Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    British people aren't marxist socialists. We get by on merit and hard work, not other peoples money.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PoorBastward)
    British people aren't marxist socialists. We get by on merit and hard work, not other peoples money.
    This is probably a big factor for why Labour lost. They used to be the party of workers and work, but they have successfully gained the image of the work shy, while the tories have gained the image of being for people that work. Labour will never get anywhere unless they change this image, right now they are just the ethnic, students and middle class women party by the looks of things, and this is coming from somebody that voted for them.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacktrex)
    This is probably a big factor for why Labour lost. They used to be the party of workers and work, but they have successfully gained the image of the work shy, while the tories have gained the image of being for people that work. Labour will never get anywhere unless they change this image, right now they are just the ethnic, students and middle class women party by the looks of things, and this is coming from somebody that voted for them.
    Hear, hear.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Koolio)
    Even if Labour got half the Scottish votes, they would be no way near a majority. Losses in England were the key, especially in marginal seats. Can't blame the SNP, they did their job. Labour failed to do theirs.
    I think actually something that doesn't get mentioned is that most of the south west went lib dem to the Tories, therefore shoring up the Tories position.

    Its not really labours fault because they have no presence there so had no chance of taking those seats, but it was a relativeley big factor in how many seats the conservatives won.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Koolio)
    Labour lost due to:

    1) A fantastic, carefully calculated smear campaign by the Tories.
    2) An overwhelming majority of the newspapers pursuing a vitriolic campaign against the Labour Party. (Murdoch doing what he does best)
    3) Loss of working class votes as result of the scare tactics by the Tories and the media.

    Reason's why it's Labour's fault:
    1) No clear direction. Ed said he wanted to end centre-left legacy of the Labour Party, yet Labour agreed to further austerity. Made true socialists very angry switching to Green.
    2) They got a bit too brave against the wealthy elite. Mansion Tax, Non-dom rule being abolished, 50p tax rate.

    But I think the key reason Labour lost is that they did not defend their previous records in government enough. I have no doubt that a huge amount of working class people were duped into voting Conservative due the myth of "Labour wrecked the economy". A ridiculous amount of people believed Labour caused the global financial crisis, just look at that question time audience. Ed Miliband should have done his utmost best to get rid of the myth that Labour single handedly wrecked the economy.

    The furthest Ed Miliband went was "we gave the banks too much freedom". Should have elaborated more, praised Gordon Brown for the bailout like Paul Krugman did. He should have also challenged criticism of Labour's government spending (Which the Tories backed until 2008). Ed Miliband failed to challenge the delusion austerity. The electorate was conned into thinking thats the only way for economic prosperity. Tories tricked the electorate into thinking "balanced books = good economy". Nonsense. Economics is more than balanced books, and running a budget deficit for the welfare of the citizens is a normal thing to do. Tories are living in cuckoo land if they think they'll eliminate the budget deficit.
    Ed Miliband himself - he simply wasn't a good enough leader. He was a leader who was coached and coached, and his coaching began to become clearer when it neared polling day. People didn't think he was strong enough, a 'north-London nerd' against some of the biggest banks, Putin and the all important red Nuclear Button.

    The Scottish Referendum. It caused a surge towards the SNP and meant electoral wipeout for him in Scotland - and of course a weaker overall chance of governing. The possible arrangement of the SNP with Labour - the majority of the population in England and Wales were concerned about it.

    Their attack on the elite, banks and businesses.

    The stronger economy, and the previous weak Labour one. People didn't have faith in a Labour government, particularly with Balls and Miliband.

    More people in jobs, the hypocrisy revealed for NHS privatisation and also the support for zero hours contracts.

    The campaign which focused on food banks. People realised you cannot elect a new government because of one major failure. Labour's attack on business and banks would mean fewer jobs, and more people using food banks - so they've cut off their nose to spite their face.

