SIGN UP

Can Labour Be "taken Back" From The Extremists?

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 09:17 Fri 07th Sep 2018 | News
28 Answers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45438855
St Tony thinks not. Are the Labour supporters on here happy with the current position of the party within the political spectrum?

Answers

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Avatar Image
Three-time Tony, the most successful Labour PM ever, has a point. He realised that to actually win elections, the centre ground needs to be on board- to take votes away from the Tories and Lib Dems. That's why he won three elections for Labour. However, Corbyn could still become PM. Here's how- at the next election, it is unlike the Tories will win another...
10:20 Fri 07th Sep 2018
The point is do they want to "taken back".
-- answer removed --
If Labour can not pull back from the brink of extremism then there is really no hope for the country.

Far left can’t work just as much as far right can’t.
Also why do people seem to say that any unpopular or ‘retired’, or resigned labour MP is just a Tory at heart or in disguise?

Some of these people ran for, won for and worked for Labour over many years and now that they don’t agree with the extremes of the party at present are dismissed as nothing to do with Labour.

A lazy argument without merit.
I think Mr Blair has the wrong end of the stick.

The Labour Party was unelectable before he and the creep Mandelson decided to change it to “Noo Laybah”. The people of the UK (and Blair and Mandelson) had realised that their recipe for the country (high taxes, high spending, state control of everything and the trade unions pulling the strings) was no longer what they wanted. Blair and his friends decided to move the party to the middle and poach votes from the Conservatives (who did not suit many people at that time either). So “New Labour” was born and we all know the rest.

It is Mr Corbyn that has done the "taking back", All that he's done is to espouse policies that were commonplace in the 1960s and 70s (which led to piles of rubbish rotting in the street and the dead left unburied). It is Blair who took the party away from all that (and into government which they would never have achieved without such a change of direction). All Mr Corbyn is doing is attempting to restore the status quo.

All this happened a quarter of a century ago and the electorate now is not the electorate then. Whether there are enough people around who are prepared to vote and who either do not remember the 1970s or do and don’t care remains to be seen. That will determine whether Jezza gets the keys to Number Ten. All I can say is God help all of us if he does.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Question Author
yeah Bang on NJ: I suppose then that those who support the current Labour party are happy for a return to the good old days of union dogma, strikes, etc
Corbyn = Out, Kier Starmer in as the new leader. then Con Party out . Bingo.
How is that going to happen when the majority of the Labour Party are Corbyinistas
Taken back from the extremists ? Thought they'd managed that after Blair left office. (Although, admittedly the pendulum then swung a bit far the other way.)
Three-time Tony, the most successful Labour PM ever, has a point. He realised that to actually win elections, the centre ground needs to be on board- to take votes away from the Tories and Lib Dems. That's why he won three elections for Labour.

However, Corbyn could still become PM. Here's how- at the next election, it is unlike the Tories will win another majority, and also very unlikely that Labour would either. So the Tories would likely be left to try and cobble together another coalition. However, the Lib Dems will never go with the Tories again, so a Labour/SNP coalition would be the most likely outcome.

Then the country would be rewarded with an indecisive Marxist pensioner as PM, someone then free to wreak his havoc on the economy, our armed forces, our armed forces, and our world allies. Soon enough, the penny will drop and those currently crowing for Jeremy's coronation will realise that you can't borrow your way out of poverty, anti-business policies make for huge unemployment and mass uncontrolled illegal immigration and an increase of the welfare state is the thing most likely to bring the NHS to an end, not cuts to bureaucracy.
Question Author
quite right spungle.
An interesting day.

Blair says Labour may be lost.

And then this:

--------------------------
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45438907
Sir Vince Cable could stand down as Lib Dem leader as soon as next year - and wants the contest to replace him to be opened up to non-party members.

In a speech, Sir Vince set out plans to transform the party into a "movement for moderates".
--------------------------

Could Blair run for Lib Dem leadership, and attract in a bunch of Labour and Tory moderate MPs and voters?

Although David Blunkett had it right on the Today programme this morning - "the Tories are good at sticking together rather than fracturing" - we have also had the likes of Dominic Grieve saying "I will leave the party if Boris Johnson becomes leader." And the other Tory remainers may feel a lot more comfortable in a centrist party post-Brexit.
It was industrial conflict led to rubbish in the street etc. not Labour government per se. Labour moved right of centre under Blair (unless you redefine the middle) abandoning principles for popularity in a nation that had swung to the right and even put up with Thatcher. Seen then as the equivilent of a more moderate Tory party, it picked up what would normally have been Tory voter support, leaving the actual Conservative party nowhere to appeal for replacement votes. It's hardly surprising if social conscience and disillusionment means there's a gradual return to more left wing politics. It would've been accomplished earlier had the anti-Blair reaction within the party not been so great.
People said that socialism was dead when Blair changed Labour into Tory Lite.
These things come in cycles. When Corbyn has a bad election, the pty will revert again.
"It was industrial conflict led to rubbish in the street etc. not Labour government per se."

The strife was caused by union greed which had been fed by Labour appeasement, OG. "Beer and sandwiches" at No 10 had become the normal negotiating end-game for union barons and after they'd had their refreshments they walked out with wheelbarrows full of taxpayers' money. They knew that a Labour government would never insist that their paymasters should behave in a responsible fashion.
Question Author
and to be fair judge, the Wet Tory Heath Government was useless and spineless. It needed TGL to sort the mess out in the end.
@ NJ

"The strife was caused by union greed which had been fed by Labour appeasement, OG. "Beer and sandwiches" at No 10 had become the normal negotiating end-game for union barons and after they'd had their refreshments they walked out with wheelbarrows full of taxpayers' money. They knew that a Labour government would never insist that their paymasters should behave in a responsible fashion. "

Exactly so.

There's no such thing as the Labour party anymore, it survives in name only. The party is being subsumed by the Marxist leaning `Momentum` even to the point of them trying to oust (deselect) long-serving members and replacing them with Pro-Corbyn supporters. Tom Watson is instrumental in this going so far as to deny membership of the NEC to right-wing biased members of the Labour Party. They may as well change the perty's name to Momentum but obviously even fewer would vote for them if they did.
Never heard of Chris Williamson however I fear he needs to wake up, take a look around and smell what he’s shovelling!!
The man is seriously deluded.

1 to 20 of 28rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Can Labour Be "taken Back" From The Extremists?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.