[Politics] Next leader of the Labour party

[Hastings gull]

You're still waiting? I went out grocery shopping after my husband finished work, and went to bed when I got in because I was in pain.
You're not my boss nor a headmaster.

I said there was talk of boundary changes and fixed term, and here is the article talking about it, that I read.

https://theconversation.com/boris-j...re-are-the-ones-you-need-to-know-about-128956

Yes, but your previous choice of words doesn't reflect this, does it. You said that the Tories are planning to change the boundaries, clearly implying some shady dealing, when the reality is that the Independent Boundaries Commission had urged change in 2016.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes, but your previous choice of words doesn't reflect this, does it. You said that the Tories are planning to change the boundaries, clearly implying some shady dealing, when the reality is that the Independent Boundaries Commission had urged change in 2016.

Where did I imply shady dealing? Maybe that's how you judged my post?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I gave you the link to the professor at Bangor university. He was talking about it.

You said ‘there is talk of.’ That implies so much more than a random idea from a professor at Bangor University. I think you know that, particularly as you did not post the link with your original comment. This is the standard of debate seen on many parts of the internet, I would just like to think we are better than that on NSC. That is of course full on headmaster mode
Anyway, it’s no problem and I am not looking to pick a fight.

 

[Bish Bosh]

I don't really care about Labour, I'm simply saying it as I see it. I can do that because I'm not a politician.

So yes, many many absolute morons have voted Johnson purely because Brexit. You don't have to agree of course, but that is how I see it.

For what it is worth I agree 100%. There are intelligent reasons for leaving the EU, but you rarely hear them articulated in ' vox pops'. More often you hear either made up sh1t, say on bananas - lots of which go back to Johnson's own lies - or outright xenophobia.

Seems like it will be disadvantaged parts of the country that will suffer most if/when Brexit goes tits up. Well I for one won't be shedding any tears for them.

Do think it's tough on good Labour MPs like Nandy who genuinely want the best for their towns though.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You said ‘there is talk of.’ That implies so much more than a random idea from a professor at Bangor University. I think you know that, particularly as you did not post the link with your original comment. This is the standard of debate seen on many parts of the internet, I would just like to think we are better than that on NSC. That is of course full on headmaster mode
Anyway, it’s no problem and I am not looking to pick a fight.

Instead of debating the professor's points, as Gwylan did, you decided to debate my posts instead. Deflections.

 

[BenGarfield]

So you don't think there's any point making any effort at all to find common ground? Put whatever has been said in the past and try to work together to beat the Tories as a unified force?

Because if you don't think that then the only alternative is wiping them out. Decent MP's, blokes like Peter Kyle. How long is that going to take? Is is going to be quick and easy? No. If you go down that route it will be a bloodbath (in political terms). All the while playing into the hands of the Tories and the gleeful press barons.

You can unite the left and centre (stopping calling them blairites will be a start). Accord can be reached if both sides genuinely listen to the concerns of the other and if subjugation of one side to the other is genuinely off the table. My advice to you. Lose the history lessons, stop the labelling and focus on the true enemy. Policy-wise there's not huge differences between the left and centre in the scheme of things. If there was a genuine meeting in the middle on policy, neither the left or centre would find it too bad. And my guess is the electorate as a whole would find the policy menu and party much more attractive

But there are huge differences both in economic philosophy and in geo-politics. The right wing of the labour have more in common with the Tories and lib dems. That is where their natural home lies.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Having read a good few pages of this thread, there's some quite interesting ideas about what Labour could or should do moving forward, but I think 2 significant points are being missed in all this discussion.

1. All the while the SNP have a significant number of seats North of the border, there will not be another Labour majority.

2. A lot of people have under-estimated the Tory Election campaign (which was based completely on lessons learnt by the Leave campaign). Have a three word election campaign and don't put anything significant in a manifesto and definitely no detail (anything more will confuse the message). Use huge amounts of targeted money to spread this message throughout media and social media and demonise the opposition. Even when it was abundantly clear and obvious that Johnson was lying, the message carried through.

Everyone seems to agree that It would be good to have a powerful electable opposition, but given the lessons learnt above, I really don't see how that will happen, regardless of who the leader of the opposition is

 

[Titanic]

1. All the while the SNP have a significant number of seats North of the border, there will not be another Labour majority.

