blandy Posted January 17, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 17, 2023 5 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Do they, or do the polls say that the tories are so **** shambolic that Kier wins by default. Neither, or both. Take your pick, because for Labour to win “by default” it has had to change to be (justifiably) credible as a government in waiting. It was not seen that way by the population at large for the past 12 years or so, so that’s a big improvement that hasn’t happened by accident, and Starmer should be credited for that. But he needs to be wary of also needing to offer a clearly explained better alternative. Milliband for example offered a timid version of his beliefs, watered down by wonks worried about media and polling. Corbyn then went the other extreme and offered multiple moons on a socialist stick, to the extent that the population at large liked quite a bit of it, but didn’t believe that Labour was credible in offering to do so much, so quickly, or that it wouldn’t crash the economy through spooking the markets by having no plan to pay for it all. See also Truss, Liz 2022). So Starmer still has to explain more about how his party will be better for voters and what that will look like and has to be seen to be confident and capable of delivering that and to capture a bit of feel good impetus, but “not scaring the horses” also remains imperative for any Labour opposition because of the skewed media landscape in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 The choices for the next government in Westminster are tory, or tory lite. Mustn’t scare the horses that the next government could be much different from the one that has given us the last 10 years of excellence. Free at the point of use, PFI, think tank, focus group lead, managerial, anti inspiration, anti vision, measured, affordable, pro Brexit, anti immigration, sort of tory but with less blatant theft and corruption, decline. Hallelujah, for we are saved. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KentVillan Posted January 17, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted January 17, 2023 1 hour ago, chrisp65 said: The choices for the next government in Westminster are tory, or tory lite. Mustn’t scare the horses that the next government could be much different from the one that has given us the last 10 years of excellence. Free at the point of use, PFI, think tank, focus group lead, managerial, anti inspiration, anti vision, measured, affordable, pro Brexit, anti immigration, sort of tory but with less blatant theft and corruption, decline. Hallelujah, for we are saved. The idea Starmer is Tory lite is based on what? There’s a long tradition in the Labour Party going back to it’s founding, through Gaitskell, Callaghan, Kinnock, Smith, Blair, and Brown of Labour politicians who reject socialism. Attlee and Wilson were a long way to the right of Corbyn and Lynch. Fine if you disagree with Starmer, but to say it’s not real Labour is a Corbynite fiction. There are plenty of obvious differences between Labour and the Tories at the moment, anyway, and they’d probably become more obvious with Labour in government. Under the current voting system, the leadership of the Labour Party will always have to be somewhat to the right of the wider party to win elections, in the same way the Tory leadership in government usually sits a bit to the left of its party (many of them think Sunak and Hunt are socialists!). The only way to change that is proportional representation, which would probably split each of the main parties in two. Starmer might lose the next election, but he won’t lose it because his policy on the strikes isn’t inspiring enough. It’s not his job to be a figurehead for strike action. What could he possibly gain from stirring the pot, and what would it achieve for striking workers if their actions are seen as an election dividing line by the Tories? 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 2 minutes ago, KentVillan said: The idea Starmer is Tory lite is based on what? I’ve based this on my conclusion from everything I’ve ever heard him say. We were broke in the 1940’s, no money, no power, desperately short of a young healthy workforce. Labour had a vision to form the NHS and bring in a workforce that could help the country get back on it’s feet. Now I know times change, I know circumstances differ. But there is simply no vision, no big plan. We have an ageing workforce we have a care system in crisis, we have a labour shortage and we have uncontrolled immigration because we refuse to allow controlled immigration where we can selfishly select those that could prove their worth and be a net benefit to the UK. We have an energy crisis, we have an emergency need of more renewables, we have a manufacturing base short on investment and short on human resource. We have a mean immigration policy. I’m not asking him to support strikes, I’m asking for him to explain how we will all be given a fair go with improving prospects. Instead, what we get is ubercaution, where he criticises the tories without actually suggesting there is very much more than a cigarette paper between their ideas and his, their agenda and his. The consensus appears to be that the middle ground has been reset to the right. So how does a suggestion we might edge towards the middle as long as the focus groups and tabloids are ok with that, begin to suggest he might be an actual genuine Labour advocate? Yes, if he reveals a vision the tories might steal it. But there is no vision for them to steal. He’s tory lite. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 32 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I’ve based this on my conclusion from everything I’ve ever heard him say. We were broke in the 1940’s, no money, no power, desperately short of a young healthy workforce. Labour had a vision to form the NHS and bring in a workforce that could help the country get back on it’s feet. Now I know times change, I know circumstances differ. But there is simply no vision, no big plan. We have an ageing workforce we have a care system in crisis, we have a labour shortage and we have uncontrolled immigration because we refuse to allow controlled immigration where we can selfishly select those that could prove their worth and be a net benefit to the UK. We have an energy crisis, we have an emergency need of more renewables, we have a manufacturing base short on investment and short on human resource. We have a mean immigration policy. I’m not asking him to support strikes, I’m asking for him to explain how we will all be given a fair go with improving prospects. Instead, what we get is ubercaution, where he criticises the tories without actually suggesting there is very much more than a cigarette paper between their ideas and his, their agenda and his. The consensus appears to be that the middle ground has been reset to the right. So how does a suggestion we might edge towards the middle as long as the focus groups and tabloids are ok with that, begin to suggest he might be an actual genuine Labour advocate? Yes, if he reveals a vision the tories might steal it. But there is no vision for them to steal. He’s tory lite. If he did what you’re suggesting, do you think he could win the next election? Not a rhetorical question, just wondering what is actually feasible for a Labour leader right now who wants to beat the Tories. Which are the policy areas where he could he push the boat out a bit more in opposition without shedding votes? I’m sure there are some, but the odds are stacked against the Labour Party these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 3 minutes ago, KentVillan said: If he did what you’re suggesting, do you think he could win the next election? Not a rhetorical question, just wondering what is actually feasible for a Labour leader right now who wants to beat the Tories. Which are the policy areas where he could he push the boat out a bit more in opposition without shedding votes? I’m sure there are some, but the odds are stacked against the Labour Party these days. Well, if he can’t allude to at least some of that right now, when his opposition is so poor, then we might as well all pack up and go home. What is the point of power, if all you intend to do with it is babysit the shitshow until the others get back in? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 (edited) Based on the Corbyn-hangover still present within Labour I think Starmer will need to work hard to actually manage to get his party in order. Some people seem to think that the only way to be a labour leader is to be so vehemently left-leaning that one can change a clunky old system like ours in one period. As much as I admire the vision the realpolitik of it all tells me that it's not going to happen. Starmer is the only credible politician at the moment that Labour can hope to drag them into position. You don't win elections or change things in the U.K by having extreme opinions on anything, and if you do you're quickly removed (see Corbyn and BoJo) by your own flaws and faults. For all his faults I think Starmer is doing quite well, he knows how to debate, he's well educated with work experience that matters (compared to Corbyn and BoJo for example), and has the 'statesman' vibes about him. The Labour left needs to get over the loss and help be the change that they seek. They won't be if all they're doing is complaining about Starmer's image. Their own saviour and saint JC wasn't exactly from a poor family either, and in a whole career full of doing diddly squat on the back benches I don't see how his imaginary project would work in real life. Edited January 17, 2023 by magnkarl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted January 17, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 17, 2023 I don't think it's fair to label Starmer as anything until he's had a chance to release some sort of intention on his policies. I mean sure he said some things in his campaign for the leadership but that was some time ago, and we know he had his ten pledges when he started out, but it turns out he didn't believe in any of them and he's rolled back or supported the opposite of just about all of them since they were announced - so, until he actually does tell us absolutely anything that we can believe about what he wants to do or what he might actually believe in, I don't think it's fair to label him as Tory-lite or any of those things. He's only had the job for almost two years and he's been too busy cosying up to the banks, corporations and media that decide UK elections to have time to do policy stuff - so I think it's entirely in the hands of each of us individually on whether we think he's the steadying hand of centralist corporatism or a shill installed and supported by corporate power to cover their arses once they realised the Tories were a shitshow. Regardless, if we can picture the nation as a wife whose (political) husband comes home pissed every night and beats the shit out of her, leaving him for a weak, disloyal fella who occasionally wears her tights and steals from her purse is still a step in the right direction. I remain in favour of the Stopgap-Starmer future - a world in which he wins the election and then we see if we can find a replacement who can take the country forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 Fascinating, that anything with a vision is to be viewed as extreme. No mention of seizing the means of production, no mention of hiking taxes, no mention of supporting strikes, no mention of anything even remotely socialist. I’ve mentioned ideas around improving social care, manufacturing, sustainable energy, immigration in to an ageing population. The worry instantly is that this is a hard left agenda, a stalking horse ideology. The worry is that green issues, employment, and care all sounds a bit Corbyn, a bit Lynch. They’ve planted the trigger words that make you worry about a bolshevik plot. Those words are ‘jobs’, ‘care’, ‘community’, ‘fair’. Basically, they’ve won. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 2 hours ago, chrisp65 said: The choices for the next government in Westminster are tory, or tory lite. Mustn’t scare the horses that the next government could be much different from the one that has given us the last 10 years of excellence. Free at the point of use, PFI, think tank, focus group lead, managerial, anti inspiration, anti vision, measured, affordable, pro Brexit, anti immigration, sort of tory but with less blatant theft and corruption, decline. Hallelujah, for we are saved. Funny enough traditional Tory voters claim that their party of choice have become Labour lite. There doesn't seem to be any clear blue water between the parties. I would be interested to know what policies you would like to move Labour to where you would like them to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Fascinating, that anything with a vision is to be viewed as extreme. No mention of seizing the means of production, no mention of hiking taxes, no mention of supporting strikes, no mention of anything even remotely socialist. I’ve mentioned ideas around improving social care, manufacturing, sustainable energy, immigration in to an ageing population. The worry instantly is that this is a hard left agenda, a stalking horse ideology. The worry is that green issues, employment, and care all sounds a bit Corbyn, a bit Lynch. They’ve planted the trigger words that make you worry about a bolshevik plot. Those words are ‘jobs’, ‘care’, ‘community’, ‘fair’. Basically, they’ve won. I agree with this, I just think one needs to be in position in order to change that narrative. Screaming from the barricades Corbyn style put people off, so the strategy should probably be a silent change when Labour is in power. It's much better to present successes when they've happened than to fable about them with no credible financial platform behind the policy like Corbyn did. People are wary of politicians after Corbyn and BoJo, and they've got plenty of reasons to be. Both left our political system with much less trust than when they came in. The personality cults behind both need to be avoided at all costs, which Sunak and Starmer does perfectly by being less extreme in their behaviours. Edited January 17, 2023 by magnkarl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 24 minutes ago, magnkarl said: People are wary of politicians after Corbyn and BoJo, and they've got plenty of reasons to be. Both left our political system with much less trust than when they came in. The personality cults behind both need to be avoided at all costs, which Sunak and Starmer does perfectly by being less extreme in their behaviours. I thought this was quite interesting the other day: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 24 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: I would be interested to know what policies you would like to move Labour to where you would like them to be. Well cards on the table, I think my Labour voting days are over until I see a genuine change. But I’d be open to them having policies that had a bit of genuine ambition behind them. A radical (hopefully that word doesn’t scare anyone) house building plan (how about a couple of new towns?), a genuine step change in social care provision (it doesn’t even have to be based around the bourgeoise idea of protecting the property inheritance of relatives). I’ve mentioned energy policy. Anything, pick one, there are free hits to be had everywhere. but please god, don’t just mumble something about having a policy that will be 2.5% nicer than the tory one. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 17, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 17, 2023 (edited) 6 hours ago, chrisp65 said: Well, if he can’t allude to at least some of that right now, when his opposition is so poor, then we might as well all pack up and go home. Leaving aside personal preferences, and looking ( I hope) at it tactically, then he won't form a Government for another, what, 2 years? maybe a bit less. What he's had to do to get from a significantly poor position for Labour, of getting thrashed in the last election, to where he has now has all been about understanding why Labour got thrashed and rectifying things bit by bit. His longer term plan, from April 2020 when he took over hasn't been "on day 1, come up with a load of ideas and stuff that left wing people like" - I'd argue that (while a bit of a hotch potch, and too broad in scope, in terms of a campaign) Corbyn's Labour had lots of those ideas and stuff. It got trounced. There were 3 main reasons - Corbyn himself was a massive drag electorally, Brexit, where Labour had no credible clear or comprehensible answer or plan, compared with the Tory message, and a manifesto which people didn't believe was credible, even if they liked a chunk of it. Anti-semitism was also (while exaggerated for political gain) a genuine stain on the Labour party. So he's had to, bit by bit, address these major obstacles. Not being Corbyn was the easy part, because he isn't. Anti-semitism, in the eyes of the public and media isn't something that Labour can now be accused of in the same way, an yes, he's ditched or rowed back on a chunk of the wide Corbyn Labour manifesto, concentrating on a narrower set of things which people can get into their heads - namely "Labour isn't reckless on the economy and won't ruin us", "Labour is accepting of Brexit and isn't trying to reverse it", Labour is not "weak" on immigration". Whatever we personally think of those choices generally I think it's hard to argue that people generally are scared of Labour any more. Where there's still work to do is on "I don't really know what they will do, other than be less dog and less incompetent that the tories". Back to the point that there's no likelihood of an election for another 18 months. That's the space into which to step by step put the missing ingredients of "what will you actually do to make my life better". It's not Trans rights, it's not getting into bed with the Rail workers Union leader, it's not phoney wars with the EU, it's more prosaic things - NHS, Energy, Schools, gig economy, housing availability, the state of the country where everything is run down and damaged and broken, the economy and so on. He needs to state how Labour will fix these things, how it will be different. Whether you or I want the UK to break up, or everything nationalised, or to become a republic or whatever isn't really where he needs to be focused. He needs to persuade a lot of people who voted Tory last time to vote Labour next time. If he doesn't he won't win. He has to win first. Yes, he's a bit of a manager, not an orator. But he's good at managing. He's capable and honest and straightforward, or at least seen to be that way. Personally I prefer Angela Rayner giving it both barrels, in terms of style and expressing the anger and fury at what the tories have done and how it ought to be, but while that ticks a box for me, it won't for a floating voter, or tories fed up with the incompetence of their preferred party who are up for looking at alternatives. Edited January 17, 2023 by blandy typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 Well there’s little to disagree with there @blandy but I’m very sceptical about the projection that once he’s convinced the voters he’s not a horse botherer, he will go on to reveal his true identity as an ideas man rather than a caretaker of managed decline. There are a lot of well meaning people that just want the tories out at any cost and based on recent experience they will support a middle manager rather than anything that could remotely be charged with being interesting. The ghost of Corbyn looms large, but it doesn’t have to be a binary choice between Corbyn and tory lite. He could announce an interesting policy in a very managerial considered way. He doesn’t have to shout announce reform whilst walking with a banner he clearly doesn’t believe in and holding his left fist aloft. But he won’t. He’ll vaguely use words that appear to promise to be the manager of our decline that 43% of us are prepared to settle for. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 We've already been rinsed, but the same experts still chat shit here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 1 hour ago, ml1dch said: I thought this was quite interesting the other day: I wonder what the -/+ is based on - presumably just policy or..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 17, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 17, 2023 1 minute ago, bobzy said: I wonder what the -/+ is based on - presumably just policy or..? On a scale of 1-100 how far left or right do you think Leader X is? It's about subject perception of where they lie on the scale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 1 hour ago, blandy said: He's capable and honest This is a highly dubious claim. Quote Ten Broken Pledges. The central document of Starmer’s leadership bid was his ‘ten pledges’, a list of promises he made to Labour members in 2020. https://novaramedia.com/2021/09/29/keir-starmer-is-just-as-dishonest-as-boris-johnson/ I get that FPTP means you just have to win at all costs, I really do. And that's a big reason why it needs to go. Nonetheless, Starmer's approach as Labour leader has fuelled the idea that politicians are all dishonest, it further reduces trust in institutions, corrupts public life, and diminishes our democracy. Don't know if I'll vote Labour at the next GE, but I just hope to God there's a good person in there who is doing all this shape-shifting in order to win in order to improve the lives of the people he supposedly represents. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 17, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 17, 2023 50 minutes ago, juanpabloangel18 said: Nonetheless, Starmer's approach as Labour leader has fuelled the idea that politicians are all dishonest, it further reduces trust in institutions, corrupts public life, and diminishes our democracy. It hasn’t IMO. Johnson, yes, absolutely. There will always be people like by Aaron Bastani, himself a shape shifter and monumental bell end, who will “comment” from his position as a professional Corbynite (currently) media mouth, it’s how he earns his living. That’s fine. But the general public, in surveys and polls sees Starmer as honest and boring. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts