UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80

How do you intend to vote in the 2019 General Election if eligible?

  • Brexit Party

    Votes: 30 4.3%
  • Conservatives

    Votes: 73 10.6%
  • DUP

    Votes: 5 0.7%
  • Green

    Votes: 23 3.3%
  • Labour

    Votes: 355 51.4%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 58 8.4%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 3 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 9 1.3%
  • SNP

    Votes: 19 2.8%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 6 0.9%
  • Independent

    Votes: 1 0.1%
  • Other (BNP, Change UK, UUP and anyone else that I have forgotten)

    Votes: 10 1.4%
  • Not voting

    Votes: 57 8.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 41 5.9%

  • Total voters
    690
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Read an analysis on push notifications sent by the 10 major newspapers since 6 November. Tory was 18% positive and Labour 57% negative. Most people probably just read the headlines and are driven by fear and hatred and a bit of tribal nationalism is the only thing that gives some meaning to their shitty loveless lives.

Hasn’t Murdoch backed every single winner of an election in decades?

They reflect the national viewpoint as much as they influence it. People were against Corbyn and Labour far more than they were pro-Conservative, regardless of the media. Elections in the last few decades have had fairly obvious winners.

Siding with Boris was an easy choice. Just as it was to side with Blair against a tired John Major led Tory party, to go against an incompetent Gordon Brown, Ed Miliband (who?) and especially Corbyn.
 
Weeeell. Someone posted the data on the age divide earlier. It showed that in the 18-45 range, Conservatives are doing TERRIBLY. Similarly, in the US, if you cap the voting age at say, 50 (I do not support any sort of age cap in practice, this is just a theoretical exercise), Hillary Clinton would have wiped the floor with Trump.

So to keep doing the same thing would be insane for Labour - in the short term. In the long term, the Tories will have to stop doing the same thing over and over and will have to evolve because it's increasingly obvious, that just like the Republicans over there, or Fidesz here in my personal shithole, they have very little appeal to the next generations. I've only seen American studies on the issue but Generation Z, many of whom are yet to become of voting age, seems to be even more left-leaning than Millennials.

It's a huge, and as far as I'm aware, unprecedented age divide, and it's global.

I am sure someone else can look up trends - but my assumption would be that as you get older and more affluent you change your voting patterns (who would have thought). It’s not just a case of waiting until all the Tories die off...

I expect there are a large proportion of people who voted for Harold Wilson who now vote Tory.
 
And more importantly, to all the analysers here: all of this is not specific to the UK!

Sure, other countries don't have Brexit but the divide is similar, the issues are similar. Young people facing an increasingly difficult future don't believe the assertion that just more privatisation, more economic liberalisation will somehow solve the problems it caused in the first place. Most of them do not believe that immigrants and the international Jewish conspiracy are to blame.

Older voters, voters in rural communities or in traditional industries want to at the very least stop the clock, and preferably turn it back. This is happening EVERYWHERE. It's not about Johnson, it's not about Corbyn, it's not even about Trump.

And everywhere, the Left has a harder job than the Right. Being on the right is easy: lower taxes, more deregulation, more redistribution of wealth to the top. How you'll pay for that? By keeping immigrants out and by cutting off those leeches on benefits. Boom, done. Easy. It will trickle down eventually, we promise!

It's also easier to appeal to authoritarians (hence the Cult of the Leader). It's also a lot easier to keep an authoritarian movement in check - because they see obedience to a leader as a value, because it's easy to appeal to national pride, and shit like that. It's a lot harder to keep the left together as it encompasses from liberals who do view solidarity as a value (and therefore aren't hardcore ECONOMIC liberals) to anarchists, and is filled with people who are suspicious of authority and LOVE to debate and dislike compromising on ideals.

Great post
 
So we sit and wait.

