He is centrist.
A sobering though is that the last truly left wing government was elected in 1974.
I think Marxism and Communism is a dead duck in the UK.
Anyone for New , New , Labour
Moderator: Jon O'Neill
How are you defining Marxism and Communism? Which Labour policies in particular are part of this dead duck?Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 8:16 am I have to go with Kier Starmer
He is centrist.
A sobering though is that the last truly left wing government was elected in 1974.
I think Marxism and Communism is a dead duck in the UK.
Anyone for New , New , Labour![]()
Not to over simplify things but :Gavin Chipper wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 1:21 pmHow are you defining Marxism and Communism? Which Labour policies in particular are part of this dead duck?Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 8:16 am I have to go with Kier Starmer
He is centrist.
A sobering though is that the last truly left wing government was elected in 1974.
I think Marxism and Communism is a dead duck in the UK.
Anyone for New , New , Labour![]()
Graded income tax, free schools, the NHS...Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 2:21 pmNot to over simplify things but :Gavin Chipper wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 1:21 pmHow are you defining Marxism and Communism? Which Labour policies in particular are part of this dead duck?Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 8:16 am I have to go with Kier Starmer
He is centrist.
A sobering though is that the last truly left wing government was elected in 1974.
I think Marxism and Communism is a dead duck in the UK.
Anyone for New , New , Labour![]()
Robbing the rich to feed the poor.
Nationalisation.
Things that work in places like , let me think.....Utopia
I don't think the majority are against the policies in principle. It's how it's been presented. And I'm not just talking about Corbyn.Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 3:11 pm Sounds like a no brainer except the majority didn't think so.
That is my point.
The caring , sharing make the most noise.
But the greedy and the selfish keep winning
I don't think it's that at all. You mentioned the press. It's much more how it's presented than the actual policies.Marc Meakin wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 6:52 pm Put simply as long as the haves outnumber the have nots then the Tories will keep on winning![]()
So let me get this right. The Labour party just suffered their worst defeat since 1935, and you think it's down to presentation?Gavin Chipper wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 10:58 pm I don't think it's that at all. You mentioned the press. It's much more how it's presented than the actual policies.
With hindsight if Corbyn had fallen on his sword early this year when the anti semitism scandals were at there peak. ( yes I know it's mainly dirty tricks by the right wing press )Paul Worsley wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 12:40 amSo let me get this right. The Labour party just suffered their worst defeat since 1935, and you think it's down to presentation?Gavin Chipper wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 10:58 pm I don't think it's that at all. You mentioned the press. It's much more how it's presented than the actual policies.
People hate Corbyn and he's the leader presenting their policies.Paul Worsley wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 12:40 amSo let me get this right. The Labour party just suffered their worst defeat since 1935, and you think it's down to presentation?Gavin Chipper wrote: βMon Dec 16, 2019 10:58 pm I don't think it's that at all. You mentioned the press. It's much more how it's presented than the actual policies.
Labour won fewer seats than they did in 2015.Jon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 5:34 pm Labour got more votes and more seats this GE than the 2015 GE so to call it their worst defeat since 1935 is a little misleading in a discussion about how they fared.
They're a not-insignificant secondary, but I agree with this. So far none of the many, many hot takes I've seen on what Labour's Brexit strategy should have been have been at all convincing - the idea that there's some colossal swathe of floating Remainers who would flock to any party who were sufficiently 'pro-Remain' has been disproven at pretty much every opportunity, and the idea that Corbyn could have been expected to make some miraculously compelling case for the EU that would win over Leave voters in the seats Labour lost (something that, conspicuously, nobody has ever been able to do) seems totally unrealistic.Jon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 5:34 pm Labour got more votes and more seats this GE than the 2015 GE so to call it their worst defeat since 1935 is a little misleading in a discussion about how they fared.
This was the Brexit election. UKIP got 3.9m votes in 2015 and the Brexit party got 600k in 2019. Where did the other 3.3m votes go? I'd bet the vast majority went to the Tories.
Policies, presentation etc.. it's all surely secondary.
YouGov: How Britain voted in the 2019 general electionJon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 10:34 pm The Lib Dems did get 1.4m more votes than the 2017 GE. So that's evidence of the effect. But who's to say the elasticity(/plasticity?) of Tory Remainers' vote is the same as Labour? It's a hard thing to know.
I'd be interested to read more statistical analysis of all the above. There are some sweeping generalisations flying about (predominantly by me) and I'd like to read more without having to do the analysis myself. Are there any good blogs on this stuff? It's harder than it should be to Google for stuff like referendum result voting vs. GE voting (I think it's impossible to know from publicly-available data but can be estimated quite accurately).