But the SNP would prop up a Labour minority, for a price?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But there are huge differences both in economic philosophy and in geo-politics. The right wing of the labour have more in common with the Tories and lib dems. That is where their natural home lies.

Are you telling me to **** off?

If people like you carry on like that, eventually I will.

At some point, after 10 or 15 years maybe you'll give your head a wobble and realise that you need votes to get elected, and being a pressure group (albeit 100% pure, no moderate additives) is a bit frustrating. Or maybe not. The church of holy socialist purity is obviously sufficiently nourishing for some

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Having read a good few pages of this thread, there's some quite interesting ideas about what Labour could or should do moving forward, but I think 2 significant points are being missed in all this discussion.

1. All the while the SNP have a significant number of seats North of the border, there will not be another Labour majority.

2. A lot of people have under-estimated the Tory Election campaign (which was based completely on lessons learnt by the Leave campaign). Have a three word election campaign and don't put anything significant in a manifesto and definitely no detail (anything more will confuse the message). Use huge amounts of targeted money to spread this message throughout media and social media and demonise the opposition. Even when it was abundantly clear and obvious that Johnson was lying, the message carried through.

Everyone seems to agree that It would be good to have a powerful electable opposition, but given the lessons learnt above, I really don't see how that will happen, regardless of who the leader of the opposition is

Re-alignment of the 'progressive' centre-left before next GE? Sorry - just dreaming. But it's just possible that 5 years of the odious Johnson regime might just bang heads together.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Instead of debating the professor's points, as Gwylan did, you decided to debate my posts instead. Deflections.

Everything in your world seems to be a conspiracy. I commented on the lack of source to your dubiously worded initial comment. I have also treated you with politeness but am faced with a bitter response because you dislike my politics.
There is an easy way out. I will simply not engage with you again.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But the SNP would prop up a Labour minority, for a price?

Yes, devolution, which would then not only amputate the SNP support, it would also prevent forever any recovery of scottish labour seats in the English parliament.

So it would be a bit like attempting to perk up a flagging marathon run at 13 miles by taking a couple of lines of charlie.

But you knew that

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Everything in your world seems to be a conspiracy. I commented on the lack of source to your dubiously worded initial comment. I have also treated you with politeness but am faced with a bitter response because you dislike my politics.
There is an easy way out. I will simply not engage with you again.

That's a relief.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Having read a good few pages of this thread, there's some quite interesting ideas about what Labour could or should do moving forward, but I think 2 significant points are being missed in all this discussion.

1. All the while the SNP have a significant number of seats North of the border, there will not be another Labour majority.

2. A lot of people have under-estimated the Tory Election campaign (which was based completely on lessons learnt by the Leave campaign). Have a three word election campaign and don't put anything significant in a manifesto and definitely no detail (anything more will confuse the message). Use huge amounts of targeted money to spread this message throughout media and social media and demonise the opposition. Even when it was abundantly clear and obvious that Johnson was lying, the message carried through.

Everyone seems to agree that It would be good to have a powerful electable opposition, but given the lessons learnt above, I really don't see how that will happen, regardless of who the leader of the opposition is

Spot on.

Point 1, yes, which is why Blair tolerated the duality of scottish MSPs and MPs (which surprisingly neutralised the 'West Lothian' question rather tham making it more of an issue); for a while it worked (scottish labour seats returned to Westminster) then the SNP decided they wanted more. I can't see labour winning back seats in jockland, especially given their current inability to win seasts in their English heartlands.

Point 2, indeed. It was widely reported that this would be the Boris strategy. It is the same as 'Britain isn't working' which worked well for Thatcher who had nothing meaningful in her manifesto about privatising everything and taking on the unions by changing laws on striking and picketing (which makes me wonder what Boris has up his sleeve).

But the main point, yours I think, is that you have to win a decent majority before implementing policy, and to do that, the less said the better. By providing a detailed and complicated myriad of policy objectives Corbyn simply demonstrated he has learned nothing about winning in his decades as an MP. Although why would he - he has been a leader of nothing, and even an opponent of many of labour's policies (winning policies, popular policies; the clue is in 'win').