    The collapse of the Lib Dems. The majority of their seats had the Conservatives at second place, so it was near impossible to make lots of gains from them when the Conservatives were in the best position to do so.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    In England and Wales, they couldn't compete on the economy. In Scotland, they couldn't compete against nationalism.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rubyx)
    I completely agree and I am ashamed of this country for allowing the Tory's to win an outright majority.
    Take a look at the BBC's map of turnout (near the bottom).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32624405

    It looks like turnout in traditionally Labour strongholds (Tyneside, Merseyside, Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, South Wales, East London) was generally much lower than the turnout in Scotland and in Conservative areas. If (and this is speculation) the Labour turnout was low everywhere and the Conservative turnout was high everywhere, then it suggests that a higher Labour turnout could have taken many marginal English seats - perhaps enough to beat the Tories. In which case the non-voters have themselves to blame for Labour's loss.

    Of course, this could all be nonsense and the pattern could be for a completely different reason. It's worth thinking about though, don't you think?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Failed to articulate their message.

    In many ways, I don't think the leadership actually knew what their message was.

    The tories have been so incompetent that crushing them should have been like shooting into an empty goal, but for some reason, miliband and co refused to take the kick.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think it is a massive shame that Labour lost, and this election has really shook up British Politics. I also feel that many people didn't vote Labour as they didn't take Ed Miliband seriously, the media really did not take a liking to him over the campaign making him seem foolish and not a good leader (making people believe his brother could do better). Many swing votes from Labour to other parties may have been tactical, in the hopes that they might change the leadership of the party (and they have succeeded). A good point made to me was that the scaremongering of 'Vote Labour and you get Alex Salmond' by the Conservatives would have really caused those people who perhaps were 'offended' by Scotland's nationalism to become afraid of voting Labour in case it did happen. Overall, I can say I think we may have a rocky road ahead of us with 5 years of a majority Conservative government.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Have read all that folk have said and totally agree, that the majority of it was the stance Labour took, when it should have been acted on people's concerns, like the referendum (if refusing from threat of businesses leaving, it is clearly profit over people and cannot dispute the overwhelming number of support for reform or exit in the European Elections) as the issue was addressed as a referendum being an out vote instead of a vote to have your democratic say (where campaigns for why we should/not remain should wait till then) , like the concerns with SNP, like tackling the over-spending issue in QT that you could even hear a penny drop, like arguing moot points like jobs and the economy - is why this election has not been like elections of the past - having SNP to deal with and UKIP, which has working class people vote for them and taking votes off Labour, should have paid attention more.

    Now is to see what is to come of the next 5yrs and hopefully some of the issues and mistakes made are learnt and taken onboard, as we now await whose to replace Milliband and Clegg
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think the election was rigged because otherwise the exit poll would have been very different
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    So glad that Ed. Balls will not be a contender for the leadership. I wonder if Diane Abbott will throw her hat into the ring?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by swagyolo420)
    Scotland


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Even if Labour won all 59 seats in Scotland. You would have needed a further 35 seats, in order to reach a majority. So really, Labour didn't campaign effectively enough in England in order to win a majority of English seats.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    "Labour in England was fighting a campaign about fairness, less austerity and the NHS. But the SNP surge made the debate exactly about what Cameron said it was: who can form a non-chaotic and legitimate government of the UK. " - http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason...win-worse/3671 That is also a good article on how much trouble labour are in.

    I also think there message was confused and lacked conviction. Labour did poorly in opposition in terms of attacking the Tories on the economy, they failed to combat all the Tory narratives like labour spent too much (they were busy fighting over who should be leader), or caused the recession. Failed to point out thinks like Osborne created more debt etc. They did worse, they legitimized the Tories position by voting with them all the time.

    They then adopted austerity lite, but if you believe the Tory message of austerity is needed to save the economy why would you not vote for the party all about austerity you can trust will do it?

    (Original post by SausageMan)
    Even if Labour won all 59 seats in Scotland. You would have needed a further 35 seats, in order to reach a majority. So really, Labour didn't campaign effectively enough in England in order to win a majority of English seats.
    I'm not attacking the SNP but I think the fear of a Labour government working with the SNP moved voters away from labour in England. Unfortunately.

