news & politics:discussion

[Ozanne]

 

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

interesting red wall stuff....

 

[squirrelarmy]

Gove certainly on it this morning. 
 

 

[pink_triangle]

14 hours ago, mattiloy said:

Time to start acting like it then big boy. And that means facing reality, no matter how hard it is - Starmers a dud 

So forget who you think would succeed him, who do you think would be the best option for leader now? Do you think labour would be doing better if Long Bailey of Nandy had won?

[mattiloy]

11 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

So forget who you think would succeed him, who do you think would be the best option for leader now? Do you think labour would be doing better if Long Bailey of Nandy had won?

I don't think anybody in Labour could deliver an overall majority in 2 years time, the party has driven out all its members and activists and near bankrupted itself in the time since Starmer took office.

I think Wes Streeting could court more big business donors, get an easier time off the right wing press and is better in front of a camera and thus probably has a better chance of winning a plurality of seats.

As much as his politics are almost completely antithetical to my own, he has backed proportional representation in the past and the only thing that matters in 2024 is to get rid of first past the post. Otherwise the long term prospects for the UK are dire.

If Starmer were to somehow win an overall majority in 2024 and did not take the opportunity to implement constitutional reform, the long term prospects for the UK would be equally dire.

I backed Nandy in the 2020 leadership election for the same reason - sounded very pro decentralisation, pro democratisation, I thought she could appeal to the red wall in a way that the others wouldn't - that being said, she also isn't the best in front of a camera and has a bad habit of tying herself in knots on policy, presumably through not being completely on top of her brief, but still, I think she would have done better than Starmer who has been a 1/10 leader.

[steviewevie]

Everyone seems to assume Streeting will be next leader...I actually think Reeves or Cooper are more likely...too soon for Steeting (plus, he's a bloke).

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

I don't think anybody in Labour could deliver an overall majority in 2 years time, the party has driven out all its members and activists and near bankrupted itself in the time since Starmer took office.

I think Wes Streeting could court more big business donors, get an easier time off the right wing press and is better in front of a camera and thus probably has a better chance of winning a plurality of seats.

As much as his politics are almost completely antithetical to my own, he has backed proportional representation in the past and the only thing that matters in 2024 is to get rid of first past the post. Otherwise the long term prospects for the UK are dire.

If Starmer were to somehow win an overall majority in 2024 and did not take the opportunity to implement constitutional reform, the long term prospects for the UK would be equally dire.

I backed Nandy in the 2020 leadership election for the same reason - sounded very pro decentralisation, pro democratisation, I thought she could appeal to the red wall in a way that the others wouldn't - that being said, she also isn't the best in front of a camera and has a bad habit of tying herself in knots on policy, presumably through not being completely on top of her brief, but still, I think she would have done better than Starmer who has been a 1/10 leader.

I'm undecided about Nandy, she may have been slightly better, my instinct is they would probably be about the same. RLB I think would have been a complete disaster.

I agree with you that PR is the way forward and good to see that senior people like Burnham also supporting. Potentially this could be delivered without a majority and working with other parties. I agree that Starmer is flawed, I don't however see anyone who would do significantly better.

[pink_triangle]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Everyone seems to assume Streeting will be next leader...I actually think Reeves or Cooper are more likely...too soon for Steeting (plus, he's a bloke).

Cooper is a possibility, I think Reeves is more bland than Starmer and possibly hated more by the left.

[steviewevie]

10 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Cooper is a possibility, I think Reeves is more bland than Starmer and possibly hated more by the left.

I don't think any of them are exactly popular with the left.

[steviewevie]

11 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I'm undecided about Nandy, she may have been slightly better, my instinct is they would probably be about the same. RLB I think would have been a complete disaster.

I agree with you that PR is the way forward and good to see that senior people like Burnham also supporting. Potentially this could be delivered without a majority and working with other parties. I agree that Starmer is flawed, I don't however see anyone who would do significantly better.

I actually quite liked Long Bailey...but she didn't stand a chance after that 2019 defeat.

[steviewevie]

what we really need is a trade war with the EU.

[Kurosagi]

Yuck, just spent my lunch watching Politics Live and Steve Baker was on. They played the clip of him in the HoC where he called on Johnson to go and asked if he still stands by that and he's trotted out the whips line of both leaders are as bad as each other blah blah that it reflects badly on all of them blah blah but it's a lovely Queen's Speech so let's just crack on with that blah blah.

Fast forward a month where Starmer gets off, Johnson gets more fines and the polling in his constituency sees him at risk of losing his seat and then no doubt he'll be making more negative speeches about Johnson.

[squirrelarmy]

42 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I don't think any of them are exactly popular with the left.

None of them are crazy enough to be popular with the hard left. 

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

None of them are crazy enough to be popular with the hard left. 

rumours that Barry Gardiner might stand...as a unity candidate.

Most likely Starmer stays put for now, but if labour lose next election badly he'll probably go then...and Burnham says he's staying as mayor of Gtr Manc until 2024..so maybe he'll back in parliament in time to stand and be that sexy northern blairite the country is crying out for.

[pink_triangle]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

rumours that Barry Gardiner might stand...as a unity candidate.

Most likely Starmer stays put for now, but if labour lose next election badly he'll probably go then...and Burnham says he's staying as mayor of Gtr Manc until 2024..so maybe he'll back in parliament in time to stand and be that sexy northern blairite the country is crying out for.

I don't think Gardner would get on the ballot. I have a feeling if Starmer went there would be a coronation (like when howard took over from IDS) rather than a contest.