That's awesome. Thanks.Graeme Cole wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 11:08 pmYouGov: How Britain voted in the 2019 general electionJon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 10:34 pm The Lib Dems did get 1.4m more votes than the 2017 GE. So that's evidence of the effect. But who's to say the elasticity(/plasticity?) of Tory Remainers' vote is the same as Labour? It's a hard thing to know.
I'd be interested to read more statistical analysis of all the above. There are some sweeping generalisations flying about (predominantly by me) and I'd like to read more without having to do the analysis myself. Are there any good blogs on this stuff? It's harder than it should be to Google for stuff like referendum result voting vs. GE voting (I think it's impossible to know from publicly-available data but can be estimated quite accurately).
That was published this morning. It's got some good graphics showing the proportions of voters for parties in 2017 which switched to other parties in 2019, and how Remainers and Leavers voted in the election.
Of course, with perfect political hindsight, this looks like it would have been a much better strategy. It also aligns with their position in the 2017 election, so the backlash should have been tolerable. Those remain supporters would have been disappointed and may have cost Labour some seats in strong Lib Dem areas, but may have prevented hemorrhaging seats to the Tories in Leave areas.Innis Carson wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 9:21 pm
Equally, given that a majority of Labour's 2017 vote base (and a bigger majority of their MPs and members) were Remain voters, it takes a lot of faith to imagine that the leadership could have fobbed off all calls for a second referendum without an unmanageable backlash.
Momentum is toxic and is poisoning the Labour party from withinPaul Worsley wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 1:00 am Coming back to the original question, I believe that Sir Keir Starmer or Lisa Nandy would be the best choice to lead the Labour party. Given that both candidates are seen as too centrist for Momentum, it's likely to be Rebecca Long-Bailey.
None of them will ever be PM, but Nandy stands the best chance of making Labour electable again.
Yes. On a superficial level. But there is still the question of why Tory remainers were less likely to change their voting habits than Labour leavers. It's not enough to say it's just because. And I do think that must come partly down to how Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party were seen generally. Not everyone voted on Brexit anyway, and if you've got a party and leader that the mainstream media are shitting all over, it's bound to make a difference among people who could have gone either way. Sure, Brexit was a thing, but it wasn't the only thing. Also:Jon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 11:33 pmThat's awesome. Thanks.Graeme Cole wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 11:08 pmYouGov: How Britain voted in the 2019 general electionJon O'Neill wrote: βTue Dec 17, 2019 10:34 pm The Lib Dems did get 1.4m more votes than the 2017 GE. So that's evidence of the effect. But who's to say the elasticity(/plasticity?) of Tory Remainers' vote is the same as Labour? It's a hard thing to know.
I'd be interested to read more statistical analysis of all the above. There are some sweeping generalisations flying about (predominantly by me) and I'd like to read more without having to do the analysis myself. Are there any good blogs on this stuff? It's harder than it should be to Google for stuff like referendum result voting vs. GE voting (I think it's impossible to know from publicly-available data but can be estimated quite accurately).
That was published this morning. It's got some good graphics showing the proportions of voters for parties in 2017 which switched to other parties in 2019, and how Remainers and Leavers voted in the election.
For everyone else, don't bother reading it. It just confirms everything I speculated about above.
Yeah, thanks for that informative insight, you jargon-obsessed dickheads. I do, however, think the following is interesting:In fact, the Conservatives actually did better amongst C2DE voters (48%) than they did amongst ABC1 voters (43%). Labour performed the same amongst both social grade groups (33%).
Reasonable and well-educated people tend not to vote Conservative. Voting Conservative tends to come from ignorance or self-servingness.The highest level of education someone has achieved remains an important dividing line in how people vote. Labour did much better than the Conservatives amongst those who have a degree or higher, by 43% to 29%.
I wanted Nandy to run in 2015. I'm really hoping she runs this time. I will be joining the party for long enough to vote for her if she does.Paul Worsley wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 1:00 am Coming back to the original question, I believe that Sir Keir Starmer or Lisa Nandy would be the best choice to lead the Labour party. Given that both candidates are seen as too centrist for Momentum, it's likely to be Rebecca Long-Bailey.
None of them will ever be PM, but Nandy stands the best chance of making Labour electable again.
I would guess: many of the Tory remainers may not have been hard remainers, and in the ensuing 3 years had come to accept the result. Labour's position, another referendum sometime down the line (which they might lose again anyway) seemed like more trouble than the quick pain of getting it over with.Gavin Chipper wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 2:00 pm Yes. On a superficial level. But there is still the question of why Tory remainers were less likely to change their voting habits than Labour leavers. It's not enough to say it's just because. And I do think that must come partly down to how Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party were seen generally. Not everyone voted on Brexit anyway, and if you've got a party and leader that the mainstream media are shitting all over, it's bound to make a difference among people who could have gone either way. Sure, Brexit was a thing, but it wasn't the only thing. Also:
Maybe that should have been Labour's slogan. But anyway, voting Labour correlates well with being younger, as does whether someone holds a degree. You'd need to see education level when restricted to different age groups to make something meaningful out of it.Reasonable and well-educated people tend not to vote Conservative. Voting Conservative tends to come from ignorance or self-servingness.
And even then the only "meaning" would be to affirm the sense of superiority that Labour voters, being selfless and educated, are "right" and the self serving thickos who vote differently are wrong.Conor wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 3:36 pmI would guess: many of the Tory remainers may not have been hard remainers, and in the ensuing 3 years had come to accept the result. Labour's position, another referendum sometime down the line (which they might lose again anyway) seemed like more trouble than the quick pain of getting it over with.Gavin Chipper wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 2:00 pm Yes. On a superficial level. But there is still the question of why Tory remainers were less likely to change their voting habits than Labour leavers. It's not enough to say it's just because. And I do think that must come partly down to how Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party were seen generally. Not everyone voted on Brexit anyway, and if you've got a party and leader that the mainstream media are shitting all over, it's bound to make a difference among people who could have gone either way. Sure, Brexit was a thing, but it wasn't the only thing. Also:
Maybe that should have been Labour's slogan. But anyway, voting Labour correlates well with being younger, as does whether someone holds a degree. You'd need to see education level when restricted to different age groups to make something meaningful out of it.Reasonable and well-educated people tend not to vote Conservative. Voting Conservative tends to come from ignorance or self-servingness.
Political parties aren't like favourite colours - it's not a purely subjective thing as to which is better. And just because a party is mainstream it doesn't automatically make it acceptable. If you accept that a party can be a force for bad, then it's perfectly possible that a mainstream party can be.Fiona T wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 4:06 pm And even then the only "meaning" would be to affirm the sense of superiority that Labour voters, being selfless and educated, are "right" and the self serving thickos who vote differently are wrong.
There are sound and valid reasons to vote for any of the main parties, and also sound and valid reasons not to vote for any of them! The thing that drives me crazy is the refusal of both main factions to accept that the other side's policies could have any merit whatsoever.
I don't ever remember elections being so divisive in the past. You voted how you thought best, you lost, you shrugged and got on with it.
I'm a natural labour supporter, but I'm really concerned by the stuff I've seen on social media from some Labour voters against anyone who voted differently. They have, with the odd notable exception, shown little wish to understand why someone might have a different viewpoint. For people that would like to think they have a liberal viewpoint, it's a fine example of narrow minded bigotry. My life is a lot better since I unfollowed the worst culprits.
But nor is it black and white, good guys vs bad guys, and if you (generically, not specifically) can't understand why people didn't vote Labour you're not in a position to address their concerns and make Labour electable.Gavin Chipper wrote: βWed Dec 18, 2019 6:52 pm
Political parties aren't like favourite colours - it's not a purely subjective thing as to which is better. And just because a party is mainstream it doesn't automatically make it acceptable. If you accept that a party can be a force for bad, then it's perfectly possible that a mainstream party can be.
And the point is that I think that the Conservative Party is a force for bad. We've seen the effects of austerity over the last near decade. It's the poorest in society that have suffered, disabled people, and generally those that are least able to stand up for themselves. This isn't abstract philosophising about obscure points of policy - this is people's lives. And given what I've seen of the Tories and that they've elected Boris Johnson as their leader, a guy with no scruples whatsoever, yes I think they are a bad party. And what they have done is far worse than upsetting a few people on the internet.
And given that I think that, it's impossible for me not to conclude that people who vote Tory are either not very nice people themselves or simply wrong about things. It's not bigotry. It's an inescapable logical conclusion.
Of course, simply posting on Facebook or Twitter what you think of the Tories and Tory voters in the run up to an election is unlikely to change people's minds, so it's best to be a bit more tactful about what you do post if you actually want to make a positive change. I mean, I posted some stuff the day before the election but I don't think what I posted was particularly offensive to anyone. But as for what I post on c4c - this is the place I go to be more blunt about things.