The Commons Bar Mk IX - MHoC Chat Thread Watch

This discussion is closed.
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8301
Report 4 years ago
#8301
(Original post by KingStannis)
Thank God Harman isn't the actual labour leader. Would be terrible in the commons.
Agreed, but I struggle to believe the permanent selection is going to be any better. Labour as a party is determined to continually stick a middle finger up to its routes and as long as it keeps this up it's in terrible trouble.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8302
Report 4 years ago
#8302
(Original post by Green_Pink)
Agreed, but I struggle to believe the permanent selection is going to be any better. Labour as a party is determined to continually stick a middle finger up to its routes and as long as it keeps this up it's in terrible trouble.
What makes you think going back to it's routes will bring it glory when England has not voted properly left since 74 (Indeed the Tories narrowly got the English vote even in 05).

One of the strengths that Labour has/has had over the past 20 years is that they are considerably less marmite than the Tories or Ukip and therefore are probably more likely to be able to produce a large swing than if the Tories needed one. Moving to the left would in all likelyhood force a polarisation that they are not guaranteed to win.

Statistically though, they will fail to get a majority in 2020 without the 4th largest gain since at least 1945.
0
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8303
Report 4 years ago
#8303
(Original post by Green_Pink)
Agreed, but I struggle to believe the permanent selection is going to be any better. Labour as a party is determined to continually stick a middle finger up to its routes and as long as it keeps this up it's in terrible trouble.
You sound far too far left to be a liberal tbh.

We have to move away from the identity politics and extremism which stopped labour getting elected for 18 YEARS on the trot. Those people will tactically vote labour, while we also need to pick up the middle class vote. The working class is smaller than ever now. We need to appeal to the under paid professional class.
0
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8304
Report 4 years ago
#8304
When people say "labour" and "roots" in the same sentence i let out an involuntary eye roll.
0
Airmed
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8305
Report 4 years ago
#8305
Guys, no more medication for me! I CAN DRINK ALCOHOL AGAIN!

First round on me, of course.
0
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8306
Report 4 years ago
#8306
(Original post by CescaD96)
Guys, no more medication for me! I CAN DRINK ALCOHOL AGAIN!

First round on me, of course.
grats, you getting better then?
0
Airmed
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8307
Report 4 years ago
#8307
(Original post by KingStannis)
grats, you getting better then?
Well, yes and no. I have an official diagnosis so I know what's wrong with me. Just a crap load of therapy now. What would you like to drink?
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8308
Report 4 years ago
#8308
(Original post by Rakas21)
What makes you think going back to it's routes will bring it glory when England has not voted properly left since 74 (Indeed the Tories narrowly got the English vote even in 05).

One of the strengths that Labour has/has had over the past 20 years is that they are considerably less marmite than the Tories or Ukip and therefore are probably more likely to be able to produce a large swing than if the Tories needed one. Moving to the left would in all likelyhood force a polarisation that they are not guaranteed to win.
The problem for me is that in the Blair years - the ones widely seen within the party still as a success - Labour lost five million voters. In 1997 they did well because the Tories were in an awful position meaning middle England was prepared to back a moderate, reforming Labour leader in Blair, and the working class vote remained loyal to them and willing to give him a chance. What the party still fails to understand is that these people have not suddenly voted Tory - they have stopped voting at all, gone to UKIP, or ended up with the Greens via the Liberal Democrats. Labour can try as much as they like to appeal to Aspirational People or whatever we're calling them this year, but there's two massive issues with that. The first is that it isn't going to win back the millions of people who no longer vote for them because they feel unrepresented and because the party has sacrificed sensible and popular policies for meaningless rhetoric. The second is that however much Labour try and appeal to this demographic, any competent Tory leader is going to attract most of their votes - if you believe we should cut taxes for the comparatively well-off, concentrate more on helping businesses than helping workers, and attack welfare claimants as scroungers rather than help and defend them as victims of our economic failure, you are far more likely to vote for a Cameron, Boris or Osborn than a Miliband, Burnham or Kendall.

The strategy, at the end of the day, relies on sacrificing natural Labour votes to desperately try and win natural Tory ones. Cameron has a much better plan - concentrate on appealing to the one in four adults he needs to convince to win the election, and don't care or listen to in the slightest the three-quarters who range from ambivalent to massively opposed. Labour don't need to swing Tory voters, or make everyone love them - they need to make left-leaning, working and lower-middle class voters love them enough to get out and vote.

