What is the point of Labour ?

[Frank Grimes]

Labour figures in Scotland now starting to warm to the idea of #IndyRef2

The start of something?

Poor Duncan’s head will explode 

[Granny Danger]

52 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

I met Richard Leonard quite a few times 15 years back and he's definitely left wing. He was working alongside the leader of the Communist party in Scotland and came across as a genuine and highly intelligent guy. He's a deep-thinking policy guy.

I'm gutted that he's not been able to do anything but I'm struggling to think what he could do. His style is obviously not engaging but I'm not sure what direction he could take the party in which would work.

Scottish Labour will not recover until post independence, and then it absolutely will.
 

I have known many Labour politicians in my time whose views had ‘moderated’ in a timescale well shorter than 15 years.

[CambieBud]

I met Richard Leonard quite a few times 15 years back and he's definitely left wing. He was working alongside the leader of the Communist party in Scotland and came across as a genuine and highly intelligent guy. He's a deep-thinking policy guy.

I'm gutted that he's not been able to do anything but I'm struggling to think what he could do. His style is obviously not engaging but I'm not sure what direction he could take the party in which would work.

Scottish Labour will not recover until post independence, and then it absolutely will.

Spot on. They don’t seem to see the irony of this. I agree completely that post independence they could well be like the Swedish Socialists and be in power for decades

[San Starko Rover]

Spot on. They don’t seem to see the irony of this. I agree completely that post independence they could well be like the Swedish Socialists and be in power for decades

Never understood Scottish Labour being so anti independence, Scotland has been Labour for decades and would probably return to them after a Yes vote, I think the SNP would break apart after independence as their common goal would be achieved. As part of the UK Labour will be 2nd most elections as England backs the Tory party even during the Blair years Labour had to move right to win. Until recently most of Scotland would back anyone Labour put up. Surely post independence Labour would be the dominant party in Scotland even with left of centre policies.

[dirty dingus]

19 minutes ago, San Starko Rover said:

 

Never understood Scottish Labour being so anti independence, Scotland has been Labour for decades and would probably return to them after a Yes vote, I think the SNP would break apart after independence as their common goal would be achieved. As part of the UK Labour will be 2nd most elections as England backs the Tory party even during the Blair years Labour had to move right to win. Until recently most of Scotland would back anyone Labour put up. Surely post independence Labour would be the dominant party in Scotland even with left of centre policies.

I think the brand name may be toxic even in a post indy landscape, will obviously be a place for Labour core values but this may not be accepted till the left in the SNP and the pragmatic pro indy labourites join together under a new party.

[Sir Tarmo Kink]

Brexit is considered an act of Satan on this site (and by most of Scotland) but any hint of denying the democratic result that the people voted for was political suicide down in England. The SNP managed to clean up in Scotland because of the heavy Remain presence but down South, the Tories were the only large party willing to deliver what the people voted for. A lot of Corbyn fantasizers and rabid nats/remainers (I’m an SNP voter, but not a crazed, myopic one) simply refused to see that cancelling Brexit or having a second referendum would be undemocratic as it was ignoring the original vote. England voted for Brexit, and surprise surprise, they voted for the party that wanted to deliver Brexit. Corbyn got it totally wrong from the start of his tenure as Labour leader, he was even worse than Miliband. Him, McDonnell and Abbott should be nowhere near the forefront of any political party.

[Bully Wee Villa]

Nobody really ever explained to me how letting the people decide on the final Brexit deal is "undemocratic". But, you're right in that Brexit made the election unwinnable. With pretty much every Leave voter going Tory, and the Remain vote split between Labour and Lib Dem, and Green to a lesser extent, it was always going to be a bad night for Labour.

Plus Corbyn became personally toxic. A lot of people in the Wigans of this world see him as anti-British,  due to the  media spending years portraying him as loving the IRA, Hamas, etc.

I hope we can appoint a Left-Winger who keeps the party Socialist but doesn't come with a lot of the baggage that was attached to Corbyn. I'm edging towards Becky Long-Bailey at the minute but haven't decided. Also, she's has yet to confirm that she will definitely stand, anyway.

I just hope that, following an election in which the old Left vs Right divide made no difference, we don't panic and rush to appoint a Blairite to make us "electable". The main battle in the next few years is to ensure that Johnson does not sell off the NHS. Having a Leader from the wing on the Party that endorsed large scale privatisation in the 90s/00s would not be helpful in this regard.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bully Wee Villa

[Sir Tarmo Kink]

Letting people vote on a deal isn’t undemocratic, but putting a deal up against Remain in what is effectively a repeat of the first vote, is undemocratic as you’re ignoring what was voted for. We can’t have multiple referendums on the same issue only a few years apart as it reduces the validity of future referendums.

 

I’m not sure who at Labour thought it was a good campaign to suggest Corbyn getting a deal, putting it up against Remain and then staying neutral. How good was his deal going to be if he wasn’t even backing it? Would he get a poorer deal than he could have to sway voters the way of Remain? Despite the narrative that was building recently about Brexit being a mistake, this election certainly showed that the English were strongly in favour of Brexit.

 

 

 

[welshbairn]

I don't see why allowing a narrow majority of the 2016 electorate to dictate what happens to the 2020's electorate is any more democratic than allowing a second vote when the alternatives are clear. Much ado about nothing now though, what happens will depend on who Johnson lied to, the One Nation lot who he promised a cosy frictionless deal or the hard brexit or crash out he promised the ERG.

[steelmen]

24 minutes ago, Sir Tarmo Kink said:

Letting people vote on a deal isn’t undemocratic, but putting a deal up against Remain in what is effectively a repeat of the first vote, is undemocratic as you’re ignoring what was voted for. We can’t have multiple referendums on the same issue only a few years apart as it reduces the validity of future referendums.

 

I’m not sure who at Labour thought it was a good campaign to suggest Corbyn getting a deal, putting it up against Remain and then staying neutral. How good was his deal going to be if he wasn’t even backing it? Would he get a poorer deal than he could have to sway voters the way of Remain? Despite the narrative that was building recently about Brexit being a mistake, this election certainly showed that the English were strongly in favour of Brexit.

 

 

 

The bit in bold... the problem was no one really knew what they were voting for. it has been proven that the stuff on the bus was made up. so it is reasonable to give people the option of accepting what has been agreed or scraping the whole thing.

but after last week it i think it is a waste of time because the English will probably vote in larger numbers to accept Brexit.

[Sir Tarmo Kink]

The bit in bold... the problem was no one really knew what they were voting for. it has been proven that the stuff on the bus was made up. so it is reasonable to give people the option of accepting what has been agreed or scraping the whole thing.
but after last week it i think it is a waste of time because the English will probably vote in larger numbers to accept Brexit.

Given the strong Tory vote in England, I think it’s quite clear they knew what they were voting for. The Remainers are obviously upset by this, understandably, but that’s not a reason to have another vote.

You’re right though, I think Leave would win more convincingly this time.

[Paco]

I hope we can appoint a Left-Winger who keeps the party Socialist but doesn't come with a lot of the baggage that was attached to Corbyn. I'm edging towards Becky Long-Bailey at the minute but haven't decided. Also, she's has yet to confirm that she will definitely stand, anyway.
I just hope that, following an election in which the old Left vs Right divide made no difference, we don't panic and rush to appoint a Blairite to make us "electable". The main battle in the next few years is to ensure that Johnson does not sell off the NHS. Having a Leader from the wing on the Party that endorsed large scale privatisation in the 90s/00s would not be helpful in this regard.

Long-Bailey is already being spun in the media as a Corbyn/McDonnell stooge. The media will be out to get whoever the leader is, no question, but I think they just need to cut ties entirely with what is clearly a toxic brand.

Keep some of the popular policies, but drop things like the four-day week, ‘there shouldn’t be billionaires’ and free broadband. Corbyn is the scapegoat but the UK isn’t ready for it, clearly.

Someone like Andy Burnham (note: not actual Andy Burnham) who’s been away from the Corbyn frontline, isn’t damaged by either his brand or Brexit would be ideal, but I’m not sure that person actually exists. Depending on progress with the EU by the next election, Starmer could be seen as a Remainer out to sabotage things. Thornberry you’d hope was never a serious contender but has surely been done in by Flint in any case. So who are we left with? Rayner? I know absolutely nothing about her, which isn’t a bad thing.

A clean-cut, standard issue British politician might just be the order of the day.

[NotThePars]

2 hours ago, Bully Wee Villa said:

 

I hope we can appoint a Left-Winger who keeps the party Socialist but doesn't come with a lot of the baggage that was attached to Corbyn. I'm edging towards Becky Long-Bailey at the minute but haven't decided. Also, she's has yet to confirm that she will definitely stand, anyway.

I just hope that, following an election in which the old Left vs Right divide made no difference, we don't panic and rush to appoint a Blairite to make us "electable". The main battle in the next few years is to ensure that Johnson does not sell off the NHS. Having a Leader from the wing on the Party that endorsed large scale privatisation in the 90s/00s would not be helpful in this regard.

I hope she declares. There's a lot of question marks around how committed Rayner is and Lisa Nandy is a Blue Labourite. Will be funny if Phillips runs and gets even less than Liz Kendall. Clive Lewis is thinking of running but I can't imagine he's much more popular than Jess Phillips is. f**k knows who the melts will go for atm.

[welshbairn]

11 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

Lisa Nandy is a Blue Labourite

Does that apply to anyone who didn't back Corbyn? I'd say she was a lot different from the likes of Liz Kendall.

[NotThePars]

Does that apply to anyone who didn't back Corbyn? I'd say she was a lot different from the likes of Liz Kendall.

No. It’s a distinct wing of the Labour Party from the Blairites. Economically radical but socially conservative. The problems are good but their causes.. their causes are very bad.

[Granny Danger]

22 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

I hope she declares. There's a lot of question marks around how committed Rayner is and Lisa Nandy is a Blue Labourite. Will be funny if Phillips runs and gets even less than Liz Kendall. Clive Lewis is thinking of running but I can't imagine he's much more popular than Jess Phillips is. f**k knows who the melts will go for atm.

From my knowledge of him Clive Lewis is a million millions away from Jess Phillips and would be my choice.

His army background will be a huge turnoff for the Momentum crowd, and I can understand that, but he seems to be pretty mainstream left and I could see that background being helpful in selling a radical manifesto to the type of voters who need to be won over.

 

[welshbairn]

5 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

No. It’s a distinct wing of the Labour Party from the Blairites. Economically radical but socially conservative. The problems are good but their causes.. their causes are very bad.

 

Life long learning this place..

https://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2011/04/blue-labour-party-glasman

[Granny Danger]

Just now, MixuFixit said:

Given Labour can only win by courting racist people, Clive Lewis isn't going to work is he?

You’re better than that.

[NotThePars]

From my knowledge of him Clive Lewis is a million millions away from Jess Phillips and would be my choice.
His army background will be a huge turnoff for the Momentum crowd, and I can understand that, but he seems to be pretty mainstream left and I could see that background being helpful in selling a radical manifesto to the type of voters who need to be won over.
 

I meant in popularity. From what I gather Lewis isn’t popular among MPs so might struggle to get nominated whereas Phillips seems loathed by a large swathe of the membership.

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

I meant in popularity. From what I gather Lewis isn’t popular among MPs so might struggle to get nominated whereas Phillips seems loathed by a large swathe of the membership.

 

I assume there will be nutters on the extremes of both wings who will not want to compromise their views; I include McLuskey in this and hope he fucks off/drops dead soon.

Others, if they are genuine about gaining power to protect those who need protected, will need to show some compromise.