Forgetting that as the old die out, the young get old and the cycle is likely to keep repeating. I don't think it's that simple, it's like those saying it's ok because Boris will screw brexit and Labour will get in on the back of that. I just don't think we have all the time to expect these things, in the meantime Labour still need to try imo.
My point is that things which are considered to be "leftist" or "liberal" political positions will just become the norm. Thirty years ago openly and strongly campaigning against, say, gay marriage would have been a very much mainstream conservative position. Today it's MUCH less socially acceptable to say it (in happier countries than mine, at least). Or openly campaigning on behalf of official racial segregation would make any politician unelectable in the UK and probably even the US today - wasn't the case half a century ago.

When it comes to social issues, you can count on conservatives being on the wrong side of history almost without exception. The isolationist-nationalist narrative is likely to go the same way. Eventually, the right will have to reinvent itself, too, it will have to adapt to the times. And in the meantime, all the left can do is make sure they continue to appeal to THEIR core demographics because alienating them is a bigger mistake than anything else.
 
I am sure someone else can look up trends - but my assumption would be that as you get older and more affluent you change your voting patterns (who would have thought). It’s not just a case of waiting until all the Tories die off...

I expect there are a large proportion of people who voted for Harold Wilson who now vote Tory.

Well that's kind of true but you're talking about a generation of people with totally different values to the ones coming up.

They're not going to be become Katie Hopkins as soon as they hit 50.
 
We just had an election, we've seen what the country thinks.

It's funny that people are asserting that centrism is dead hours after the most centrist Tory manifesto arguably ever has just returned a huge majority.

No meaningful tax cuts to individuals, a reversal of intended corporation tax cuts, inflation busting day to day investment in education, health and security; large increases in he minimum wage and greater borrowing to fund capital projects. Not to mention a Brexit policy that sits exactly in the middle of the extremist and undemocratic policies of either revoke or putting remain against remain in a new referendum and Farage's "clean break" no deal. Something that articulates what was widely agreed both by sides going into the referendum (ie leaving means no single market and no customs union but a close trading relationship). Labour even strangely rejected Theresa May's deal which was the closest credible leave option to remaining (for solely political reasons).

The far left confused "far right" with far right of their far left agenda, ie centrist. This is from someone who's disappointed that a genuine right of centre economic agenda (along with a liberal social agenda) was not put forward by any party in the election. It was more spending and taxes vs a monumental amount of more spending and a monumental increase in everyone's taxes to pay for it.
 
My point is that things which are considered to be "leftist" or "liberal" political positions will just become the norm. Thirty years ago openly and strongly campaigning against, say, gay marriage would have been a very much mainstream conservative position. Today it's MUCH less socially acceptable to say it (in happier countries than mine, at least). Or openly campaigning on behalf of official racial segregation would make any politician unelectable in the UK and probably even the US today - wasn't the case half a century ago.

When it comes to social issues, you can count on conservatives being on the wrong side of history almost without exception. The isolationist-nationalist narrative is likely to go the same way. Eventually, the right will have to reinvent itself, too, it will have to adapt to the times. And in the meantime, all the left can do is make sure they continue to appeal to THEIR core demographics because alienating them is a bigger mistake than anything else.

I understand more, thank you mate.

However, I feel you continue to miss what many are actually saying. So I'll try to make it more simple: Why is looking for change the same as losing your core base, in your mind? Why can't we expect Labour to change their leadership process without it destroying the base?

Further to that: Surely you see the pitfalls in the hope that this is just going to all go away and right itself? And if not, how long do you expect this to take?
 
We just had an election, we've seen what the country thinks.

Yes we have - we’ve seen that;

Brexiters largely wanted a Conservative Government

Remainers broadly wanted a Labour Government

>40s broadly wanted a Conservative Government

<30s broadly wanted a Labour Government

People of lower educated, as defined by YouGov (don’t shoot the messenger please!) largely wanted a Conservative or Brexit Party Government

People with college/university educations largely wanted a Labour or Lib Dem Government

People living in major cities broadly wanted a Labour Government

People living in rural areas and smaller communities broadly wanted a Conservative Government

Now, these are facts taken from YouGov’s analysis of the demographics

So my point is - how do you reconcile all of that with the view that Labour have gone totally in the wrong direction and the electorate have given a clear mandate to the Conservatives and Brexit? It’s just simply not true and now 50%+ of the population and most of the people living in our major cities are not represented at all under the FPTP voting system and the current Government
 
Well that's kind of true but you're talking about a generation of people with totally different values to the ones coming up.

