The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[blandy]

1 hour ago, peterms said:

his simple conclusion isn't the simple fact that he presents it as

You're technically right, but I find it hard to look at remain (non-Labour) vote going up by nearly 2 million, Tories up by 300K and Labour down by 2.6 million, with a small drop in overall turnout as well, and not conclude that the drift was substantially from Labour to remain, with a smaller switch Labour-Tory. You are right to look at it as "not proof", but were anyone to deny the direction of travel, given the sheer size of the numbers I'd question their reasons why.

Sure some older voters will have died, some will have changed their minds, some young 'uns will have voted for the first time (and many for Labour), but such a big drop in labour votes and big rise in Remain party votes suggests they lost a lot of remainers - 5 times as many as leavers.  Were the numbers in the thousands or 10s of thousands, nationally, then I'd tend to want to look much deeper, but 2.6 million is a very significant number of people.

[markavfc40]

Richard Burgon said on Friday, and plenty of others in Labour have said it, that it was clearly Brexit that cost them this time as in the 2017 election they had the same leader and a very similar manifesto. That for me shows exactly where a huge problem lies. The wing of the party now controlling Labour see 2017 as a huge success yet they finished 55 seats behind a destructive Tory government that had been in power 7 years

Today we have Corbyn proclaiming they lost the election but won the argument and the momentum mob seem to be lapping it up. Labour in its current guise seem to set the bar very low as to what they consider a success. 

I do worry that the left of the party is now so in control of it that they will continue to remain in their own little bubble and continue to tell each other that their way will work waffling on about the size of the membership as proof they are doing the right thing. Oblivious to the fact it is the electorate that matter and in two elections, not one, against a dire Tory government, their way has been rejected.

Edited December 15, 2019 by markavfc40

[Dr_Pangloss]

19 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Richard Burgon said on Friday, and plenty of others in Labour have said it, that it was clearly Brexit that cost them this time as in the 2017 election they had the same leader and a very similar manifesto. That for me shows exactly where a huge problem lies. The wing of the party now controlling Labour see 2017 as a huge success yet they finished 55 seats behind a destructive Tory government that had been in power 7 years

Today we have Corbyn proclaiming they lost the election but won the argument and the momentum mob seem to be lapping it up. Labour in its current guise seem to set the bar very low as to what they consider a success. 

I do worry that the left of the party is now so in control of it that they will continue to remain in their own little bubble and continue to tell each other that their way will work waffling on about the size of the membership as proof they are doing the right thing. Oblivious to the fact it is the electorate that matter and in two elections, not one, against a dire Tory government, their way has been rejected.

The party is overrun with demagogues who just want power over Labour rather than actually be in government. The levels of delusion I've seen since Thursday are astonishing. As I said the other day, the brexit-blaming is tantamount to blaming the ref after losing and putting in a shit performance. The continuing uptalk of this amazing 'manifesto', which amounted to an unprecedented enlargement of the state  and was IMO, totally infeasible as a collective set of policies, and thus amounted to electioneering, promising everyone everything under to the sun in order to get elected, is hilarious.

The future direction of the party appears to be heading toward another Corbynite. Was it not Marx who once said "first time as tragedy, then as farce"? This is exactly where Labour are heading. In an ideal world there'd be a wholesale liquidation of Corbynites and Momentum, that's the only way the party doesn't become an irrelevant laughing stock for the next decade or so.

Edited December 15, 2019 by Dr_Pangloss

[Wainy316]

Can Labour ever expect to win a majority though without Scotland?

[blandy]

52 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I do worry that the left of the party is now so in control of it that they will continue to remain in their own little bubble and continue to tell each other that their way will work

It's not even that, is it? I mean I agree with your post, but I think it's like an ideological purity thing with them. They think they are the only ones with virtue, the true believers, the true chosen ones. They don't seem to care if they win or not. It's more important to be seen to be doing their virtue project. If your not part of their cult, you're a tory.

Utterly destructive, tory-enabling f***wits.

[blandy]

45 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

In an ideal world there'd be a wholesale liquidation of Corbynites and Momentum

I feel bit sorry for "Momentum" people - not the high profile tubes who've sort of claimed it as theirs, but the ordinary people who were enthused by the idea of "something different" - they were large enough in number to be significant. I mean I know a few and they had hope and weren't old style lefties, they were (are) just nice people who want a better way of things being run, fairer, not controlled by big business and big donors, or Unions even.

But these 3 quid membership folks are just left as disillusioned as the rest of us.

[hippo]

As unlikely as it is to work. There will I think be a split in the labour party.

The reason against it is the support labour has (33% of the vote) - it would be difficult for a new party to get that. - yet it is difficult to see that 33% going any other way but down.