How a labour leader or any leader can imagine their best stategy is to focus on pleasing only one element of the party faithful and ignoring other natural supporters of the party who are not part of the leader's favourite element is naive beyond belief. It is like managing a football team and focusing only on the attack. Perhaps Corbyn has been overly influenced by his presumed hero, Arsene Wenger.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Everything in your world seems to be a conspiracy. I commented on the lack of source to your dubiously worded initial comment. I have also treated you with politeness but am faced with a bitter response because you dislike my politics.
There is an easy way out. I will simply not engage with you again.

Because TB used the word 'deflections'?

 

[Simster]

For what it is worth I agree 100%. There are intelligent reasons for leaving the EU, but you rarely hear them articulated in ' vox pops'. More often you hear either made up sh1t, say on bananas - lots of which go back to Johnson's own lies - or outright xenophobia.

Seems like it will be disadvantaged parts of the country that will suffer most if/when Brexit goes tits up. Well I for one won't be shedding any tears for them.

Do think it's tough on good Labour MPs like Nandy who genuinely want the best for their towns though.

Exactly. [MENTION=7631]wellquickwoody[/MENTION] thinks you're bitter for holding this opinion, and maybe he's right but you are entirely justified.

The conservatives tried to force a particularly isolationist Brexit down the throats of the Commons, which is the only reason it ever got delayed. I wish I could say I didn't understand why the narrative has consequently become that it was all the fault of the opposition parties for delaying Brexit, when the truth was always that the Tories could easily have modified what Brexit actually meant and it would have sailed through. But unfortunately I know exactly why that narrative was followed - a constant drip feed by a right wing press blaming everyone else, and then a 3 word soundbite suggesting the Tories are the only ones who ever wanted it done.

But this red wall that has gone blue - the Tories have decimated certain northern towns down the years, they have done barely anything positive in power over the last nine years, and now these complete morons are convinced the Tories - a party whose manifesto could have been written on the back of a fag packet - have got their backs because, er, "get Brexit done". Well words fail me. They've had 3 years and as with every other issue in that time, they've achieved f*k all positive.

As far as I'm concerned, these people have ensured we will be less prosperous, they have forced a race to the bottom as workers rights are removed, and they have removed the pan-European working rights of my kids and created them an uncertain, less flexible future. None of this will concern the ignorant moronic new-Tory-voting Brexiteer of course, and as such I no longer care about these places in a way I once did. The level of ignorance makes me ashamed to be English - we're now no better than Trump-voting America.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

As it's Christmas, a time where the spirit of goodwill to all men (and women ... and nonbinary peeps) abounds, I will throw in a crumb of comfort to the vanquished. Oppositions don't win elections, governments lose them. If Brexit turns out as badly as many of you are predicting ... if the Tories are really intent on stripping away worker's rights/ Singapore on Thames etc then there is an outside chance of hung parliament territory at the next GE. (Assuming Labour have finally got their act together in five years time). Merry Christmas!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Because TB used the word 'deflections'?

Indeed. 'Bitter' is not a word I'd associate with TB. 'Measured', now....

 

[Pretty Plnk Fairy]

If labour want to carry on with the same approach then Nigel Farradge is the man. he has lots of experence of leading a motley crue of swivel eyed lunatics who worship there leader with messianic fervour to a series of election defeats, perfect for those who want another Corbin.

Regards

DF

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Exactly. [MENTION=7631]wellquickwoody[/MENTION] thinks you're bitter for holding this opinion, and maybe he's right but you are entirely justified. .

A slightly different take on this, for me; Brexit will hardly affect me if it does go horribly badly (well, unless my pension evaporates). Therefore I have rather patronisingly perhaps been thinking about the less advantaged, and the possibility they have been duped into supporting a Brexit that will harm them.

Perhaps it is better to be a little more stoic. Things are what they are.

So I am prepared to rebrand Brexit is a win-win for me personally:
If Boris makes a massive success of it then what's not to like?
On the other hand if he buggers it up then it means I am more likely to see a labour government return (albeit freed from the hancuffs of momentum).

And what about the others I have been so patronisingly attempting to protect by speaking against Brexit? In one scenario we might see a lot of disappointed working class, formerly labour, Brexit fans, possibly in a very difficult situaltion (job losses, mortgage defaulting etc). If this happens (and it may not), I should now desist from complaining on their behalf. That, as I have been repeatedly told when 'speaking up' for those I consider too stupid to understand their best interest, is patronising. I don't wish to be patronising. So **** 'em.