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

[ml1dch]

Tells its own story that the resignation of the Scottish Labour leader hasn't warranted even a passing mention 24 hours after it happened. 

Anyway, just adding the up-to-date context to post this bit of crystal ball-gazing:

 

(that eleven point margin from 2017 is now a thirty-two point margin)

[dAVe80]

20 hours ago, ml1dch said:

Tells its own story that the resignation of the Scottish Labour leader hasn't warranted even a passing mention 24 hours after it happened. 

Anyway, just adding the up-to-date context to post this bit of crystal ball-gazing:

 

(that eleven point margin from 2017 is now a thirty-two point margin)

Seemingly asked to leave at the request of some potential rich donors. Nice one Keith. 

Edited January 16, 2021 by dAVe80

[ml1dch]

19 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Seemingly asked to leave at the request of some potential rich donors. Nice one Keith. 

My name isn't Keith.

[HanoiVillan]

On 14/12/2020 at 15:36, HanoiVillan said:

Regardless what people think of Starmer's answer to 'Gemma from Cambridge', it is probably worth being concerned about an organised campaign from the far right to spread white replacement theory bollocks on the airwaves, for that's what was happening apparently:

Why am I not surprised to see the link between far-right politics and 'wellness culture' rearing its head again?

Follow-up to the story of Keir Starmer's far-right phone-in guest:

From Private Eye, via *shudder* Nick Cohen: https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/1352333564227022851

 

[OutByEaster?]

In fairness, that's good work by the station - they're not in the business of fairness, or of allowing fair debate, they're in the business of attention - getting people to realise that they're there and that there might be some controversy and driving up listener numbers in order to drive advertising revenues. The Talksport model.

[blandy]

10 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

while he's persuading the country that he could be a good Tory, he's losing a lot of Labour voters who keep hearing him quack and are wondering if he's a duck

Is he? Again, that's not my perception. I totally get that some Labour voters/supporters fear he is an evil Tory incarnate - mainly Corbyn fans judging from the Twitters (yeah, I know...). But while they may be vocal and angry and want him immediately deposed and replaced by the second coming of Catweazle, I feel the actual electorate or population generally is giving him a chance. Labour lost a F-ton of seats the last election, and those people who voted Tory for the first time aren't going to instantly return - For many they wanted Brexit done, for others they didn't like Catweazle at all. They got their Brexit. So I think it's not about him "losing" a lot of Labour voters, more about a long hard slog to gain voters from other parties to even have a chance  of gaining a good number of seats. Of course some of the Corbyn likers and more left wing labour people will be concerned or angry and decide to leave, but I don't think there are that many of them who will. And to be blunt, Labour  would be better off without some of them. I saw yesterday I think it was, that Piers Corbyn had designed a basically appalling mock Nazi style leaflet based around the "Arbeit Macht Frei" concentration camp arch for some local campaign leaflet against Covid vaccinations. These weapons are just a burden on decency and sanity and their like should be nowhere near Labour - I'm not saying he is, but we all know there are some who are.

[OutByEaster?]

27 minutes ago, blandy said:

Is he? Again, that's not my perception. I totally get that some Labour voters/supporters fear he is an evil Tory incarnate - mainly Corbyn fans judging from the Twitters (yeah, I know...)

I think it's worth remembering that it was the values, principles and policies of Corbyn that propelled him to a position for which he was entirely unsuited. Those principles and polices are Labours core values and always have been. Whilst the man himself proved that the job wasn't for him, I think it's worth noting that outside of personality, the vast majority of Labour members and voters were Corbyn fans - I think it's incredibly naive to think that Labour would be better off without them. 

I guess this comes down to the schism in the Labour party between the traditional Labour socialists and the business friendly New Labour Blair thing. I think within the party the vast majority favour the policies and principles of traditional Labour rather than the 90's version, but I think a significant section have moved on. Labour remains two parties - it's the biggest weakness the party has. I don't fear that Starmer is an evil Tory incarnate, I fear he's a new Blair, perhaps without foundation and certainly without sound evidence until such point as there's a manifesto, but there are lots of things that hint in that direction. 

 

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

 I saw yesterday I think it was, that Piers Corbyn had designed a basically appalling mock Nazi style leaflet based around the "Arbeit Macht Frei" concentration camp arch for some local campaign leaflet against Covid vaccinations. These weapons are just a burden on decency and sanity and their like should be nowhere near Labour - I'm not saying he is, but we all know there are some who are.

Isn't Piers Corbyn a complete crank and widely understood to be such by absolutely everyone in the Labour Party, including his own brother?

I don't think he's a very typical example of what the Labour left thinks about anything. I'm not even sure he identifies as on the left.

EDIT: Should probably have said 'absolutely everyone of any importance'; to be clear, I'm not denying that there are any cranks with weird opinions on the Labour left, because clearly there are some, I just don't think Piers Corbyn is a very good example.

Edited February 1, 2021 by HanoiVillan

[darrenm]

Piers Corbyn is a dangerous lunatic who shouldn't be given any oxygen of publicity. It's unfair to group him with the left because he clearly isn't.

[darrenm]

Posting this in here to bring the discussion of the Labour Party back into the Labour Party thread.

A lot of people seem to think that the 2019 election was a verdict on what was happening at the time. They would say that it was people voting against Corbyn and Labour's brexit policy, whichever way they saw it was wrong.

