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

[darrenm]

3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Does anyone think under rebecca long bailey they would have performed better in these elections than starmer?

Honestly, yes, massively.

Until recently, I wouldn't have thought so. But everywhere Labour have done well, it's been where either pro-Corbyn or outwardly left figures were involved. Everywhere they've done poorly it's where Keir Starmer or the continuity Tory approach was pushed.

Drakeford and Welsh Labour did great. Preston Labour council, Salford with Long Bailey, most of Manchester.

[dAVe80]

I really can't be chewed to sit and write tons, so here are a few thoughts on how Labour get back on track. 

Embrace the policies in the 2017 & 2019 manifestos. They are popular with the electorate, and offer the hope the apathetic and disenfranchised. At the same time they need to be realistic. They can't offer everything all at once. Trying to put 15 years worth of policies into the first 100 days of government isn't going to work. Pick the ones that can be delivered quickly, and help the most amount of people, and champion those. 

Champion working people. Talk them up. Offer them something. Reward their hard work. The obvious answer is to back pay rises. In the public sector, and private. Back a real living wage. Adopt the new deal for workers. 

Support unions. Support education staff when they tell you it's not safe to be in school. Oppose any bill that seeks to take away workers rights (and human rights ffs!). Oppose fire and rehire, and pedge to outlaw it. 

Look at the success the party has had, and learn from it, and adopt and scale the campaigns. Look to Wales, Salford and Preston. Take their ideas, and shout about them. Tell the country that there are alternatives and they work, and there's proof that they work. 

This is perhaps the one I'd personally maybe struggle with the most, and I'm still not sure about, but get a leader who sits in the middle ground. Doesn't necessarily have to be a populist, but Labour is going to need someone that can't be demonised in the press. Yeah they're not gonna get an easy ride, but it can't be anyone who's going to have skeletons (whether they're real or concocted). That leader is going to have to listen to and embrace the left. This means having Corbyn or McDonnell in the shadow cabinet (yes I know that contradicts the skeletons part). If they can do this, that means they bring the activists back, which means the army of door knockers, leaflet deliveres and champions who did so well in 2017. 

[darrenm]

1 hour ago, markavfc40 said:

There are millions of people in this country that don't vote Tory. I get the impression Labour are now trying to convince those that do to change their minds and vote for them. What they should be doing though is going after the millions of people that don't vote Tory and offering them something that means they get off their arses and vote Labour. Offer genuine alternatives and show there is a better way.

Labour under Corbyn had some very good, attractive to the electorate policies. They just had the wrong man, in the eyes of many, wanting to deliver them. I am not convinced Starmer is the right man, and whilst accepting it is a difficult time to be in opposition, he has spent the last year failing to oppose with any venom and offering very few alternatives. There needs to be clear lines between the Tories and Labour not pussy footing around trying to be Tory lite and copying the Tory flag shagging in the hope of attracting a few voters back from the dark side. 

It would certainly hep though if they could at the very least untie as a party. I am sure in America there are plenty of democrats who weren't particularly enamoured with Biden. They united though because they realised that if they didn't Trump and all he represented would win again. 

The situation in America was very similar to here. Biden took Bernie with him and therefore the left got behind Biden. Starmer did the opposite.

[Demitri_C]

4 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

I really can't be chewed to sit and write tons, so here are a few thoughts on how Labour get back on track. 

Embrace the policies in the 2017 & 2019 manifestos. They are popular with the electorate, and offer the hope the apathetic and disenfranchised. At the same time they need to be realistic. They can't offer everything all at once. Trying to put 15 years worth of policies into the first 100 days of government isn't going to work. Pick the ones that can be delivered quickly, and help the most amount of people, and champion those. 

Champion working people. Talk them up. Offer them something. Reward their hard work. The obvious answer is to back pay rises. In the public sector, and private. Back a real living wage. Adopt the new deal for workers. 

Support unions. Support education staff when they tell you it's not safe to be in school. Oppose any bill that seeks to take away workers rights (and human rights ffs!). Oppose fire and rehire, and pedge to outlaw it. 

Look at the success the party has had, and learn from it, and adopt and scale the campaigns. Look to Wales, Salford and Preston. Take their ideas, and shout about them. Tell the country that there are alternatives and they work, and there's proof that they work. 