That being said, the monumental failures in the party over the last 20 years will be difficult to reverse. The party needs for a start to internally resign itself to the fact that a majority in 2020 isn't happening, work to change public opinion on a deal between themselves and the SNP, and adopt a much more long-term approach to win back trust.

(Original post by KingStannis)
You sound far too far left to be a liberal tbh.

We have to move away from the identity politics and extremism which stopped labour getting elected for 18 YEARS on the trot. Those people will tactically vote labour, while we also need to pick up the middle class vote. The working class is smaller than ever now. We need to appeal to the under paid professional class.
I'm sure your opinion there will be different once we've worked together for a term

Extremism? What extremism? The problem with Miliband was mostly that he managed to let everyone in the middle be convinced he was an extremist whilst not actually having any solid policies to appeal to his natural demographic. And these people are quite categorically not voting Labour, that's the whole problem. They're staying at home, voting UKIP and voting Green. Left-leaning policies such as nationalising the railways, increasing the minimum wage and defending local communities would appeal to young professionals as well as the traditional left whilst not costing somewhere between nothing and very little.
1
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8309
Report 4 years ago
#8309
(Original post by Green_Pink)
The problem for me is that in the Blair years - the ones widely seen within the party still as a success - Labour lost five million voters. In 1997 they did well because the Tories were in an awful position meaning middle England was prepared to back a moderate, reforming Labour leader in Blair, and the working class vote remained loyal to them and willing to give him a chance. What the party still fails to understand is that these people have not suddenly voted Tory - they have stopped voting at all, gone to UKIP, or ended up with the Greens via the Liberal Democrats. Labour can try as much as they like to appeal to Aspirational People or whatever we're calling them this year, but there's two massive issues with that. The first is that it isn't going to win back the millions of people who no longer vote for them because they feel unrepresented and because the party has sacrificed sensible and popular policies for meaningless rhetoric. The second is that however much Labour try and appeal to this demographic, any competent Tory leader is going to attract most of their votes - if you believe we should cut taxes for the comparatively well-off, concentrate more on helping businesses than helping workers, and attack welfare claimants as scroungers rather than help and defend them as victims of our economic failure, you are far more likely to vote for a Cameron, Boris or Osborn than a Miliband, Burnham or Kendall.

The strategy, at the end of the day, relies on sacrificing natural Labour votes to desperately try and win natural Tory ones. Cameron has a much better plan - concentrate on appealing to the one in four adults he needs to convince to win the election, and don't care or listen to in the slightest the three-quarters who range from ambivalent to massively opposed. Labour don't need to swing Tory voters, or make everyone love them - they need to make left-leaning, working and lower-middle class voters love them enough to get out and vote.

That being said, the monumental failures in the party over the last 20 years will be difficult to reverse. The party needs for a start to internally resign itself to the fact that a majority in 2020 isn't happening, work to change public opinion on a deal between themselves and the SNP, and adopt a much more long-term approach to win back trust.



I'm sure your opinion there will be different once we've worked together for a term

Extremism? What extremism? The problem with Miliband was mostly that he managed to let everyone in the middle be convinced he was an extremist whilst not actually having any solid policies to appeal to his natural demographic. And these people are quite categorically not voting Labour, that's the whole problem. They're staying at home, voting UKIP and voting Green. Left-leaning policies such as nationalising the railways, increasing the minimum wage and defending local communities would appeal to young professionals as well as the traditional left whilst not costing somewhere between nothing and very little.
I wouldn't say the 5m lost votes is really that relevant, after all, in 97 they gained 5, lost 3 of them in 01 and they could only go down in 10, it's too be expected. Ask they did was go from unusually high levels (for any party) to normal levels

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8310
Report 4 years ago
#8310
(Original post by CescaD96)
Well, yes and no. I have an official diagnosis so I know what's wrong with me. Just a crap load of therapy now. What would you like to drink?
I don't do this pretend drink thing. If i get drunk i do it for reals, as you well know.
0
Airmed
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8311
Report 4 years ago
#8311
(Original post by KingStannis)
I don't do this pretend drink thing. If i get drunk i do it for reals, as you well know.