Wots more likely though momentum loosing control of the labour party ? - or getting some traction behind a centre left party.

[markavfc40]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's not even that, is it? I mean I agree with your post, but I think it's like an ideological purity thing with them. They think they are the only ones with virtue, the true believers, the true chosen ones. They don't seem to care if they win or not. It's more important to be seen to be doing their virtue project. If your not part of their cult, you're a tory.

Utterly destructive, tory-enabling f***wits.

You are possibly right about them not caring if they win or not but certainly before the election when most outside of them believed the best outcome we could hope for was a hung parliament they seemed to believe a Labour majority was on. They don't own the fact that it didn't come to fruition though they push the blame onto those non believers within the Labour party and every other outside influence.

[hippo]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

I feel bit sorry for "Momentum" people - not the high profile tubes who've sort of claimed it as theirs, but the ordinary people who were enthused by the idea of "something different" - they were large enough in number to be significant. I mean I know a few and they had hope and weren't old style lefties, they were (are) just nice people who want a better way of things being run, fairer, not controlled by big business and big donors, or Unions even.

But these 3 quid membership folks are just left as disillusioned as the rest of us.

That's not my experience of momentum. They are people for whom politics is a hobby.

They can go to meetings talk of pure socialism - they talk of not being afraid to put out a left manifesto - not being afraid of the right wing media....

Winning an election is a side issue. Pumping resources into unseating Boris Johnson shows how insular they can get.

[bickster]

2 hours ago, hippo said:

Just seen Lisa Mandy talking making her pitch for the leadership

FTFY and f*** me that would be the death of the party.

Actually bring it on it needs to die and be replaced with something credible.

[hippo]

13 minutes ago, bickster said:

FTFY and f*** me that would be the death of the party.

Actually bring it on it needs to die and be replaced with something credible.

You seem to say that about everyone though. !!!

To me they are all talking window dressing...local parties...getting involved with the local community...being democratic about how decisions are made......

The eye doesn't seem to be on the prize.

[Davkaus]

Labour still has the same problem as it had in 2015. The bulk of MPs and the Labour voting electorate (or at least, electorate that could be won over to voting Labour) on one side, and the current leadership cult and the membership on the other. Nothing has been done to bridge that divide. 

When the PLP and electorate are at odds with the bulk of the membership, it's hard to see a clear way forward.

[markavfc40]

1 hour ago, Wainy316 said:

Can Labour ever expect to win a majority though without Scotland?

It makes it tougher but still doable. In 1997 Labour took 418 seats and in 2001 412. Even without a single seat in Scotland they'd have had comfortable majorities

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

When the PLP and electorate are at odds with the bulk of the membership, it's hard to see a clear way forward.

I hadn't thought of it like that - I'd been thinking about how to change the people at the top to reconnect - but if you're right they're done for as the second party. And I think you might be right. If they've been dragged down an unelectable road by the angry tramps, egged on and aided by the career revolutionaries with their cushy jobs like Milne and McLuskey, then Labour for normal people is gone.

[blandy]

6 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

It makes it tougher but still doable. In 1997 Labour took 418 seats and in 2001 412. Even without a single seat in Scotland they'd have had comfortable majorities

The tories will fix/rig the system to stop the possibility. Nailed on.

[markavfc40]

Just now, blandy said:

The tories will fix/rig the system to stop the possibility. Nailed on.

True. I was just trying to offer hope, all be it false, and up you stepped again with your realism. Cheers 

[tonyh29]

2 hours ago, Wainy316 said:

Can Labour ever expect to win a majority though without Scotland?

They would have won all 3 Blair terms without Scotland as I recall

edit 

guess I should have read the replies before  I posted ..

 

Edited December 15, 2019 by tonyh29

[Dr_Pangloss]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

I feel bit sorry for "Momentum" people - not the high profile tubes who've sort of claimed it as theirs, but the ordinary people who were enthused by the idea of "something different" - they were large enough in number to be significant. I mean I know a few and they had hope and weren't old style lefties, they were (are) just nice people who want a better way of things being run, fairer, not controlled by big business and big donors, or Unions even.

But these 3 quid membership folks are just left as disillusioned as the rest of us.

I personally know people like that too however I'm a lot less sympathetic, they're a part of the problem.

[colhint]

7 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Starmer is the standout but the 'it must be a woman' meme is very worryingly gaining traction. 

So you think Labours next leader should be their arch Remainer. A london M.P and a lawyer. 

Edited December 15, 2019 by colhint

[Mic09]

20 minutes ago, colhint said:

So you think Labours next leader should be their arch Remainer. A london M.P and a lawyer. 

It should be the best person for the job, whoever that might be.