They're not going to be become Katie Hopkins as soon as they hit 50.

I don't know, for ages on here people have been showing studies about how people change as they get older. I remember a lot of that talk leading up to the election.

It kind of worries me that all the hope is now on guesswork and expectations. As in brexit going wrong, so Labour will win. The old will die out, and the ones replacing them will not be cons so Labour will get in.
 
Fairly convinced if we had a referendum on proportional representation it would not win.
 
Yes we have - we’ve seen that;

Brexiters largely wanted a Conservative Government

Remainers broadly wanted a Labour Government

>40s broadly wanted a Conservative Government

<30s broadly wanted a Labour Government

People of lower educated, as defined by YouGov (don’t shoot the messenger please!) largely wanted a Conservative or Brexit Party Government

People with college/university educations largely wanted a Labour or Lib Dem Government

People living in major cities broadly wanted a Labour Government

People living in rural areas and smaller communities broadly wanted a Conservative Government

Now, these are facts taken from YouGov’s analysis of the demographics

So my point is - how do you reconcile all of that with the view that Labour have gone totally in the wrong direction and the electorate have given a clear mandate to the Conservatives and Brexit? It’s just simply not true and now 50%+ of the population and most of the people living in our major cities are not represented at all under the FPTP voting system and the current Government

That's a lot of people who want Labour.

That's clearly why they just got humiliated...Maybe, just maybe, there's more to it than polls? I mean if they 100% correct, then where did all these Labour voters go and why?

And now we come full circle :lol:
 
I am sure someone else can look up trends - but my assumption would be that as you get older and more affluent you change your voting patterns (who would have thought). It’s not just a case of waiting until all the Tories die off...

I expect there are a large proportion of people who voted for Harold Wilson who now vote Tory.

Interesting point given the millennial generation is and will continue to be poorer than their parents' generations. One wonder whether that struggle to become more affluent will prevent or delay the shift to the right you speak of.

Plus voting patterns in terms of party affiliation aren't quite the same as shifting to the left/right in general terms given parties also shift too. If younger generations do eventually shift to the Tories then one can only imagine the Tories will also have shifted to the centre (relative to where they are now) during the same time period to reflect the sensibilities of the people they need to attract.
 
Thats a good piece of analysis - you do realise Labour would have won 600 seats based on the votes cast by 18-24 year olds? Yet apparently all I’ve been told by the Twitterati this morning is that Labour voters have rejected “Corbynism” and that we must immediately revert to media-friendly right wing policies to have a hope at the next election

I’m sorry but there’s so much wrong with that I don’t even know where to start.

As I’ve said elsewhere to other posters, I welcome genuine debate but I’ll always resist the kind of simplicity you get from the “experts” on Twitter
I’ve written extensively in this thread about why Labour wouldn’t win this election. If you’re interested you may read those posts. In spite of my better judgement and being against my family interest I voted Labour as well!

The article I shared captured my views. You just dismissed those. Do carry on and resist away.
 
Fairly convinced if we had a referendum on proportional representation it would not win.

I'm increasingly convinced that a referendum on whether the Tories are allowed to ride the poor like horses would be a close run thing.
 
I understand more, thank you mate.

However, I feel you continue to miss what many are actually saying. So I'll try to make it more simple: Why is looking for change the same as losing your core base, in your mind? Why can't we expect Labour to change their leadership process without it destroying the base?

Further to that: Surely you see the pitfalls in the hope that this is just going to all go away and right itself? And if not, how long do you expect this to take?
Looking for change is fine. Just be careful with that change. It has to be more than just "do away with Corbyn". Putting another Blair in charge, for example, might alienate more voters than it would gain. Going too far into self-flagellation mode and throwing the baby out with the bathwater should be avoided. If there are ten major points in your manifesto, don't throw away all ten: prioritise, identify those that are most important, soften the rest, that sort of thing. It's why I dislike the calls for "centrism" because all too often it seems to imply that a leftist agenda is necessarily a bad thing: leftist parties are necessary, they can't just all go to the centre. That's pointless.