    You are correct in that a SNP MP is still an anti Tory MP and SNP took seats from lib dems so from that perspective it didn't harm labour. Probably helped them. The thing is the english, epseically in the south and countryside, are not as susceptible to openly center left policies.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by B_mk)
    I think Labour lost for a few reasons;

    1) They failed to restore trust that they had lost since the Blair/Brown financial crisis. Once Ed Milliband said that the last Labour government didn't overspend, people started to realise that Labour could not be trusted with the economy. Far too left-wing, with no reasonable plan to cut our deficit and our debt.
    I've said it a million times but your view is hysterical. Labour were pro austerity, they voted with the Tories on it whilst in opposition. They were hardly left wing. The last labour government overspending is really up to debate as to whether that is a fair analysis or not. What labour failed to do was combat the narratives you are describing.

    (Original post by meenu89)
    So glad that Ed. Balls will not be a contender for the leadership. I wonder if Diane Abbott will throw her hat into the ring?
    To be honest no edd balls will probably help labour.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    l think you'll find Labour became a very screwed up twisted party, didn't even recognise themselves anymore and seamed to forget what they used to stand for. voted with the Tories on cutting billions from austerity and then sat and told bare faced lies that they did no such thing.

    Scotland seen through it l'm afraid and voted SNP
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zürich)
    No, low skilled immigration drives down wages. That is basic labour economics and there's no getting away from that. The Labour party, if it actually cares about working class living standards, ought to have been fighting tooth and nail against mass immigration, but they did not. It's a worrying sign when the ''party of the working class'' and big corporations who hire low skilled labour are 100% alligned on immigration policy. Alarm bells ought to be ringing here for Labour types but of course they support mass immigration because a)they know minorities vote Labour and b)they think it's morally unacceptable to be anti-immigration.

    That's just one high profile example. Working class people are fully aware that the Labour party would be leading marches through the streets if it was Asian kids being abused like that. Btw of course most pedos are white, this country is about 90% white. But a)Asian men commit vastly disproportionate numbers of these acts b) they are targeting white girls, which is a racist attack in addition and c)the media and powers that be systematically covered these incidents up for PC reasons. So the difference to run of the mill pedos is quite apparent. I trust that if racist skinheads were roaming the streets beating up minorites, and were then covered for by an apologist media, police and government you wouldnt try to claim these incidents were no different to general GBH crime...

    There are actually hundreds of examples of this PC nonsense. The Labour party are run by a bunch of upper-middle class windbags living in £3m mansions in Hampstead hosting dinner parties discussing how fun 1968 was. They cant understand why some gadgie from Bradford is annoyed about immigration when their Hungarian nanny is so wonderful(and cheap...) and when all those lovely Iranian restaurants in Crouch End are so fun and exiting. They are simply not in tune with the aspirations and experiences of the working class any more.
    You my friend are nothing but a massive bigot trying to stand up for working class people but with scaremongering tactics used by UKIP...
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    l'm glad Labour have been exterminated in Scotland and the one who remained, remained by the skin of his teeth.. His leaflets contained nothing about Miliband or Murphy he stripped anything to do with that lot from his leaflets and made them all about himself. He won but not by much. SNP campaigners will beat him next time.. lol He won't have a seat for much longer.. So l suggest he makes the most of it while he can.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jacktrex)
    This is probably a big factor for why Labour lost. They used to be the party of workers and work, but they have successfully gained the image of the work shy, while the tories have gained the image of being for people that work. Labour will never get anywhere unless they change this image, right now they are just the ethnic, students and middle class women party by the looks of things, and this is coming from somebody that voted for them.
    Not anymore. in Scotland they have earned the nickname Red Tories.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Ed Miliband kept referring to his supporters as "friends". He should have called them "comrades".
 
 
 

3,368

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should universities take a stronger line on drugs?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.