News2 mins ago
How Can Labour Recover?
I’ve just listened to a Labour spokeswoman (no idea who she was) saying that the way for Labour to recover is to return to the hard left. What is it they don’t understand?
If you were making decisions for Labour what changes would you implement to return them to a modicum of popularity?
If you were making decisions for Labour what changes would you implement to return them to a modicum of popularity?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think Labour need to understand and accept that it is not that the voters desperately want the Conservatives, it's that they desperately don't want Labour.
Corbyn tried to go the hard left route, and got himself and his party vapourised is the process.
Labour still appear reluctant to accept that the reasons for that were twofold - one was telling the electorate that they were fools for voting to leave the EU, and the other was utterly fannciful nonsense dressed up as policies that no-one could ever take seriously.
The current encumbents seem paralysed, utterly unable to move in any direction, or forming anything approaching a coherent strategy for their candidates to sell on the doorstep.
Right now, Starmer is treading water because he is either unable, or unwilling to move the party forwards with a proper strategy, policies he can sell, and a convincing argument that hw would do better than Mr Johnson.
So until the party gets a grip and finds some ideas that are saleable, and starts to sell them, they will remain where they are, stationary and damaged beyond repair.
That may be with Starmer, I suspect not, but whomever they choose, it has to be someone that the electorate can honestly see as a prosective prime minister.
Looking at the last fifty years' worth of leader - Smith and Blair excepted, they seem wilfully to choose the most unpleasant unattractive incoherent muddle-headed lefty muppet , and give them the job of leader.
That has to stop, and stop now - another useless leader will condemn them to opposition for decades, and based on their current choice - that is exactly what they deserve.
Corbyn tried to go the hard left route, and got himself and his party vapourised is the process.
Labour still appear reluctant to accept that the reasons for that were twofold - one was telling the electorate that they were fools for voting to leave the EU, and the other was utterly fannciful nonsense dressed up as policies that no-one could ever take seriously.
The current encumbents seem paralysed, utterly unable to move in any direction, or forming anything approaching a coherent strategy for their candidates to sell on the doorstep.
Right now, Starmer is treading water because he is either unable, or unwilling to move the party forwards with a proper strategy, policies he can sell, and a convincing argument that hw would do better than Mr Johnson.
So until the party gets a grip and finds some ideas that are saleable, and starts to sell them, they will remain where they are, stationary and damaged beyond repair.
That may be with Starmer, I suspect not, but whomever they choose, it has to be someone that the electorate can honestly see as a prosective prime minister.
Looking at the last fifty years' worth of leader - Smith and Blair excepted, they seem wilfully to choose the most unpleasant unattractive incoherent muddle-headed lefty muppet , and give them the job of leader.
That has to stop, and stop now - another useless leader will condemn them to opposition for decades, and based on their current choice - that is exactly what they deserve.
How can Labour recover? Simply just chuck the towel in and split.
Someone this morning on R4, was it the Prince of Darkness?, said that the Labour Party came into existence to improve the working man's conditions (and women's) as well as social inequality.
Today this has changed, as their work has largely been done and now society is about 'those who have money and those who don't' - and the Labour Party hasn't woken up to this Brave New World.....could be a good insight, indeed?
Someone this morning on R4, was it the Prince of Darkness?, said that the Labour Party came into existence to improve the working man's conditions (and women's) as well as social inequality.
Today this has changed, as their work has largely been done and now society is about 'those who have money and those who don't' - and the Labour Party hasn't woken up to this Brave New World.....could be a good insight, indeed?
//Because there would be no choice... you could vote for option A, the Tories, or option B, some other Tories, but called something else....//
In the 2019 election there were five major parties who fielded candidates in England who polled more than 91% of the votes cast in the UK between them. They all had different manifestos. If none stood on a manifesto of your choosing the only thing you can do is start a new party with proposals that suit you. There are lots of things I would like government to undertake to do but none of the currently existing parties proposes to do them. That doesn’t mean I don’t have a choice. It simply means there are no candidates representing a party that will reflect my wishes.
There is no more an automatic right to have a party which reflects your preferred political views than there is for anybody else. The New Labour architects realised that there was not enough support in the country for the “Left Wing” policies of Foot and Kinnock, his predecessors (John Smith tragically not having had time to acquaint the electorate with his). There is simply no point in presenting policies which you know will not see you win an election just to give the electorate a “choice.”
In the 2019 election there were five major parties who fielded candidates in England who polled more than 91% of the votes cast in the UK between them. They all had different manifestos. If none stood on a manifesto of your choosing the only thing you can do is start a new party with proposals that suit you. There are lots of things I would like government to undertake to do but none of the currently existing parties proposes to do them. That doesn’t mean I don’t have a choice. It simply means there are no candidates representing a party that will reflect my wishes.
There is no more an automatic right to have a party which reflects your preferred political views than there is for anybody else. The New Labour architects realised that there was not enough support in the country for the “Left Wing” policies of Foot and Kinnock, his predecessors (John Smith tragically not having had time to acquaint the electorate with his). There is simply no point in presenting policies which you know will not see you win an election just to give the electorate a “choice.”
Untitled // I would not like us to end up like the USA.... as bad as our politics are I reckon theirs are a lot worse, and this is a big reason...
If both parties are right wing then they just engage in a race to go further right... e.g. the Republicans flirtation with fascism for the last few years.//
Me neither, but the last US election result proves your second point wrong.
If both parties are right wing then they just engage in a race to go further right... e.g. the Republicans flirtation with fascism for the last few years.//
Me neither, but the last US election result proves your second point wrong.
It's surely important that there appears to be a massive regional divide in Labour's fortunes as well. They seem to be doing fine, more or less, in Wales, London, and the North West. It's just everywhere else that they're failing.
I don't in any sense wish to portray this as anything other than a disastrous election for Labour, but I get the feeling they'll just have to price this in for the next few years. Labour screwed up badly by picking Corbyn and swinging to the "London left" of the party, and it will take time to undo that damage, even before you throw in Brexit and Covid, both of which play into the Government's hands for the time being.
I don't in any sense wish to portray this as anything other than a disastrous election for Labour, but I get the feeling they'll just have to price this in for the next few years. Labour screwed up badly by picking Corbyn and swinging to the "London left" of the party, and it will take time to undo that damage, even before you throw in Brexit and Covid, both of which play into the Government's hands for the time being.
The problem that labour have got is that the tories seem to have moved to the left and instead of having a right and a left wing party we now have an almost left wing party and labour on the far left.
After all the years of condemning the far right and pampering to the looney left, labour now has dug itself into a hole it can't escape from.
I don't think that many of the top people at the BBC being left wing is helping the labour party either.
After all the years of condemning the far right and pampering to the looney left, labour now has dug itself into a hole it can't escape from.
I don't think that many of the top people at the BBC being left wing is helping the labour party either.
"There is no more an automatic right to have a party which reflects your preferred political views than there is for anybody else. "
I did not say that there was New Judge... but if we must live in a two party system and both parties stand for the same thing then our votes for one or the other don't really mean anything do they... and if that is the case then that's not a democracy... it's just a sham system akin to Russia. I understand you might love to have both the government and the opposition agree with you but that is not a democracy... it's New Judge-ocracy!
I did not say that there was New Judge... but if we must live in a two party system and both parties stand for the same thing then our votes for one or the other don't really mean anything do they... and if that is the case then that's not a democracy... it's just a sham system akin to Russia. I understand you might love to have both the government and the opposition agree with you but that is not a democracy... it's New Judge-ocracy!