I see the pitfalls with the 'wait and see' approach and honestly, I'm pessimistic no matter what. Basically, the Left has to find some magical balance, as described above, and I think that's very difficult in the present and for the foreseeable future. Events outside the control of political parties will probably have a bigger impact on election chances than any strategy.
 
When and if Labour do return to government this really needs to be a priority. FPTP is a joke.
They won't make it a priority because it benefits them as much as it benefits the Tories.

Only hope we have for it is if voters prioritise it to the extent the main parties are forced to consider it in their future manifestos. Unfortunately I don't think the public care enough about it to garner even the slightest bit of lip service from them.
 
Don't understand why there is such disrespect to the older generation here. In general, they probably pay taxes in the highest bands. Without them, there would be a tax wormhole which the young will have to compensate for.
 
Don't understand why there is such disrespect to the older generation here. In general, they probably pay taxes in the highest bands. Without them, there would be a tax wormhole which the young will have to compensate for.
Depends on how you define 'older'. In general, most of them are probably pensioners and don't pay income tax at all. Without them, younger people would have it a lot easier.

I'm not advocating the extermination of old people, before anyone believes so. It's just that this particular argument about taxes is not great.
 
Depends on how you define 'older'. In general, most of them are probably pensioners and don't pay income tax at all. Without them, younger people would have it a lot easier.

I'm not advocating the extermination of old people, before anyone believes so. It's just that this particular argument about taxes is not great.
Sure there are the pensioners, but there's also the people who are in senior positions in the workplace in high tax bands who are there because they've been working 40 years.

Having a 20 year CEO paying taxes at 50% rate to fund a Labour gov is incredibly rare.
 
Looking for change is fine. Just be careful with that change. It has to be more than just "do away with Corbyn". Putting another Blair in charge, for example, might alienate more voters than it would gain. Going too far into self-flagellation mode and throwing the baby out with the bathwater should be avoided. If there are ten major points in your manifesto, don't throw away all ten: prioritise, identify those that are most important, soften the rest, that sort of thing. It's why I dislike the calls for "centrism" because all too often it seems to imply that a leftist agenda is necessarily a bad thing: leftist parties are necessary, they can't just all go to the centre. That's pointless.

I see the pitfalls with the 'wait and see' approach and honestly, I'm pessimistic no matter what. Basically, the Left has to find some magical balance, as described above, and I think that's very difficult in the present and for the foreseeable future. Events outside the control of political parties will probably have a bigger impact on election chances than any strategy.

But you then also see the problem with straight away bringing up Blair, right?

My issue with you guys, isn't what you are saying and what you represent. It's with the failure to take on board what's actually being said, you've been guilty of jumping to extremes of what I've said to you too, now the dust has settled you might even see that. I don't want a centrist as such, I definitely don't want another Blair and I don't want to abandon what Labour 100% should stand for. But what I do want is the party and you guys who defend them to just step out of that bubble and look where the last 15 years of momentum has got us and admit there is now a lot of real hard thinking and changes to be made.

Like it's no crime to suggest the new leader should be a great public speaker and be able to take the fight to the opposition. That doesn't mean giving up your morals and getting nasty. It's no crime to suggest that there should be a plan to tackle the media. That doesn't mean Blair. It's no crime to suggest stuff like the Broadband issue just looks like standard Labour promises (despite being deeper). That doesn't mean we suddenly hate free stuff.

But most of all, I want the excuses to stop. Media, brexit, old voters, we knew all of this years ago. It's simply ridiculous to defend Corbyn and his acolytes on those fronts, when they had so much time to at least get a coherent game plan. That's not giving up on Labour Ideals, that's just pure common sense.
 
On every level Corbynism has been a spectacular failure. Driven by out an out of touch membership that poisoned the well with tone deaf wacky ideas like 'extending freedom of movement' and a campaign that it transpires was run like a 6th form student election.
Clashing egos and 'policy incontinence': inside Labour's campaign
Labour insiders point to lack of strategic focus, leadership confusion, and say Corbyn had all but given up by the final week

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/13/inside-labours-campaign-behind
 
I don't know, for ages on here people have been showing studies about how people change as they get older. I remember a lot of that talk leading up to the election.