I think you need to look a bit further than that. The 2019 election was a verdict on the Labour Party since the end of the 2nd world war. If you think this is hyperbole then perhaps these graphs will convince. I made a thread on that there twatter so I'll extract bits here.

The 'red wall' is a bit of a lazy term but it can be useful as a generic term for parts of the North East, West Midlands, North West, etc. Places which were seen to be strongly Labour due to being working class or industrial.

The problem is, they weren't strong Labour. Not for a long time. Here's the list of some of the red wall constituencies as listed by some rando editing Wikipedia (as good a source as any)

OK, Bassetlaw

Probably not a great example because of John Mann doing the same as Ian Austin and basically telling everyone to vote Tory. But still, see the trend line from the election after the end of WW2?

Bishop Auckland

Blyth Valley

 

I could post the same downward trend of the last 70 years for every one of those constituencies. The trend was bucked twice, once in 1997 by Blair and again in 2017 by Corbyn. There was one common theme between those 2 elections - the offer of change. An offer of hope for the future through radical change.

In 2019 it simply reverted to the downward trend.

If you want an answer as to why the Tories can't be shifted off 40% polling, it's because there simply isn't enough Labour vote and it's only getting worse. The only hope Labour will have to stay relevant is to make an electoral reform pact with other parties.

[TrentVilla]

12 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Maybe and there are certainly lots of Tory voters fed up with Boris; he's too loud, too brash, too irresponsible, not their sort of man. Starmer would fit in much better at the golf club I'm sure and I think he can win some of those voters over, possibly in decent amounts - or at least persuade them to abstain in good numbers - that seems to be the plan.

The problem is that while he's persuading the country that he could be a good Tory, he's losing a lot of Labour voters who keep hearing him quack and are wondering if he's a duck.

The reality is though that a left Labour party is unelectable, Corbyn proved that twice!

Labour won’t get elected as a left leaning party, the only way to power is the third way. Blair knew it and it remains as true today as it was in the 90’s.

So Kier is appealing to exactly the audience he needs to try and attract if he is to have any hope of power. The left can frankly whinge and moan as much as they like but they had their arses handed to them twice already so their choice is support a more moderate centerist Labour party or well frankly they can groan from the sidelines.

The old left and right is the past, power is in the middle. Blair knew it, Cameron knew it even Boris seemed to know it.

[Seat68]

Those examples above. Isnt it the same for tories largely reducing followed by a sudden drop for the Blair years and a massive gain around Brexit. 

[TrentVilla]

41 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think it's worth remembering that it was the values, principles and policies of Corbyn that propelled him to a position for which he was entirely unsuited. Those principles and polices are Labours core values and always have been. Whilst the man himself proved that the job wasn't for him, I think it's worth noting that outside of personality, the vast majority of Labour members and voters were Corbyn fans - I think it's incredibly naive to think that Labour would be better off without them. 

I guess this comes down to the schism in the Labour party between the traditional Labour socialists and the business friendly New Labour Blair thing. I think within the party the vast majority favour the policies and principles of traditional Labour rather than the 90's version, but I think a significant section have moved on. Labour remains two parties - it's the biggest weakness the party has. I don't fear that Starmer is an evil Tory incarnate, I fear he's a new Blair, perhaps without foundation and certainly without sound evidence until such point as there's a manifesto, but there are lots of things that hint in that direction. 

 

That Labour fear a new Blair is remarkable frankly, what would they rather, their ideals while they piss and whinge from the sidelines or compromise a little and have power to actually make meaningful change?

Blair become toxic I get that but New Labour was the best thing that happened to this country in many years and for a time did hugely positive things and made long lasting significant changes.

That the Labour party or those on the left of it still can’t stomach that or the rejection of Corbyn is staggering. There seems to be this notion that the nation rejected Corbyn not the policies he stood upon, I don’t think this is true I think they rejected both but some in Labour kid themselves they lost because of personal attacks on Corbyn.

[TrentVilla]

38 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Piers Corbyn is a dangerous lunatic who shouldn't be given any oxygen of publicity. It's unfair to group him with the left because he clearly isn't.

What is he then? To me he is a huge example of champers socialism.

[darrenm]

1 minute ago, TrentVilla said:

What is he then? To me he is a huge example of champers socialism.

Just unhinged. I don't think he falls into any political spectrum.

[Seat68]

3 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

What is he then? To me he is a huge example of champers socialism.

Piers Corbyn? Crackpot Piers Corbyn?

[OutByEaster?]

We seem to have turned the Tory party thread into the Labour Party thread by talking about Starmer.

Amusing irony notwithstanding, we should probably take this to the Labour thread.

 

[blandy]

50 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I don't think he's a very typical example of what the Labour left thinks about anything. I'm not even sure he identifies as on the left.

He was a labour party member and councillor, though he left Labour in opposition to Iraq war. He is something of a Marxist and is definitely of the loony left.

Sure he's not a Labour member now, but he is of an ilk with many on the very left of Labour, but as you say also a proper barmpot.

[TrentVilla]

2 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Piers Corbyn? Crackpot Piers Corbyn?

No, my mistake had him mixed up with his son.

[darrenm]

7 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Those examples above. Isnt it the same for tories largely reducing followed by a sudden drop for the Blair years and a massive gain around Brexit. 

I don't understand. Those graphs are going back to 1950. The Labour decline was happening a long time before Blair and brexit. There are drops and gains for both parties at various points (1997 and 2017 for Labour as I said) but the trend continues.