Could just take a leaf out of the other sides book and just say and do whatever is needed to get in , maybe employ a psychological warfare company to help
Lots of interesting stuff above but I think we do need to avoid suggesting that anyone that isn't perfect is completely useless and that politicians are all the same. You can look over the pond and see what the US got because there was a bit of mud to stick round Clinton and a stench of nepotism and cronyism. She may have not been ideal, and it's obvious Bernie Sanders was dealt with poorly, but the current incumbent is capable of almost anything and leading the world in a dangerous direction emboldening racists and setting the real expectation that once you are elected you can do whatever you like. It won't take the gasroom super investigators two minutes to find probably creditable evidencr of loathsome things that HRC has done so I get it would be difficult to support her with any gusto but then you get Circus boy who's list of misdemeanors just this last couple of weeks will end up being a book.
My answer to @DevC ’s question (and always has been) is that I’d like a balance between an electable leader and one whose policies I agree with. The most important thing is getting into power, but then there’s little point of getting into power if then your biggest achievements are sure start centres and the Iraq war.
I was wary of Corbyn when he was chosen as leader, as he wasn’t the most polished politician. The result in 2017 made me fully committed to Corbyn, as it showed he could both be socialist and win votes. His honest commitment to social justice and improving the lives of the less fortunate energised young people, giving an alternative to the neo-liberal consensus that we’ve had since New Labour. There were no obvious more electable figures within the Labour movement (although I’ve been impressed by Andy Burnham as Manchester mayor.) The very fact we have a meaningful choice at elections, rather than just supporting our favourite team, is vitally important for our politics.
Corbyn was undermined by a concerted media campaign, and by opponents within the Labour Party itself. And unfortunately in 2019 he came up against Boris Johnson who was a popular politician at the time, and the peculiarities of the Brexit influence on the election.
I’ve not made my mind up on Starmer yet. He isn’t from the right of the party - Corbyn has definitely moved the Overton window for the Labour leadership. But he does seem to be too hesitant to support just causes.
Corbyn’s biggest achievement for me is helping to make young people interested in politics again.
Chris , yo seem to be suggesting that Blair's major achievements were "sure start centres". I don't understand why the momentum side of the party is so desperate to denigrate Blair's achievements. Its an absolute gift to the Tories.
I listed some of Blair's achievements above
Significant investment in healthcare and education spending.
Introduced minimum wage
Achieved peace in Northern Ireland
Reduced relative poverty
Devolved power to Scotland and Eales and English cities
Equalised the age of consent for gay people and introduced civil partnerships
Improved the social security safety net
But if you don't like those, you could add
The Human Rights Act
Lifting most pensioners out of poverty
Equality at work legislation
Getting rid of most hereditary peers
etc
Surely you acknowledge that Blair did many good things even if you would have liked him go further.
For all the excuses I am afraid Corbyn managed to lose badly to first a Prime Minister generally accepted to be challenging Eden for worst post war PM and then to a chancer who looks like eclipsing them both. His legacy is facilitating the shift in the Tory party in power away from relative One Nation to UKIP/English Nationalism including the disaster of Brexit along the way.
Starmer has a long road back but has started assuredly. There will be some hurdles ahead - navigating Trump's behaviour over the next six - nine months and the crisis that may well bring may be the most significant for us all, but at last after a woeful period I think there are grounds for cautious optimism.
To say that Labour lost badly in 2017 is far worse spin than to say Blair’s lasting legacy is sure start centres.
Given the majority in 1997 and so many years of Labour control, I’d have expected more. I read Toynbee and Walker’s book years ago, and even they concluded that Blair’s government did not achieve enough.
@Chris said:
To say that Labour lost badly in 2017 is far worse spin than to say Blair’s lasting legacy is sure start centres.
Given the majority in 1997 and so many years of Labour control, I’d have expected more. I read Toynbee and Walker’s book years ago, and even they concluded that Blair’s government did not achieve enough.
The point is that any loss in 2017 was a bad loss because they were up against one of the worst prime ministers in history.
Interesting you mentioned how well Corbyn engaged the youth vote. How well do you reckon he did that during the EU referendum campaign?
@Chris said:
To say that Labour lost badly in 2017 is far worse spin than to say Blair’s lasting legacy is sure start centres.
Given the majority in 1997 and so many years of Labour control, I’d have expected more. I read Toynbee and Walker’s book years ago, and even they concluded that Blair’s government did not achieve enough.
Corbyn lost by 50seats against a historically bad PM fighting such a bad campaign that the voting public were openly laughing at her. That's hardly triumphant glorious success!
I understand you may have wanted Blair to go further. But surely you must acknowledge those very significant successes that improved the lives of millions of our people.
That has been my point all along. Better to accept and achieve half of what you want and gain the power to do so than reach for all of it and lose yet again
The problem..or not depending upon your point of view..with our sceptre'd isle is that on the whole we are a conservative (with a small c) society...so excepting the 1945 Labour landslide which came after the war and people remembered what had happened to the poor after the sacrifice of WW1...Labour governments until Blair (Wilson, Callaghan) on the whole had to struggle with small majorities...even during the 1970s when the unions (gawd bless 'em) ruled. No-one, even the poor and working class, really want anything that is going to frighten the horses...Blair was a safe, bland option but got in, Broon another steady though charisma free option only just failed, Milliband was made to look like a radical (!) and Corbyn was a definate horse-frightener. Much as I try my best not to agree with @DevC the fact is the first thing you want is to get in (see also Biden) and try to get things good things done without too much fuss. Starmer has a decent chance, and I think we've not seen the best of him yet...as he is largely letting the government p*** on its own chips in the glare of the public. Now David Icke has some very interesting views on this...
In 2019 he was definitely up against one of the worst Prime Ministers in history.
It seems a bit pointless to argue about counterfactuals - who can possibly say that another leader would have done better in 2017? But Labour overachieved massively against expectations, and got a remarkable number of votes (including winning in Canterbury of all places.) And, as I said before, there is a generation of young people interested in politics now, which can only be a good thing for the country.
That has been my point all along. Better to accept and achieve half of what you want and gain the power to do so than reach for all of it and lose yet again
What if the alternatives are reaching for all of it and losing, or reaching for half of it and losing?
Repeatedly painting 2017 as a catastrophic loss for Labour despite having brought them back from a spectacular polling deficit, winning more votes than Super Tony and running in an election where every racist in the country was guaranteed to vote Tory, while also banging on about how "electable" Blair was is peak Blue Labour cognitive dissonance.
If you don't gain power, it doesn't real matter what your policies were.
Except in that if you present a credible alternative, at least that pulls the Tories back towards a less damaging more centrist position as they have to defend their centre-right votes. If Labour are too far left, they can continue to largely take them for granted and be UKIP/Eng Nats.
Starmer has started well. People are starting to consider Labour as an alternative to this shambolic government. If Trump falls in the autumn and Starmer continues to outperform Johnson, wouldn't surprise me in the least to see Johnson gone by Christmas 2021.
As former Wycombe boy Ian Drury would say, there are reasons to be cheerful.
@drcongo said:
Repeatedly painting 2017 as a catastrophic loss for Labour despite having brought them back from a spectacular polling deficit, winning more votes than Super Tony and running in an election where every racist in the country was guaranteed to vote Tory, while also banging on about how "electable" Blair was is peak Blue Labour cognitive dissonance.
It was a catastrophic loss. Not long afterwards we have a horrifically right wing govt led by Boris Johnson with a huge majority, they are handling the Covid 19 crisis disastrously, they have emboldened the far right in ways not seen for decades and we're heading at full speed towards Brexit on WTO terms
You might not think that's catastrophic but it will certainly do until the catastrophe gets here
People are suffering, and things are getting worse, and our country is becoming a nastier less tolerant place. And it could have been prevented by an opposition that was actually focussed on winning an election rather than engaging in the politics of protest they'd been involved in their entire lives, and one whose leader had given even the slightest shit about winning the EU referendum rather than go missing for a few months. Talk about the Overton Window? Brexit has shifted us further to the right than anything else in modern history
You continue to admonish yourself from blame for any of it if you like. Hope it makes you feel better
@Chris said:
If you acknowledge that an opposition can make a difference outside of power then the whole ‘reaching for all of it and losing’ thing is misleading.
It seems like Marcus Rashford has more impact on government policy than Kier Starmer so far.
No opposition makes a difference by presenting itself and being seen by the voting population as a credible alternative government. In that way the Government is forced to react to counter the threat.
Corbyn failed abjectly.
I am afraid he and his Cummings equivalent, Seumas Milne bear a large part of the blame for Brexit. It almost certainly wouldn't have happened without them.
Not long afterwards we have a horrifically right wing govt
We already had one. May was significantly more authoritarian than Johnson. This is the woman who came up with the Go Home vans and the snooper's charter. Incredible scenes to think she was left of Johnson.
[...] they are handling the Covid 19 crisis disastrously, they have emboldened the far right in ways not seen for decades
Brexit did most of the hard work and you'd be hard pushed to find anyone not white who thinks Theresa May deporting British citizens to their deaths was less confirmatory for racists. I'm starting to think you weren't paying attention at the time.
People are suffering, and things are getting worse, and our country is becoming a nastier less tolerant place. And it could have been prevented by an opposition that was actually focussed on winning an election
I look forward to watching a man who can't even use the word racist to describe racists making things better.
And believe me, I sincerely hope you're right, because I have no answers at all. I'm entirely in despair at British politics because I cannot see anyone getting us out of this shit.
@RogertheBandito said:
"peak Blue Labour cognitive dissonance", wow, a new level of utter bollocks there son...
Who would have guessed that painting everyone who disagreed with Corbyn or didn't want to go as far economically as either traitors or Tories and telling them to sod off and vote conservative would turn away voters.
I am afraid he and his Cummings equivalent, Seumas Milne bear a large part of the blame for Brexit. It almost certainly wouldn't have happened without them.
Blame Nigel Farage, blame the BBC for giving Farage a platform, blame Cameron for calling a referendum, blame austerity, blame Labour for not putting in place adequate financial regulations, blame Thatcher; they all bear far more responsibility for Brexit than Corbyn.
@Chris said:
Blame Nigel Farage, blame the BBC for giving Farage a platform, blame Cameron for calling a referendum, blame austerity, blame Labour for not putting in place adequate financial regulations, blame Thatcher; they all bear far more responsibility for Brexit than Corbyn.
Corbyn has to take his fair share of responsibility for Brexit due to his ever changing views on European membership and his total indecisiveness leading up to the election.
Corbyb's major problem with brexit was that he was a crap liar.
He always was a Eurosceptic, but for entirely different reasons (after all the EU was really a right of centre economic setup).
He didn't fully believe in it, that was clear, the public dont want nuance, he couldn't say what he actually thought, maybe something along the lines of " I think the EU is not a good organisation for xyz reasons, but leaving under a hard right Tory govt wound be far worse ", because that wouldn't work.
That damaged one of his main reasons for being popular - being genuine.
That's before you get into the ridiculous smear campaign - a lot of people genuinely do think he's a communist anti-semite terrorist lover, because they didn't have the intellect or critical thinking skills to resist the barrage of pure nonsense coming at them.
Comments
Could just take a leaf out of the other sides book and just say and do whatever is needed to get in , maybe employ a psychological warfare company to help
Lots of interesting stuff above but I think we do need to avoid suggesting that anyone that isn't perfect is completely useless and that politicians are all the same. You can look over the pond and see what the US got because there was a bit of mud to stick round Clinton and a stench of nepotism and cronyism. She may have not been ideal, and it's obvious Bernie Sanders was dealt with poorly, but the current incumbent is capable of almost anything and leading the world in a dangerous direction emboldening racists and setting the real expectation that once you are elected you can do whatever you like. It won't take the gasroom super investigators two minutes to find probably creditable evidencr of loathsome things that HRC has done so I get it would be difficult to support her with any gusto but then you get Circus boy who's list of misdemeanors just this last couple of weeks will end up being a book.
My answer to @DevC ’s question (and always has been) is that I’d like a balance between an electable leader and one whose policies I agree with. The most important thing is getting into power, but then there’s little point of getting into power if then your biggest achievements are sure start centres and the Iraq war.
I was wary of Corbyn when he was chosen as leader, as he wasn’t the most polished politician. The result in 2017 made me fully committed to Corbyn, as it showed he could both be socialist and win votes. His honest commitment to social justice and improving the lives of the less fortunate energised young people, giving an alternative to the neo-liberal consensus that we’ve had since New Labour. There were no obvious more electable figures within the Labour movement (although I’ve been impressed by Andy Burnham as Manchester mayor.) The very fact we have a meaningful choice at elections, rather than just supporting our favourite team, is vitally important for our politics.
Corbyn was undermined by a concerted media campaign, and by opponents within the Labour Party itself. And unfortunately in 2019 he came up against Boris Johnson who was a popular politician at the time, and the peculiarities of the Brexit influence on the election.
I’ve not made my mind up on Starmer yet. He isn’t from the right of the party - Corbyn has definitely moved the Overton window for the Labour leadership. But he does seem to be too hesitant to support just causes.
Corbyn’s biggest achievement for me is helping to make young people interested in politics again.
Chris , yo seem to be suggesting that Blair's major achievements were "sure start centres". I don't understand why the momentum side of the party is so desperate to denigrate Blair's achievements. Its an absolute gift to the Tories.
I listed some of Blair's achievements above
Significant investment in healthcare and education spending.
Introduced minimum wage
Achieved peace in Northern Ireland
Reduced relative poverty
Devolved power to Scotland and Eales and English cities
Equalised the age of consent for gay people and introduced civil partnerships
Improved the social security safety net
But if you don't like those, you could add
The Human Rights Act
Lifting most pensioners out of poverty
Equality at work legislation
Getting rid of most hereditary peers
etc
Surely you acknowledge that Blair did many good things even if you would have liked him go further.
For all the excuses I am afraid Corbyn managed to lose badly to first a Prime Minister generally accepted to be challenging Eden for worst post war PM and then to a chancer who looks like eclipsing them both. His legacy is facilitating the shift in the Tory party in power away from relative One Nation to UKIP/English Nationalism including the disaster of Brexit along the way.
Starmer has a long road back but has started assuredly. There will be some hurdles ahead - navigating Trump's behaviour over the next six - nine months and the crisis that may well bring may be the most significant for us all, but at last after a woeful period I think there are grounds for cautious optimism.
Yeah but Dev don't forget that without Jezza shifting the Overton Window we'd now have Katie Hopkins as Prime Minister
I'd vote for Bayo as Prime Minister with Mary Berry as Chancellor!
To say that Labour lost badly in 2017 is far worse spin than to say Blair’s lasting legacy is sure start centres.
Given the majority in 1997 and so many years of Labour control, I’d have expected more. I read Toynbee and Walker’s book years ago, and even they concluded that Blair’s government did not achieve enough.
That's the second mention for Mary Berry on here this morning. Is this a new record?
The point is that any loss in 2017 was a bad loss because they were up against one of the worst prime ministers in history.
Interesting you mentioned how well Corbyn engaged the youth vote. How well do you reckon he did that during the EU referendum campaign?
Corbyn lost by 50seats against a historically bad PM fighting such a bad campaign that the voting public were openly laughing at her. That's hardly triumphant glorious success!
I understand you may have wanted Blair to go further. But surely you must acknowledge those very significant successes that improved the lives of millions of our people.
That has been my point all along. Better to accept and achieve half of what you want and gain the power to do so than reach for all of it and lose yet again
The problem..or not depending upon your point of view..with our sceptre'd isle is that on the whole we are a conservative (with a small c) society...so excepting the 1945 Labour landslide which came after the war and people remembered what had happened to the poor after the sacrifice of WW1...Labour governments until Blair (Wilson, Callaghan) on the whole had to struggle with small majorities...even during the 1970s when the unions (gawd bless 'em) ruled. No-one, even the poor and working class, really want anything that is going to frighten the horses...Blair was a safe, bland option but got in, Broon another steady though charisma free option only just failed, Milliband was made to look like a radical (!) and Corbyn was a definate horse-frightener. Much as I try my best not to agree with @DevC
the fact is the first thing you want is to get in (see also Biden) and try to get things good things done without too much fuss. Starmer has a decent chance, and I think we've not seen the best of him yet...as he is largely letting the government p*** on its own chips in the glare of the public. Now David Icke has some very interesting views on this...
In 2019 he was definitely up against one of the worst Prime Ministers in history.
It seems a bit pointless to argue about counterfactuals - who can possibly say that another leader would have done better in 2017? But Labour overachieved massively against expectations, and got a remarkable number of votes (including winning in Canterbury of all places.) And, as I said before, there is a generation of young people interested in politics now, which can only be a good thing for the country.
No one comes out with any credit from Brexit.
What if the alternatives are reaching for all of it and losing, or reaching for half of it and losing?
Repeatedly painting 2017 as a catastrophic loss for Labour despite having brought them back from a spectacular polling deficit, winning more votes than Super Tony and running in an election where every racist in the country was guaranteed to vote Tory, while also banging on about how "electable" Blair was is peak Blue Labour cognitive dissonance.
If you don't gain power, it doesn't real matter what your policies were.
Except in that if you present a credible alternative, at least that pulls the Tories back towards a less damaging more centrist position as they have to defend their centre-right votes. If Labour are too far left, they can continue to largely take them for granted and be UKIP/Eng Nats.
Starmer has started well. People are starting to consider Labour as an alternative to this shambolic government. If Trump falls in the autumn and Starmer continues to outperform Johnson, wouldn't surprise me in the least to see Johnson gone by Christmas 2021.
As former Wycombe boy Ian Drury would say, there are reasons to be cheerful.
"peak Blue Labour cognitive dissonance", wow, a new level of utter bollocks there son...
If you acknowledge that an opposition can make a difference outside of power then the whole ‘reaching for all of it and losing’ thing is misleading.
It seems like Marcus Rashford has more impact on government policy than Kier Starmer so far.
It was a catastrophic loss. Not long afterwards we have a horrifically right wing govt led by Boris Johnson with a huge majority, they are handling the Covid 19 crisis disastrously, they have emboldened the far right in ways not seen for decades and we're heading at full speed towards Brexit on WTO terms
You might not think that's catastrophic but it will certainly do until the catastrophe gets here
People are suffering, and things are getting worse, and our country is becoming a nastier less tolerant place. And it could have been prevented by an opposition that was actually focussed on winning an election rather than engaging in the politics of protest they'd been involved in their entire lives, and one whose leader had given even the slightest shit about winning the EU referendum rather than go missing for a few months. Talk about the Overton Window? Brexit has shifted us further to the right than anything else in modern history
You continue to admonish yourself from blame for any of it if you like. Hope it makes you feel better
Corbyn clearly isn’t the one to blame for Brexit.
You don't think it would have been helpful to mobilize the youth vote in the way you've already said he did a year later?
No opposition makes a difference by presenting itself and being seen by the voting population as a credible alternative government. In that way the Government is forced to react to counter the threat.
Corbyn failed abjectly.
I am afraid he and his Cummings equivalent, Seumas Milne bear a large part of the blame for Brexit. It almost certainly wouldn't have happened without them.
We already had one. May was significantly more authoritarian than Johnson. This is the woman who came up with the Go Home vans and the snooper's charter. Incredible scenes to think she was left of Johnson.
Brexit did most of the hard work and you'd be hard pushed to find anyone not white who thinks Theresa May deporting British citizens to their deaths was less confirmatory for racists. I'm starting to think you weren't paying attention at the time.
I look forward to watching a man who can't even use the word racist to describe racists making things better.
And believe me, I sincerely hope you're right, because I have no answers at all. I'm entirely in despair at British politics because I cannot see anyone getting us out of this shit.
Who would have guessed that painting everyone who disagreed with Corbyn or didn't want to go as far economically as either traitors or Tories and telling them to sod off and vote conservative would turn away voters.
Blue Labour is an actual thing soz.
Nah, you're making it up.
It almost certainly would.
Blame Nigel Farage, blame the BBC for giving Farage a platform, blame Cameron for calling a referendum, blame austerity, blame Labour for not putting in place adequate financial regulations, blame Thatcher; they all bear far more responsibility for Brexit than Corbyn.
Corbyn has to take his fair share of responsibility for Brexit due to his ever changing views on European membership and his total indecisiveness leading up to the election.
https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/
Corbyb's major problem with brexit was that he was a crap liar.
He always was a Eurosceptic, but for entirely different reasons (after all the EU was really a right of centre economic setup).
He didn't fully believe in it, that was clear, the public dont want nuance, he couldn't say what he actually thought, maybe something along the lines of " I think the EU is not a good organisation for xyz reasons, but leaving under a hard right Tory govt wound be far worse ", because that wouldn't work.
That damaged one of his main reasons for being popular - being genuine.
That's before you get into the ridiculous smear campaign - a lot of people genuinely do think he's a communist anti-semite terrorist lover, because they didn't have the intellect or critical thinking skills to resist the barrage of pure nonsense coming at them.