It kind of worries me that all the hope is now on guesswork and expectations. As in brexit going wrong, so Labour will win. The old will die out, and the ones replacing them will not be cons so Labour will get in.

I don't necessarily think that but the Conservative party will have to halt it's slide to right if it wants to continue to exist.

Again, this generation hasn't grown up in a country where it was illegal to be a homosexual man or normal to see black people referred to as "wogs" on prime time TV.
 
BBC staff express fear of public distrust after election coverage
Director-general calls accusations of bias ‘conspiracy theories’

'The BBC’s director-general has expressed his exasperation with “conspiracy theories” about the broadcaster’s election news coverage, although some of its journalists privately fear that errors during the campaign may have hit public trust in the corporation.

Tony Hall emailed staff on Friday to thank them for their work on the BBC’s coverage, which has led to the corporation’s political news output coming under intense online scrutiny. This followed criticism of the editing out laughter aimed at Boris Johnson in a news bulletin, reporters uncritically repeating Conservative sources, such as when a Labour activist was erroneously accused of punching a Tory aide, and the prime minister escaping scrutiny after dodging a one-on-one interview with Andrew Neil.

Hall said the BBC’s critics were often seeing bias in what were genuine human errors: “In a frenetic campaign where we’ve produced hundreds of hours of output, of course we’ve made the odd mistake and we’ve held up our hands to them. Editors are making tough calls every minute of the day. But I don’t accept the view of those critics who jump on a handful of examples to suggest we’re somehow biased one way or the other.”

He also suggested social media platforms should find ways to reduce the level of public criticism aimed at journalists, such as BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg: “Elections always put the BBC’s impartiality in the spotlight. Social media offers a megaphone to those who want to attack us and makes this pressure greater than ever. The conspiracy theories that abound are frustrating. And let’s be clear – some of the abuse which is directed at our journalists who are doing their best for audiences day in, day out is sickening. It shouldn’t happen. And I think it’s something social media platforms really need to do more about.”

Despite this, there remain concerns within the corporation’s newsrooms that this election was a tough challenge for a broadcaster that strives for accuracy. More than 30 BBC journalists spoke to the Guardian about the outlet’s coverage in the final days of the campaign, ranging from senior on-air presenters to mid-level producers and recent hires.'

More:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...ar-of-public-distrust-after-election-coverage
I am very very angry with them. They have lost my trust, perhaps forever.

I stopped watching election coverage on BCC perhaps 5 days before election. Even on election night, i only switched over during ads on Sky or for brief interludes.
 
I’ve written extensively in this thread about why Labour wouldn’t win this election. If you’re interested you may read those posts. In spite of my better judgement and being against my family interest I voted Labour as well!

The article I shared captured my views. You just dismissed those. Do carry on and resist away.

Let me ask you this then (as I asked another poster who didn’t answer)

- What should a Labour Government stand for? Who should they represent? How should they represent them?

- Which of Labour’s policies did you have an issue with? What should they have done instead? How would this have been workable? How would this have helped capture the imagination of the electorate?

- Should a Labour Government represent “left-wing” values or should it do/say whatever is necessary to get as many votes as possible? Should the Labour Government move away from policies that are unanimously popular with the younger generations because they are unanimously unpopular with the older generations?

I criticised the article you shared because it didn’t even address any of these questions, let alone attempt to answer them
 
And not only that @Redlambs but perhaps more importantly this generation are not going to grow up with the same advantages of those before it. They will struggle.

So when people say studies show people become more right wing as they age what demographic are they looking at? The baby boomers who want to keep everything they have. Never has a generation been given so much and given back so little.
 
Fairly convinced if we had a referendum on proportional representation it would not win.
Quite possibly, but I think it has a fairly decent one-line slogan to go with it - "Make your vote count", which makes it an easier sell than AV, which people struggled to understand the benefits of and was susceptible to claims it allowed you more than one vote.