It's DPMQs tonight, perfect opportunity!
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8312
Report 4 years ago
#8312
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
I wouldn't say the 5m lost votes is really that relevant, after all, in 97 they gained 5, lost 3 of them in 01 and they could only go down in 10, it's too be expected. Ask they did was go from unusually high levels (for any party) to normal levels

Posted from TSR Mobile
Their on historically low levels now as they were in 2010. The big question is which group of voters is more winnable - those who now vote Tory, have done in most elections and only went for Blair a couple of times with the Tories in meltdown, or those who despise the Tories but are so uninspired they now don't vote for Labour either.
0
meenu89
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8313
Report 4 years ago
#8313
(Original post by KingStannis)
Thank God Harman isn't the actual labour leader. Would be terrible in the commons.
When Ed. Miliband resigned, someone tweeted 'I'm not sure what the solution is, but it 100% isn't Harman.'
0
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8314
Report 4 years ago
#8314
(Original post by Green_Pink)
The problem for me is that in the Blair years - the ones widely seen within the party still as a success - Labour lost five million voters. In 1997 they did well because the Tories were in an awful position meaning middle England was prepared to back a moderate, reforming Labour leader in Blair, and the working class vote remained loyal to them and willing to give him a chance. What the party still fails to understand is that these people have not suddenly voted Tory - they have stopped voting at all, gone to UKIP, or ended up with the Greens via the Liberal Democrats. Labour can try as much as they like to appeal to Aspirational People or whatever we're calling them this year, but there's two massive issues with that. The first is that it isn't going to win back the millions of people who no longer vote for them because they feel unrepresented and because the party has sacrificed sensible and popular policies for meaningless rhetoric. The second is that however much Labour try and appeal to this demographic, any competent Tory leader is going to attract most of their votes - if you believe we should cut taxes for the comparatively well-off, concentrate more on helping businesses than helping workers, and attack welfare claimants as scroungers rather than help and defend them as victims of our economic failure, you are far more likely to vote for a Cameron, Boris or Osborn than a Miliband, Burnham or Kendall.

The strategy, at the end of the day, relies on sacrificing natural Labour votes to desperately try and win natural Tory ones. Cameron has a much better plan - concentrate on appealing to the one in four adults he needs to convince to win the election, and don't care or listen to in the slightest the three-quarters who range from ambivalent to massively opposed. Labour don't need to swing Tory voters, or make everyone love them - they need to make left-leaning, working and lower-middle class voters love them enough to get out and vote.

That being said, the monumental failures in the party over the last 20 years will be difficult to reverse. The party needs for a start to internally resign itself to the fact that a majority in 2020 isn't happening, work to change public opinion on a deal between themselves and the SNP, and adopt a much more long-term approach to win back trust.



I'm sure your opinion there will be different once we've worked together for a term

Extremism? What extremism? The problem with Miliband was mostly that he managed to let everyone in the middle be convinced he was an extremist whilst not actually having any solid policies to appeal to his natural demographic. And these people are quite categorically not voting Labour, that's the whole problem. They're staying at home, voting UKIP and voting Green. Left-leaning policies such as nationalising the railways, increasing the minimum wage and defending local communities would appeal to young professionals as well as the traditional left whilst not costing somewhere between nothing and very little.
Yeah, meesage me when you have ideas about that.

Labour are in a crisis. Being the old fashioned party of the left gains what, 120 seats when you exclude Scotland? Not to mention the last time they were that left they destroyed the country, which is the moral case of not going too left.

Ed Milliaband was on the edge to be fair. Labour Party rhetoric was atrocious for 5 years.

I predict a seepage from UKIP and the Greens. The door has been slammed shut on multi party politics (thank you so much fptp) and people will tactically vote labour again.

What you're not factoring in is that we no longer live in an indusytrial economy. Even if we secure every single working class vote, it's not enough.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8315
Report 4 years ago
#8315
(Original post by Green_Pink)
Their on historically low levels now as they were in 2010. The big question is which group of voters is more winnable - those who now vote Tory, have done in most elections and only went for Blair a couple of times with the Tories in meltdown, or those who despise the Tories but are so uninspired they now don't vote for Labour either.
Neither
Labour is dying
Either goes left and loses votes, or goes right and loses money and votes

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8316
Report 4 years ago
#8316
(Original post by KingStannis)
Yeah, meesage me when you have ideas about that.

