who voted voted for someone else. Considering polls show the the working classes swung to the Conservatives rather then remain with Labour. And again; look to its leadership, look to who now makes up the majority of its membership. Its is the middle class. I think there are many on the left who really find this difficult to understand and accept but this is what is happening. And to many of us, seeing how things are currently playing out, it is no surprise. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. If you want to call it the party of the middle class fair enough that's your perogative. As previously stated though so many times in this thread social class is now not a reliable indicator of voting intention. It's practically an equal split either side. Historically Labour were not seen to be a party of the middle and upper classes. That has evidently changed to explain why we currently have a hung parliament. Surely if you beleive Labour have such an issue with the working class then you accept by that the Tories now have huge issues that they have driven aspirational and middle classes to Labour. Labours priority as stated in the manifesto is the many not the few. This encompasses historic 'working class' and middle classes. Young and old. Theres not a distinguishment now. It is a message that led to the largest vote share recovery in decades and resonated accross the country young and middle aged. They have to do more no doubt. But the arithmetic fact is they are a few hundred thousand votes away from having a majority in parliament. So you and others on here can talk about how toxic corbyn is and how voter repellent he is. How labour have supposedly turned their back on the working class despite their manifesto including policies that redistributed wealth and opportunity from those at the very top of wealth to those at the very bottom. But you deny the fact labour are nigh on neck and neck with the tories, and with the current inaction and potential fall out with brexit there could well be another swing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 14:18:05 GMT 1
Also as for this typically sneering comment 'I think there are many on the left who really find this difficult to understand and accept but this is what is happening. And to many of us, seeing how things are currently playing out, it is no surprise.'
Well what's playing out is that the Tories lost their majority to an alledgedly rag tag bunch of unelectable venzuelan communist socialist antisemitic abusive Marxists who have managed to simultaneously appeal to the working and middle classes.
Yep. The left doesn't understand.
|
|
|
Post by champagneprince on Feb 19, 2019 14:48:50 GMT 1
I've said it on the other Corbyn thread and many times on here but Labour should be trouncing Conservatives given what we've had to put up with in the days of Cameron and May. Corbyn is the worst Labour leader since Michael Foot and Foot was never going to get into power either.
The UK is desperate for a Labour government but unfortunately just don't buy into Corbyn. He IS the reason why Conservatives are still in power now and will be the reason Conservatives continue in power should there be a general election any time soon.
I say this (again) to all Labour die-hards out there. Get rid of this guy...and quick. Get Labour back into power.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 14:49:06 GMT 1
The only people who can force a by election are the electorate in each constituency - specifically 10 per cent of the electorate. So very much possible I would think. More twists and turns to come then... I think any such move would come from the CLPs in question and I suspect that the Labour Party General Secretary would be on the telephone straightaway to stop it. A proper local party organisation will have canvassed and received replies about voting intentions for about 40% of constituents (at least) that is no more than two years old. Most especially in what are already marginal seats. They will also know who voted and who didn’t. That is the basis for a campaign to gain sufficient signatures with a margin because parties never have absolutely up to date information about who is and is not on the electoral roll. Most proper local party organisations - as described - are going to Labour because it has the technology and the boots on the ground.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Rickerton on Feb 19, 2019 14:51:02 GMT 1
We have basically been left with a choice of voting for people who hate the poor or people who hate the Jews. I am not sure neither the poor nor the Jews are to blame. Labour has as issue with anti-Semitism amongst some of its membership and supporters, and needs to do more to root it out. But claiming it's an either/or is disengenuous. The Conservative party have far greater difficulties (we'll go with that word) with a number of different groups, and it's not just limited to the Jewish community. We're not reading about it with such frequency at the moment, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 14:56:07 GMT 1
I started off by thinking that there is an alternative to fighting fire with fire. There is not because it is relentless. Yeah, I suspect that's what Umunna and the Labour right are thinking too... The default position of the right of the Labour Party is “you do the work and we’ll make the decisions”.Until recently the expectation was that this state of affairs would continue. There has been a sharp expectation revision.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Feb 19, 2019 15:59:52 GMT 1
Also as for this typically sneering comment 'I think there are many on the left who really find this difficult to understand and accept but this is what is happening. And to many of us, seeing how things are currently playing out, it is no surprise.' Well what's playing out is that the Tories lost their majority to an alledgedly rag tag bunch of unelectable venzuelan communist socialist antisemitic abusive Marxists who have managed to simultaneously appeal to the working and middle classes. Yep. The left doesn't understand. It's not a sneering comment. Why do you have to take it that way? Please don't. Its an observation. It's how I see things. It is looking to the information available, from what I have read, from what I see in discussions with those on the left. You can argue all you like about the information available but it clearly now shows that more working class people are voting Tory. That is what happened in 2017. True? And by all means you can point to the fact that the Tories are now seeing their traditional support base shifting to Labour. But here I am talking about Labour. And that so many of the working class are now looking elsewhere stings. It is something that the left are having issues with because of how they position themselves, how they see themselves, how they champion themselves. It is uncomfortable for them that the people they claim to represent, the people they claim to stand for, are turning away from them. From my own experience, from what I read and hear, it is something they are really struggling to understand and accept. I mean this very conversation, looking to the information available...
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 19, 2019 16:09:21 GMT 1
I would describe my CLP as overwhelmingly middle class and middle aged. However campaigning in other parts of the region tells me that this is not replicated so strongly in urban areas. I would suggest that the membership of most of the political parties is preponderantly middle class. This is no accident, the playbook for the last 40 years is that the bottom 30% of the income distribution is to be ignored, confined to their sink estates and developments and policed. Instead political success is about attracting the middle class and the political middle ground. A middle ground that has moved inexorably to the right over that time.
|
|