[steviewevie]

15 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I don't think Gardner would get on the ballot. I have a feeling if Starmer went there would be a coronation (like when howard took over from IDS) rather than a contest.

for who? I can't see it. Labour such a broad coalition...socialist campaign group would want someone in there...and the right of party would also (Reeves?)...and then there's everyone else.

Edited May 11, 2022 by steviewevie

[steviewevie]

The Dark Prince:

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/it-is-possible-to-imagine-keir-starmer-in-no-10-but-the-labour-party-now-faces-a-choice-1617778

[pink_triangle]

20 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

for who? I can't see it. Labour such a broad coalition...socialist campaign group would want someone in there...and the right of party would also (Reeves?)...and then there's everyone else.

I think threshold is 20 percent which is now 40 MPs, don't think the socialist group would have the numbers and don't see the vote lending that Abbott and Corbyn needed happening again.

[steviewevie]

10 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I think threshold is 20 percent which is now 40 MPs, don't think the socialist group would have the numbers and don't see the vote lending that Abbott and Corbyn needed happening again.

yeah, true

[Kurosagi]

18 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

The Dark Prince:

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/it-is-possible-to-imagine-keir-starmer-in-no-10-but-the-labour-party-now-faces-a-choice-1617778

Any chance of giving a brief summary.

Their cookie box is one of the worst I've ever seen, there is no 'reject all' button which means you have to manually unclick almost 100 vendors that are selected by default. They can go fuck themselves.

[lost]

New statesman too I would of thought they were pretty much Starmer territory:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/westminster/2022/05/leader-keir-starmer-is-under-pressure

 

[lost]

27 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

Any chance of giving a brief summary.

Their cookie box is one of the worst I've ever seen, there is no 'reject all' button which means you have to manually unclick almost 100 vendors that are selected by default. They can go fuck themselves.

Both say the same thing he doesn't really have a vision/policies. Feel a bit sorry for him to be honest. Next general election could be 2025, and I guess he hasn't a clue what he's going to inherit, I'd be more worried about a politician saying "we will definitely be doing this and this" 

Edited May 11, 2022 by lost

[Kurosagi]

5 minutes ago, lost said:

Both say the same thing he doesn't really have a vision/policies.

Oh, I see.

Thanks.

[steviewevie]

39 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

Any chance of giving a brief summary.

Their cookie box is one of the worst I've ever seen, there is no 'reject all' button which means you have to manually unclick almost 100 vendors that are selected by default. They can go fuck themselves.

Projecting from last week’s seven million votes cast in the local elections, experts suggest we get a “national equivalent” win by Labour over the Conservatives of 35 per cent to 33 per cent. In a general election, this would mean a hung parliament. But arithmetic does not determine the outcome of elections – political dynamic does and this is flowing in Labour’s direction.

From a point when Labour’s then leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was never going to be elected Britain’s prime minister, it is now possible to imagine Keir Starmer being in No 10 and my reading of Britain’s political dynamic is that a Labour-led government is now the most likely outcome of the next general election.

This does not mean that Labour is home and dry and without doubt the Tory election machine and its newspaper supporters will throw any amount of mud to stop this happening, as we are seeing in the confected storm of Starmer’s Indian takeaway in Durham.

But for the dynamic to switch back to the Conservatives, they would need to replace Boris Johnson with someone the public could believe in (or just believe, given his propensity to lie) and they would need to equip themselves with a sense of purpose and consistent direction that Johnson has never given them.

“Get Brexit done” was an effective campaign slogan but, in itself, was never going to become a chock-full governing agenda. “Levelling up” was nearer the mark but Johnson simply does not have the concentration or even, it seems, deep enough interest to follow through.

Johnson is at heart not a policymaker but a journalist who lives by stories. To him, a policy is a media announcement and an accompanying photo opportunity. Government is the boring stuff, full of awkward choices and difficult decisions that might leave some Tory MPs unhappy. Given their faltering support, Johnson is not taking risks.

So, in principle, “continuation Johnson” is good news for Labour as he lurches from week to week, with no blueprint or clear vision for Britain’s future and little idea how we are going to earn our living in the decades to come.

 

In these circumstances, how much detail should Labour put into a blueprint of their own between now and the election? There are two Labour schools of thought about this.

One is “steady as you go”, let tumbling trade, inflation and the cost-of-living crisis take their toll on Tory fortunes, and don’t risk sparking controversy on difficult policy questions that would focus attention on internal party divisions.

After four election defeats in the 1990s, this was the stance of Labour’s then leader, John Smith, and is now being voiced by those around Starmer who, rightly, are determined to win back Labour’s former “Red Wall” voters. These voters, it is argued, will never support a divided party and in any case it is not detailed policy but Labour’s “identity” and “cultural” connection that worries them – so more flag waving required.

The alternative involves a whole lot more drilling down and carrying the risk that it might disappoint: work out a compelling diagnosis of the country’s ills (and opportunities) and offer a coherent plan to stave off further national decline. This would provide a lens through which both the main parties’ policies can be assessed and judged by voters.

It is essentially what Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and New Labour did before the 1997 election. For this reason alone, it might put off those who believe that you cannot fight a future election on an old model even if it did produce the biggest landslide in Labour’s history.

Whether Labour opts for “safety first” or the more radical approach, Team Starmer will need something substantial to say when the election comes or risk being blown off the pitch. Politics is about ideas and while the policies that won Labour its victory in 1997 would not be the same now, there are perennial concepts which must be to the fore of any successful campaign: the future not the past, leadership not drift and for the many not the few.

Why a fifth term Tory government will not provide these things may seem obvious, particularly under its present leader, but Labour still has to explain why its offer is the better bet.