This is perhaps the one I'd personally maybe struggle with the most, and I'm still not sure about, but get a leader who sits in the middle ground. Doesn't necessarily have to be a populist, but Labour is going to need someone that can't be demonised in the press. Yeah they're not gonna get an easy ride, but it can't be anyone who's going to have skeletons (whether they're real or concocted). That leader is going to have to listen to and embrace the left. This means having Corbyn or McDonnell in the shadow cabinet (yes I know that contradicts the skeletons part). If they can do this, that means they bring the activists back, which means the army of door knockers, leaflet deliveres and champions who did so well in 2017. 

I think labour cocked up when they choose ed over david.

I think david miliband would have made a good labour leader to be honest

[darrenm]

4 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

I really can't be chewed to sit and write tons, so here are a few thoughts on how Labour get back on track. 

Embrace the policies in the 2017 & 2019 manifestos. They are popular with the electorate, and offer the hope the apathetic and disenfranchised. At the same time they need to be realistic. They can't offer everything all at once. Trying to put 15 years worth of policies into the first 100 days of government isn't going to work. Pick the ones that can be delivered quickly, and help the most amount of people, and champion those. 

Champion working people. Talk them up. Offer them something. Reward their hard work. The obvious answer is to back pay rises. In the public sector, and private. Back a real living wage. Adopt the new deal for workers. 

Support unions. Support education staff when they tell you it's not safe to be in school. Oppose any bill that seeks to take away workers rights (and human rights ffs!). Oppose fire and rehire, and pedge to outlaw it. 

Look at the success the party has had, and learn from it, and adopt and scale the campaigns. Look to Wales, Salford and Preston. Take their ideas, and shout about them. Tell the country that there are alternatives and they work, and there's proof that they work. 

This is perhaps the one I'd personally maybe struggle with the most, and I'm still not sure about, but get a leader who sits in the middle ground. Doesn't necessarily have to be a populist, but Labour is going to need someone that can't be demonised in the press. Yeah they're not gonna get an easy ride, but it can't be anyone who's going to have skeletons (whether they're real or concocted). That leader is going to have to listen to and embrace the left. This means having Corbyn or McDonnell in the shadow cabinet (yes I know that contradicts the skeletons part). If they can do this, that means they bring the activists back, which means the army of door knockers, leaflet deliveres and champions who did so well in 2017. 

I can really only think of Andy Burnham as acceptable to everyone.

[markavfc40]

4 minutes ago, darrenm said:

The situation in America was very similar to here. Biden took Bernie with him and therefore the left got behind Biden. Starmer did the opposite.

That is a great example then isn't it of a party coming together to defeat the real opposition.

I find the infighting in the Labour party infuriating as it has lumbered those of us who despise the Tories with a Tory government. Trouble with some in Labour is that they would rather be governed by the Tories than see what they consider as the right or left side of Labour succeed. 

[dAVe80]

Just now, darrenm said:

I can really only think of Andy Burnham as acceptable to everyone.

He certainly fits the centrist bill (if centre left). 

[Sam-AVFC]

32 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Who would you want as leader sam?

Looking around its hard to see who would be next

God knows. I see absolutely no way the Conservatives lose any election at all in the foreseeable future unless the other parties finally decide to work together and/or the government decide to enact electoral reform that would not be at all beneficial to them. With this belief it's very difficult for me to stay engaged with politics. I still read about everything going on and engage now and again, but it just gets me down tbh so I've generally been avoiding it.

I know loads of people who find Boris funny and one even said he thinks it's funny that Boris is so transparently corrupt. He then said he'd never vote Keir Starmer as he doesn't want his taxes to go up, completely oblivious to the fact this wouldn't happen to him. Handing money to friends and donors = good; imaginary tax rises to pay for public services = bad. We were sat down watching TV the other night and he also said 'you wouldn't be allowed to have this on TV now'...except we're literally watching it.

I just don't know how you compete with that, because pretty much anyone I know that would vote Labour to keep the current lot out wouldn't do it if a Boris type figure was in charge, even if it did win back a few votes from people who have left. There is also a perception that Labour spend 99% of their time arguing stuff like 60 year old men should be able to self identify as 5 year old girls and go back to school, which is obviously nonsense. People see a Dailymail headline about a small number of people on Twitter not liking a program and see it as an existential threat from the left.

Starmer has been a massive let down. I doubt he's going anywhere soon though so I am 'happy' to wait and see if he can come up with a win somewhere that can be built on.

I am cautiously optimistic the Green Party might get enough support after this election to become a bit more relevant. 

Edited May 8, 2021 by Sam-AVFC

[Panto_Villan]

8 minutes ago, darrenm said:

The situation in America was very similar to here. Biden took Bernie with him and therefore the left got behind Biden. Starmer did the opposite.

I don't think you can compare the visceral hatred swing voters had for Trump with what swing voters feel for Boris, though.

All Biden had to do was not be Trump and not say or do anything that disqualified himself. Seems like that's what Starmer has tried and he's been destroyed.

I like Biden, but if Trump had dialed back his worst instincts re: covid by about 20% then I think he would have walked the re-election. The Tories won't roll over so easily.

[dAVe80]

On a happier note, my colleague, and ex member of my local union committee won his seat, alongside the other two Labour candidate, including gaining a seat from the Lib Dems. So it was nice that I was able to help in 3 Labour victories. 

[HanoiVillan]

18 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

I really can't be chewed to sit and write tons, so here are a few thoughts on how Labour get back on track. 

Embrace the policies in the 2017 & 2019 manifestos. They are popular with the electorate, and offer the hope the apathetic and disenfranchised. At the same time they need to be realistic. They can't offer everything all at once. Trying to put 15 years worth of policies into the first 100 days of government isn't going to work. Pick the ones that can be delivered quickly, and help the most amount of people, and champion those. 

Champion working people. Talk them up. Offer them something. Reward their hard work. The obvious answer is to back pay rises. In the public sector, and private. Back a real living wage. Adopt the new deal for workers. 

Support unions. Support education staff when they tell you it's not safe to be in school. Oppose any bill that seeks to take away workers rights (and human rights ffs!). Oppose fire and rehire, and pedge to outlaw it. 

Look at the success the party has had, and learn from it, and adopt and scale the campaigns. Look to Wales, Salford and Preston. Take their ideas, and shout about them. Tell the country that there are alternatives and they work, and there's proof that they work. 

This is perhaps the one I'd personally maybe struggle with the most, and I'm still not sure about, but get a leader who sits in the middle ground. Doesn't necessarily have to be a populist, but Labour is going to need someone that can't be demonised in the press. Yeah they're not gonna get an easy ride, but it can't be anyone who's going to have skeletons (whether they're real or concocted). That leader is going to have to listen to and embrace the left. This means having Corbyn or McDonnell in the shadow cabinet (yes I know that contradicts the skeletons part). If they can do this, that means they bring the activists back, which means the army of door knockers, leaflet deliveres and champions who did so well in 2017. 

I 'agree' with this post, but the problem is the final paragraph. Any leader who followed the advice in paragraphs 2-5 would not be considered 'in the middle ground', as a matter of definition. They would be portrayed as a mad socialist wearing a Russian fur hat on Newsnight, and the entirety of the party apparatus would treat them as illegitimate and force them out.

There's no reason to think anything different would happen this time.

[Jareth]

The wreckers did such a good job convincing the world that all left leaning Labourites are antisemitic - that now that they need them back in the fold and prominent in their team, they literally cannot bring them in, even if they wanted to (which they don't). They f*cked it royally. 

[dAVe80]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I 'agree' with this post, but the problem is the final paragraph. Any leader who followed the advice in paragraphs 2-5 would not be considered 'in the middle ground', as a matter of definition. They would be portrayed as a mad socialist wearing a Russian fur hat on Newsnight, and the entirety of the party apparatus would treat them as illegitimate and force them out.

There's no reason to think anything different would happen this time.

Fair point. At some point though we're just going to have to deal with the fact that you can't have the press onside, and be a radical, transformative Labour government in the traditional way that we probably want to be.  So at which point, we've probably got to say forget the press. 

[HanoiVillan]

15 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Fair point. At some point though we're just going to have to deal with the fact that you can't have the press onside, and be a radical, transformative Labour government in the traditional way that we probably want to be.  So at which point, we've probably got to say forget the press. 

. . .  but then I'm not sure what the point of having a 'centrist' leader is. If we take media antipathy as a given (I'm not sure we should, Starmer has received plenty of very softball coverage, though I would expect that to change in the run-up to an election of course), then we need a leader who will *want* to pursue the program we want, not one who will want to undermine it or downplay it at every opportunity.

Edited May 8, 2021 by HanoiVillan

[dAVe80]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

. . .  but then I'm not sure what the point of having a 'centrist' leader is. If we take media antipathy as a given (I'm not sure we should, Starmer has received plenty of very softball coverage, though I would expect that to change in the run-up to an election of course), then we need a leader who will *want* to pursue the program we want, not one who will want to undermine it or downplay it at every opportunity.

The idea of a centrist is unity. I know we can't compare to the US, but my thinking is have someone in the mould of Biden, who will take on board left (or if we're being honest not particularly left, but for the sake of the argument) policies. 

[HanoiVillan]

1 minute ago, dAVe80 said:

The idea of a centrist is unity. I know we can't compare to the US, but my thinking is have someone in the mould of Biden, who will take on board left (or if we're being honest not particularly left, but for the sake of the argument) policies. 

Yes, well that was the theory of Starmer's leadership campaign, but unsurprisingly he was just blatantly lying, and frankly I'm glad he's suffering for it.

If the practice had been anything like the theory, I'd be fully on board. The open question is to what extent the practice isn't like the theory because of Starmer's personal mendacity and bad faith, and to what extent it isn't like the theory because the theory is just impossible to put into practice for whatever reason.

[OutByEaster?]

I think regardless of where you sit in the Labour party's erm...broad range of opinions, it's pretty obvious that what needs to happen and needs to happen very quickly is that Labour needs to set out something that resembles a direction or set of policies, something with which to identify itself.

I think to fix this, the very first thing that needs to be done, and immediately is for Starmer to lay out some policy themes - maybe not actual policies, because there isn't time right now to get those agreed at a comprehensive level, but something that says "We are the Labour Party, these are the things we believe should happen and these are the ways we're going to try to achieve them." 

I think right now the Labour Party don't appear to believe in anything, we have Keir Starmer's ten key beliefs that he put in place when he was elected, but he's already gone against seven of them and they're no longer useful in terms of establishing belief or practical in political terms where they'll be used against him. Today the party looks like its beliefs are reactive and impermanent, "We believe whatever seems popular today." it's vague and almost impossible for voters to get behind.

He needs to draw a line in the sand and then put together something short, punchy but specific that says "Here's what you're getting" no wishy-washy "Improving the lives of ordinary people" or "Getting Britain working" but specifics - a pay rise of x for public service workers, a commitment to this investment in education, this transport project, this foreign policy, this regulation on taxation - something that people can say "Ah, yeah, the Labour party, I remember." 

Get it out there, get it clear, get it simple and repeat it time and time again until you can replace it with an actual policy document that supports it. Do not under any circumstances present it on a giant stone tablet as if it's the ten commandments.

Now what these polices should be are the grist of the arguments between traditional Labour and the new centrists, but regardless of what they say, just actually saying them is an absolutely necessity and an absolutely necessity immediately. 

 

[icouldtelltheworld]

1 hour ago, Sam-AVFC said:

I know loads of people who find Boris funny and one even said he thinks it's funny that Boris is so transparently corrupt.

This is an interesting point, and I think its partially a long-term result of the expenses scandal. Among the vast majority of the population who aren't particularly politically engaged there is a perception that all politicians are corrupt, its just what people expect of them all. From that, you can kind of understand someone looking at Johnson and liking the fact that he doesn't try and pretend to be whiter than white. I reckon that goes a long way to explaining why the Tory sleaze angle hasn't cut through at all with the general public

[chrisp65]

So, Mark Drakeford is a million miles from a populist. He reluctantly took the job, and has said he will quit mid way through this term. He’s slow, steady, considered.

But he’s also in power, and has delivered everything he has said he would deliver. Vaccines, done. Three new schools being built in my town. New hospitals in South Wales. £500 one off bonus for NHS staff as a ‘quick’ thank you and a promise the Welsh NHS will definitely be getting an above inflation pay rise.

Vaccine success, school building, hospital building.

Then, an election slogan that was repeated and repeated. If you value it, vote for it. If you value it, vote for it. If you value it, vote for it.

He is living proof you don’t need to be flash. But it bloody helps if you’re in power and you can choose where to target investment and effort.

[OutByEaster?]

My extensive research into the current strengths of the Labour party and the voting habits and preferences of the UK electorate has lead me to believe that there are only two sensible proposals in terms of a new leader for the Labour party following these elections; someone Welsh or Danny Dyer.