Labour are in a crisis. Being the old fashioned party of the left gains what, 120 seats when you exclude Scotland? Not to mention the last time they were that left they destroyed the country, which is the moral case of not going too left.

Ed Milliaband was on the edge to be fair. Labour Party rhetoric was atrocious for 5 years.

I predict a seepage from UKIP and the Greens. The door has been slammed shut on multi party politics (thank you so much fptp) and people will tactically vote labour again.

What you're not factoring in is that we no longer live in an indusytrial economy. Even if we secure every single working class vote, it's not enough.
That's exactly what we heard in 2010. Oh, after this, people won't vote for the Lib Dems again, they'll all come home to Labour and we'll win 40% of the vote. For a while in 2012 or so that looked possible. Then they all went off elsewhere again and that was the end of that. You can't rely on people tactically voting for the lesser of two evils, the consistently bad turnouts show they simply won't. You need to actually inspire them and show them how you're going to make their lives better. It isn't that difficult. I read Labour's manifesto, and I thought about it from my perspective (a young student) and those of my parents (one working part time on a low wage in a ****ty job, the other long-term unemployed). There was sod all in there that would actually improve our lives one iota. Unsurprisingly, not a single one of us voted for Labour despite all being strongly opposed to the Tory government. Industry may be smaller, but on the other hand you have a huge pool of students, unemployed people, and those in low paid, insecure service sector jobs in addition to the public sector and trade unionists and liberal young professionals. Those who want to aspire but for whom a comfy £40k a year job and their own home is more of a distant dream than a realistic goal.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8317
Report 4 years ago
#8317
Was amused to read that the BBC news chief claims that the Tory win proves the beeb doesn't have s left bias. Well, he would fit in perfectly in the SNP: thinks himself far more important and influential than they actually are.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8318
Report 4 years ago
#8318
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Neither
Labour is dying
Either goes left and loses votes, or goes right and loses money and votes

Posted from TSR Mobile
If Labour goes right, they're doomed. As before, why the **** would a centre-right voter support them over the Tories unless the Tories really, really **** things up? If they go left, I don't see why they can't attract the support of a lot of UKIP supporters and non-voters that could take them ahead of the Tory party. And I honestly don't believe those in the centre ground who voted Labour (not many to begin with) would be put off by a light dose of liberal leftism. We're not talking Stalin here.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8319
Report 4 years ago
#8319
(Original post by Green_Pink)
If Labour goes right, they're doomed. As before, why the **** would a centre-right voter support them over the Tories unless the Tories really, really **** things up? If they go left, I don't see why they can't attract the support of a lot of UKIP supporters and non-voters that could take them ahead of the Tory party. And I honestly don't believe those in the centre ground who voted Labour (not many to begin with) would be put off by a light dose of liberal leftism. We're not talking Stalin here.
According to yougov, the party is roughly split half and half between going left and right.
Go right and they lose some to the greens, some to lib deem and some to the Tories and give the Tories a load of seats through split support
Go left and they have a load leave to the Tories, UKIP and the lib dems, bolstering Tory support and losing their own support and lose the marginals.
Stay where they are and the floating voters will shift to the Tories
Their only hope is to somehow take out the SNP again without lurching left. I.e. they're screwed until the next 1997.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8320
Report 4 years ago
#8320
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
According to yougov, the party is roughly split half and half between going left and right.
Go right and they lose some to the greens, some to lib deem and some to the Tories and give the Tories a load of seats through split support
Go left and they have a load leave to the Tories, UKIP and the lib dems, bolstering Tory support and losing their own support and lose the marginals.
Stay where they are and the floating voters will shift to the Tories
Their only hope is to somehow take out the SNP again without lurching left. I.e. they're screwed until the next 1997.

Posted from TSR Mobile
They don't need to take out the SNP. They should completely, totally ignore them, don't spend a penny on trying to win back Scotland. Concentrate on getting the vote out to beat the Tories in a few key English seats, be more open and honest and then invite the SNP to vote them down if it's a hung parliament in 2020. The SNP won't want to be seen to let the Tories back in.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (102)
24%
No (323)
76%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed