2017 GE 1

[NJS 4281]

I've said before I think he's a decent man who shouldn't be leader but the idea that another leader (however much better) would reverse the fortunes instantly is over optimistic. The referendum really has fucked things and while the likely demise of ukip is welcome its pointless in the scheme of things as they'll all vote tory.

 

There's a division between metropolitan professional lefties and traditional areas which though it has always existed, is now at its widest I can remember.

 

As I was saying the other day, the reduction in unions and large workplaces has made labour voters vulnerable to more targetted propaganda regarding the poor and immigration which is unlikely to be reversed soon.

 

Blair succeeded because of his broad appeal including a lot of centrist voters. Any new leader will have to do the same but confront the legacy of perceived issues of immigration and economic incompetence - not an easy task against the tide.

 

I see the only hope for the labour party as riding the wave of antipathy towards the cluster fuck of May's coming deal. Unfortunately I think no matter how bad it is, it'll be sold successfully as a success no matter how bad it is.

[Park Life 71]

We'll probably always wonder how Labour with a strong pro-EU stance and a competent leader would have done.

Shit their pants didn't they. The same people who bang on about ideals suddenly became relativists.

[Rayvin 5131]

So why is half the West suffering from the same problem?

 

Is Corbyn responsible for Trump and Le Pen too?

I think you've got the right of it. You're certainly in agreement with me although it's not a popular standpoint.

 

The financial crisis was a global crisis, the impact of which has been felt globally, and we're seeing a global backlash against globalism. But apparently this doesn't apply in the UK. In the UK everything was fine until Corbyn came along and fucked it up.

 

I'm struggling to get my head around how the same people who backed the previous Labour regimes in the financial crisis, noting that Labour were the victims of a global issue, have failed to extend their logic to the current day.

 

Because Neoliberalism is a global force, the backlash against it has to be as well. This is far bigger than Corbyn, and if the old Labour party were in control, they'd still be being hammered. It's not like the Liberals are suddenly rampant is it? They were just as shit in the local elections as Labour.

 

Fucks sake, we're going to lose another generation if the centre left comes out of this thinking the problem was Corbyn. If anything, that's the single biggest problem his legacy will leave.

[Renton 20617]

I think you've got the right of it. You're certainly in agreement with me although it's not a popular standpoint.

 

The financial crisis was a global crisis, the impact of which has been felt globally, and we're seeing a global backlash against globalism. But apparently this doesn't apply in the UK. In the UK everything was fine until Corbyn came along and fucked it up.

 

I'm struggling to get my head around how the same people who backed the previous Labour regimes in the financial crisis, noting that Labour were the victims of a global issue, have failed to extend their logic to the current day.

 

Because Neoliberalism is a global force, the backlash against it has to be as well. This is far bigger than Corbyn, and if the old Labour party were in control, they'd still be being hammered. It's not like the Liberals are suddenly rampant is it? They were just as shit in the local elections as Labour.

 

Fucks sake, we're going to lose another generation if the centre left comes out of this thinking the problem was Corbyn. If anything, that's the single biggest problem his legacy will leave.

I'm watching the 10 o'clock news while reading your post. Corbyns denialism is matched by yours.

 

I told you this 2 years ago. Corbyn would be a disaster. Everyone interviewed in the news is fucking labour off because of Corbyn. Jesus wept tbh.

[Park Life 71]

Had a quick shufty at some of Dianne Abbots recent forays into the media. Real cringe worthy stuff. How did this untalented and obviously disingenuous woman get on the Labour front bench?

[Monkeys Fist 41512]

I'd thought she'd let Jeremy schtup her in the past, but I checked his wiki and apparently not- makes it even more baffling!

 

 

Did find this gem though

Corbyn is an avid "drain spotter" and has photographed manhole covers throughout the country.

Has our Tubby Tory tried this yet?

[Happy Face 29]

Had a quick shufty at some of Dianne Abbots recent forays into the media. Real cringe worthy stuff. How did this untalented and obviously disingenuous woman get on the Labour front bench?

Worse than not knowing which city she was in? (May)

 

Worse than dropping a national insurance increase less than a week after announcing it? (Hammond)

 

Worse than arguing for a ban on end to end encryption, not understanding that would kill internet banking and all government IT programmes? (Amber Rudd)

 

Worse than professional embarrassment Boris Johnson, with too many gaffes to list?

 

Worse than Lynn Truss, whose staff have said is incapable of doing the job and asked to be replaced?

 

Fallon (trident), Greening (lesbian working for anti-gay May), David (brexit minister unable to answer brexit Qs) etc.

 

I'm not sure there's a coherent thinker without a gaffe or many in front line politics.

 

Surprised to see you going along with concentrating on the lack of media sheen played up by the right wing press rather than the actual policies being ignored

[Rayvin 5131]

I find that unsettling too. Parky is turning to the dark side here.

[Howmanheyman 32121]

I've said before I think he's a decent man who shouldn't be leader but the idea that another leader (however much better) would reverse the fortunes instantly is over optimistic. The referendum really has fucked things and while the likely demise of ukip is welcome its pointless in the scheme of things as they'll all vote tory.

 

There's a division between metropolitan professional lefties and traditional areas which though it has always existed, is now at its widest I can remember.

 

As I was saying the other day, the reduction in unions and large workplaces has made labour voters vulnerable to more targetted propaganda regarding the poor and immigration which is unlikely to be reversed soon.

 

Blair succeeded because of his broad appeal including a lot of centrist voters. Any new leader will have to do the same but confront the legacy of perceived issues of immigration and economic incompetence - not an easy task against the tide.

 

I see the only hope for the labour party as riding the wave of antipathy towards the cluster fuck of May's coming deal. Unfortunately I think no matter how bad it is, it'll be sold successfully as a success no matter how bad it is.

I'd be inclined to agree about less unionised traditional workplaces contributing to labour losses but as someone who still works in the above category, I can tell you there's a bitterness not so much at employers trying to screw workers T&Cs and jobs, as it would've been once upon a time, but at immigrants and people they see/read about on the tv/papers receiving benefits living a financially similar life but not having to put up with the shit you get at work. Newcastle voted remain, but from the few conversations at work I had or overheard, my workplace was more brexit. Not had many conversations about Corbyn or politics but rightly or wrongly most just use the sun headline descriptions of him. Not sure if Miliband was thought of much more highly either. Cameron has, through sheer incompetence, masterminded a tactical masterstroke for his party.

[Park Life 71]

''The two problems – the limited leeway afforded by ‘market sentiment’ and the power of neoliberal ideology – are linked, in that most voters are materially, as well as ideologically, dependent on economic prosperity, in the form of jobs and mortgages and pension funds, and will not vote for anything that can be labelled as threatening it. As things stand, this means almost any measure the left may propose, thanks to the myth of Labour’s so-called profligacy. Nothing Labour says about the economy will get a serious hearing until the potency of this myth is broken, making this an essential first step in the ideological shift that is needed.

The reality is that between 1997 and 2007 Labour reduced the national debt from 50% of GDP to 45%, well below the levels of Germany, France and Canada. But while this was happening the banks were gambling with the country’s economic safety, and lost. Some became bankrupt and all came close to it. The big increase in the national debt under Labour from 2008 to 2010 was due to the government having to borrow over a trillion pounds – equivalent to two thirds of the annual national income – to lend to the banks, to cover their bad debts and save their shareholders’ fortunes. And because the banks had plunged the global economy into recession, tax revenue also fell sharply, so still more money had to be borrowed to plug the budget gap. The failure of the past Labour leadership to burn these basic facts into the public consciousness is not simply down to the political bias of the media. It is also a failure of the Labour leadership. Every time a senior Labour figure is quoted as acknowledging that the party needs to ‘recover the voters’ trust’ they implicitly endorse the myth instead of attacking it.''

 

 

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/colin-leys/how-left-can-win-in-britain

Edited May 6, 2017 by Park Life

[Dr Gloom 21564]

That was Miliband's failure as a leader - that and not being able to eat a bacon sandwich convincingly. Not challenging the Tory/Daily Mail narrative on austerity.

 

And look where we are now. No mention of the the long term economic plan anymore is there?

[Renton 20617]

We're going to get a cracking deal from the EU is the plan iirc.

[Park Life 71]

There was an article somewhere can't find it now where they showed how the Tories focus on electors and Labour focus on supporters at election times.

[Christmas Tree 4538]

There was an article somewhere can't find it now where they showed how the Tories focus on electors and Labour focus on supporters at election times.

Similar?

 

How to save the Labour Party.

 

Labour is now five weeks away from the election hammering it signed up to when Jeremy Corbyn was elected and re-elected leader. Sadly, the local elections are only a taste of things to come. Labour’s national vote share will be lower, the Tories’ higher and many of the PLP’s best talents will be ejected from Parliament. The only question now is whether the party’s response to its inevitable defeat kills off Labour as a party of government for good. There will be huge decisions to be made, and if the party gets them wrong – again – then oblivion awaits.

 

The first question is whether Labour wants to give up or fight for its historic commitment to forming a government that can change the lives of working people. We know where the present leadership stands. Its election strategy is about maximising the vote share, not winning seats. Whatever the result, Corbyn and his supporters will argue millions voted for socialism and the job is not finished. The PLP should not allow this argument to take root. The immediate priority the day after polling day must be to ensure a quick leadership contest. Optimists hope this will see the end of Corbyn and that no hard-left alternative to replace him will be on the ballot. That contest should return to the electoral college system. The three-quid member experiment has been a disaster and surely cannot be repeated. There is also much to be said for only allowing two candidates, rather than indulging fringe candidates. No more ‘lending votes’. Let’s look serious about picking a PM. We’re not a debating society.

 

The first speech by that new leader has to include an apology for the last two years. We need a Kinnock ’85 type reckoning with the self indulgence of armchair socialists who have taken the party further away from its traditional and potential voter base than at any time since the 1930s. The millions of people who need a Labour government have been let down by a party which has indulged an inept leadership. The party has also let down the country by failing to provide a credible and electable alternative to an uninspiring Tory government. We need to say sorry for that and to promise never again to allow the foibles of the party’s activists to overrule the interests of our supporters.

 

The next leader needs to stop obsessing about what members and activists want and start talking about what the public wants. Stop using terms like neoliberalism and austerity as the cornerstone of our political arguments – outside the political bubble they are almost meaningless terms. Start talking about patients, children and parents, not just nurses and teachers.

 

The second big step is cultural. Labour is hamstrung by an addiction to sentiment. We should be proud of our achievements, but avoid obsessing over a fantasy golden era where Labour values were the country’s values and everyone thought the Tories were evil scum. This manifests itself in a number of ways – using the NHS as a campaign crutch again and again, and focusing on historical Labour figures from the past who have little or no relevance to the modern world. Look forwards, not backwards.

 

In some quarters of the party there has grown a bizarre assumption that anyone who is not Labour must be a Tory – and that anyone who is a Tory should be pitied or despised. The consequences of this childish tribalism are catastrophic. Fake news cheerleaders on social media are followed and retweeted by thousands of activists, unwilling to take a step back and ask whether what they’re hearing in the echo chamber is actually true. Meanwhile, the party’s dire relationship with the media that most people actually engage with continues to worsen. Nonsense about ‘no deals with Murdoch’ should be for the tinfoil hat brigade, not the leadership of a serious party. Labour voters and potential Labour voters read the ‘Tory press’. Stop slagging them off, and make the best of it.

 

This echo chamber tribalism also breeds intolerance. So the anti-Semitic ravings of Ken Livingstone are defended and then validated by his continued membership. Meanwhile hundreds of members spread anti-Jewish tropes, infecting Labour with nastiness and intolerance. These people need to be expelled, along with Livingstone. No ifs or buts: out, forever.

 

A new Labour leader must also reset its relationship with the unions. The link should not be broken but neither must union leaders elected by tiny percentages be allowed to meddle and blackmail the party. Len McCluskey is a union leader, not the Labour leader and he needs to be reminded of that and told where to go if he doesn’t like it.

 

Similarly, there should be no more stitch ups on selections. The PLP must have more MPs from backgrounds other than political activism or trade union activism. We must look and sound more like normal people, not ‘activists’. As we seek to represent a broad range of the population so our MPs must share their backgrounds and experiences too.

 

Finally, the next leader will need to answer why Tony Blair is the only Labour leader in 51 years to have won an election with a workable majority. That doesn’t mean aping the policies of Tony Blair, but it should mean making one of his core political beliefs Labour’s guiding principle: that the Labour party should and can win power and change lives by speaking for the British people, not just exist for Labour activists to feel good about themselves.

 

Wise heads can use the coming disaster of 8 June as an opportunity to get Labour back on the track to electability. But it will mean speaking for the country, not for Labour members. Is there anyone brave enough to do it? If not, Labour is doomed, not just for a generation but quite possibly forever.

 

Jo Green is a former head of press and broadcasting at the Labour party and worked for the party during the 1997, 2005, 2010 and 2015 general elections and on Sadiq Khan’s mayoral campaign.

[Dr Gloom 21564]

Hard to disagree with much of that.

[Renton 20617]

Hard to disagree with much of that.

Aye.

 

Be interested to hear what Rayvin thinks of it. 

[Dr Gloom 21564]

The problem with Labour is it's all got a bit Judean People's Front vs the People's Front of Judea.

[NJS 4281]

Problem is Blair won by never offering anything vaguely left wing and whether you like it or not the anti-establishment resentment feeling that was tapped into by Brexit was not started by Cameron - it was started by Thatcher and continued by NL.

 

And anyone who votes Tory is a cunt. That has been the case since they were formed and will always be the case.

 

I accepted in the 80s/90s/ that britain is a nation of self-serving cunts so I honestly dont know why anyone even tries and makes a difference.

[Dr Gloom 21564]

Problem is Blair won by never offering anything vaguely left wing

That's just not true man. Do we need to post the list of his achievements again?

 

I totally agree that he didn't get it all right - banking regulation, pfi, Iraq etc, but there was huge investment in public services that the cunts in charge now would never dream of.

[Park Life 71]

Been a lot of positive movement in the gold markets. This was brought to my attention in my recent visit to London. There is a weird and portentous mood developing with reg to the viability of QE and the ECB and European funds running to Wall Street (the recent jump).

Financial players are always about 6-9 months ahead of bad news or they ARE the bad news.

 

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-05-05/italy-dependent-ecb-foreign-investors-dump-bonds-amid-capital-flight

Edited May 6, 2017 by Park Life

[Park Life 71]

Similar?

 

How to save the Labour Party.

 

Yup that pretty much covers it CT. Thanks for the post.

[NJS 4281]

That's just not true man. Do we need to post the list of his achievements again?

 

I totally agree that he didn't get it all right - banking regulation, pfi, Iraq etc, but there was huge investment in public services that the cunts in charge now would never dream of.

He admitted it himself when asked why anyone left wing should vote for him and said he had nothing to offer.

 

Short term investment in public services is all well and good but it's easily reversed. There should have been massive investment in housing which is hard to ruin but he wouldn't dare burst the bubble.

[Rayvin 5131]

Aye.

 

Be interested to hear what Rayvin thinks of it.

Under normal circustances I'd say it made a lot of sense.

 

Do you think a competent Labour government could reverse what has happened in the last 9 years? If it can, then actually yeah, all of the above is the solution. If it cant, then what the author of CT's post sets out isn't going to help us.

 

They're losing to anti-establishment populism, not the Tories. The minute I see the centreground Labour politicians acknowledge this, is the minute i have some hope about their chances. As it stands, they've missed the entire point of everything that happened.

 

To be frank, I genuinely feel that they've completely lost touch as a party. The only way they're going to evict the left wing behind Corbyn is by forcing them off the ballot. If they do that, they'll be openly opposed to the membership. They'll lose tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. These members won't vote for them again and Blair and Miliband lost the working class already. The broad church is dead and Labour has died with it IMO.

[NJS 4281]

Under normal circustances I'd say it made a lot of sense.

 

Do you think a competent Labour government could reverse what has happened in the last 9 years? If it can, then actually yeah, all of the above is the solution. If it cant, then what the author of CT's post sets out isn't going to help us.

 

They're losing to anti-establishment populism, not the Tories. The minute I see the centreground Labour politicians acknowledge this, is the minute i have some hope about their chances. As it stands, they've missed the entire point of everything that happened.

 

To be frank, I genuinely feel that they've completely lost touch as a party. The only way they're going to evict the left wing behind Corbyn is by forcing them off the ballot. If they do that, they'll be openly opposed to the membership. They'll lose tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. These members won't vote for them again and Blair and Miliband lost the working class already. The broad church is dead and Labour has died with it IMO.

You need more than 8 million votes to win a GE - a couple of hundred thousand huff takers won't make a difference.

 

In any case what you're forgetting is that the leadership election rules are controlled by the NEC who were almost persuaded last time to make sure the candidates depend on the PLP - I can't see another Corbyn getting 15% of MPs - especially as there'll only be about 170 of them.

[Rayvin 5131]

You need more than 8 million votes to win a GE - a couple of hundred thousand huff takers won't make a difference.

 

In any case what you're forgetting is that the leadership election rules are controlled by the NEC who were almost persuaded last time to make sure the candidates depend on the PLP - I can't see another Corbyn getting 15% of MPs - especially as there'll only be about 170 of them.

Agreed on the several hundred thousand, but when you factor in the now Tory working class, I think they've lost millions.

 

People like me don't matter, I'm well aware of this

 

But they don't understand the extent to which they've lost the working class, and that's the worry. They've learned absolutely fuck all from what brought them to this point.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Rayvin