What is the point of Labour ?

[GTG_03]

1 hour ago, NotThePars said:

There's a major problem with this and that's Labour playing their cards right.

Labour don't even have any cards. 

[Salt n Vinegar]

2 hours ago, Stormzy said:

I don't know why everyone on here is so set on "Tories for eternity" perhaps I'm more optimistic but I can easily see Labour getting elected within the next decade if they play their cards right. Unfortunately for them it's a lot harder considering 90% of their Scottish support/seats have went off to support the SNP and chase their socialist Utopian pipe dream. 

If you're not actively supporting Labour then you can't snipe at the sidelines saying "tories 4 lyf" when you're helping that along the way. 

The way I see it is if you're a full blown socialist then go for the Indy vote, it won't work out as nicely as you'd like but you'll at least be able to call yourself progressive and socialist even if you end up in a shite state, nothing like the beloved Scandinavian utopias, poorer and with less life chances you'll at least be politically consistent and you can sleep on your integrity at night as a pillow. However if you're not that fussed about left/right and you don't have a burning desire to fully replace capitalism then you should grow up, support Labour, trojan horse your way into power, actually make some positive social change, like Blair, avoid doing any wars and remember to join Canzuk and we can all merrily get along in constant stability whilst enjoying holidays to Canada.

Interesting viewpoint.

My own view that if Labour seriously wants the voters in Scotland to go "back" to them, a pretty good start would be convincing the English electorate to do that. If Labour can't win back its traditional heartlands in England first, they'll find it hard to convince voters in Scotland that they are within touching distance of a Westminster majority. 

[SANTAN]

1 hour ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

Didn't realize John Rentoul posts on here. Big laughs at that interpretation of Blair (especially right next to "avoid doing any wars" 

I'd say the introduction of the minimum wage and the marriage equality stuff is pretty positive social change that wouldn't have happened under the Tories. 

[WhiteRoseKillie]

15 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

I'd say the introduction of the minimum wage and the marriage equality stuff is pretty positive social change that wouldn't have happened under the Tories. 

Except that same-sex marriage became legal in 2013. Gonna credit Nick Clegg with that one, are we?

[SANTAN]

5 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Except that same-sex marriage became legal in 2013. Gonna credit Nick Clegg with that one, are we?

I think you know I meant the civil partnership stuff that was introduced during his tenure. 

A positive move. 

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

I think you know I meant the civil partnership stuff that was introduced during his tenure. 

A positive move. 

If that was what you meant, then that's what you should have said. Words are important, wee man. I think you'll find, especially if you speak to anyone affected, the difference between Marriage and a "Civil Partnership" is kinda profound. 

[scottsdad]

3 hours ago, NotThePars said:

The Tories only added an additional 300,000 votes in 2019 going by a very quick Google. It's not so much about that very solid bloc of voters falling behind the Tories although it is disturbing but also that people just appear to be deserting Labour long-term and the party having no idea or willingness to win them back.

Part of Labour's problems is that they have two, competing ideas. 

On the Corbyn front, a return to some semblance of socialism. Raise tax, invest where needed, try to re-shape Britain to something new. On the other front, the centrist approach to use economic boost to invest in public services. 

It gets tetchy as this is again the Old Labour vs New Labour argument. Britain hasn't voted for a socialist government in almost 50 years, so the centrists argue that the Corbyn view is unelectable. They're kind of right - the rest was the personal brand of Corbyn himself. I honestly believe that is John McDonnell became leader in 2015 instead of Corbyn, they would have done much better. The centrists...well, New Labour had it's moment but that's gone now. The Tories can honestly be seen as the successors to Blair, even if they really aren't. 

This civil war between the two wings are what has killed Labour for 10 years. The ERG in the Tories are their version of the Corbyn element, but they manage to rub along together. Tories always choose power over fighting.

[SANTAN]

19 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

If that was what you meant, then that's what you should have said. Words are important, wee man. I think you'll find, especially if you speak to anyone affected, the difference between Marriage and a "Civil Partnership" is kinda profound. 

Nah I'm good. The difference between marriage and civil partnerships doesn't have much, if any bearing on the initial point raised. 

[NotThePars]

All I know is they put a load of losers with no ideas except apologising in charge and I'm enjoying the daily Ls they're taking. I see Lisa Nandy is bumping her gums again about something or other. Good luck to her, hopefully it's not absent-mindedly threatening violence against a national minority in the UK again.

Edited May 24, 2021 by NotThePars

[btb]

Not that I spend much time worrying about Labour but the old tribal allegiances are disintegrating and  if they are going to make any sort of recovery it doesn't seem like they're going to do it by repeating the Blair Formula of the 90s i.e.  emphasizing Tory incompetence and sleaze, though they seem decent enough reasons to me. They're gonna have to male people want to vote for them and for me the target groups would be then gig economy workers by offering better workers rights and Green sympathizers genuine Green politics as opposed to Nimbyism is left wing so no contradiction there.

[Miguel Sanchez]

4 hours ago, GTG_03 said:

Labour don't even have any cards. 

[NotThePars]

He made really bad tactical errors as well though. He was far more willing to pivot towards Remainism and spent part of 2019 cosying up to persona non grata like Alistair Campbell. Corbyn was good for not bending on a ton of shit and I thought for a long time that McDonnell would've been more aggressive (he was!) but he caved on shit really badly and openly took the blame for it when the election panned out the way it did. 

He was too honourable a man resigning after the election though. Should've went straight for the c***s that currently occupy the leadership.

Edited May 25, 2021 by NotThePars

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Best McDonnell moment is surely this.

[Detournement]

8 hours ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:

I thought taking the blame for the remainism stuff was a relatively shrewd move on his part

It was undeniably true. When McConnell caved it was all over. 

He probably hoped that since his economic policies hadn't spooked the CBI and the City that going Remain might see them get some establishment backing in the upcoming election. Incredibly fucking stupid.

 

[SANTAN]

Not a fan of McDonnell and I'm unsure if he would have clinched it if he was the man in charge but I must say he does look like he could handle himself in a scrap, would enjoy seeing him vs Bojo. 

[NotThePars]

13 hours ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:

I thought taking the blame for the remainism stuff was a relatively shrewd move on his part. He knew his time at the top was over so a mea culpa allows him to take all the blame and it doesn't necessarily tarnish 'the project'. I thought the way he was willing to go on Marr etc and play the responsible bank manager showed a maturity and willingness to do the presentational stuff that Corbyn lacked. You don't want to completely personalise everything but I think McDonnell as PM would have been an easier sell than Corbyn, and (maybe this is bullshit) I get the impression he'd have shown less patience with the wreckers and been more proactive in dealing with the whole anti-Semitism farrago.

Also (slightly undermining my point about maturity here) yon time he threw the little red book at Osborne was class.

Maybe it's partly that but I think it was ultimately also partially his fault. He was more flexible on the EU/ Second Vote stuff and I think @Detournement is bang on. McDonnell seemed to be trying to appeal to the establishment types that had put the feelers out in the heady days of 2017-2019 when the Tory Party was rudderless and imploding but it blew up in his face.

If I had to toss out a quick judgment on the two I would say that Corbyn was more inflexible on important policy points they should've never caved on and McDonnell was more willing, for a while, to fight the wreckers but even on that he did that fucking bizarre interview with Campbell.

[Moomintroll]

Watching Andy Burnham speaking after that cover up earlier, he needs to be moved out of that Mayoral position & into a WM seat so we can get a leader that actually understands how to lead an opposition party & attack  the Establishment rather than an impotent Londoncentric wet lettuce who exists in an echo chamber.

[Granny Danger]

29 minutes ago, Perkin Flump said:

Watching Andy Burnham speaking after that cover up earlier, he needs to be moved out of that Mayoral position & into a WM seat so we can get a leader that actually understands how to lead an opposition party & attack  the Establishment rather than an impotent Londoncentric wet lettuce who exists in an echo chamber.

I’m not a fan of Burnham but he’s definitely the next Labour Party leader.

[Detournement]

2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I’m not a fan of Burnham but he’s definitely the next Labour Party leader.

Andy Burnham voted for the war in Iraq. Andy Burnham voted 11 times against inquiries into the war in Iraq.

You would have to hope that the idiots who voted for the man who cleared John Charles De Menzes' killers won't get fooled again.

[NotThePars]

I think Burnham's had a good year and the SCG seem like they'll back him but he won't fix Labour's problems.