Academic anyway because we certainly aren't getting a choice anytime this generation.
 
They aren’t polls...that’s the result!

Sorry, I miss read. My point is unaffected though, or more my question:

Where were the rest of the Labour voters then? What are the figures for those just jumped to the cons/libs/etc or just plain didn't show up?

Because the problem with just sticking to the actual vote, was again, the terrible result. I'm suggesting using that to suggest Labour shouldn't do anything different is even tougher to reconcile.
 
Well that's kind of true but you're talking about a generation of people with totally different values to the ones coming up.

They're not going to be become Katie Hopkins as soon as they hit 50.

FFS mate - no one turns into Katie Hopkins, except Katie Hopkins. You need to drop this, all Tories are racist shit.

it’s one of the reason labour lost.
 
And not only that @Redlambs but perhaps more importantly this generation are not going to grow up with the same advantages of those before it. They will struggle.

So when people say studies show people become more right wing as they age what demographic are they looking at? The baby boomers who want to keep everything they have. Never has a generation been given so much and given back so little.

I know what you are saying, and I do agree with a lot, if not all of it. We are spitballing here and to do that, we need to see the whole picture.

Like, you say this generation won't grow up with the advantages the previous ones have, but how can we be so sure? That relies on brexit being a disaster and the Right going even more extreme. Are both likely to happen? Of course. But is that definite? No.

Sure we have gay marriage and all the rest of it, that's things this and future generation are lucky to have, so it's not been all negative change at all. How do we know though, financially (which is where the right swing comes from), anything will change?
 
That's simply not true. Less than 50% of the electorate voted for Pro Brexit parties.

Well if you take Labour out as they straddled the divide people have voted for Brexit backing parties in hugely greater numbers than remain backing parties.
 
I'd say the Labour party should seperate what it says from what it does. Find some means of letting their core supporters know to ignore the election slogan that doesn't fit them that well. The conservatives will certainly consider privatising the NHS and i'd say a lot of their supporters know it, but they'd never admit it during an election campaign.
 
[
Sorry, I miss read. My point is unaffected though, or more my question:

Where were the rest of the Labour voters then? What are the figures for those just jumped to the cons/libs/etc or just plain didn't show up?

Because the problem with just sticking to the actual vote, was again, the terrible result. I'm suggesting using that to suggest Labour shouldn't do anything different is even tougher to reconcile.

I totally understand and appreciate your point but I’m by no means saying we shouldn’t change anything - I think sometimes when you talk with different people on a forum across a number of fragmented posts some of the points are lost.

My point was that “Corbynism” has been widely condemned this morning by the “told you so” brigade, however, I feel Corbynism represents me and clearly others in my age group/demographic

Now obviously your point is very relevant, because it’s also not representing or not getting through to other demographics

I’m saying we should resist this temptation to try and simplify every narrative to Corbyn good or Corbyn bad, I think we’re all sick of that to be honest! :-)
 
FFS mate - no one turns into Katie Hopkins, except Katie Hopkins. You need to drop this, all Tories are racist shit.

it’s one of the reason labour lost.

Strawman argument. That's not what I'm saying.

I know what you are saying, and I do agree with a lot, if not all of it. We are spitballing here and to do that, we need to see the whole picture.

Like, you say this generation won't grow up with the advantages the previous ones have, but how can we be so sure? That relies on brexit being a disaster and the Right going even more extreme. Are both likely to happen? Of course. But is that definite? No.

Sure we have gay marriage and all the rest of it, that's things this and future generation are lucky to have, so it's not been all negative change at all. How do we know though, financially (which is where the right swing comes from), anything will change?

Irrespective of whether Brexit is good or bad we can be sure now. It's incredibly difficult to get on the housing market. Those that do will probably spend their entire lives paying it off. Wage rises have stagnated etc...
 
Well if you take Labour out as they straddled the divide people have voted for Brexit backing parties in hugely greater numbers than remain backing parties.
It was about 48% leave to 52% remain if labour were remain campaigners actually. Its not that clear. I'd say its pretty clear that people want the referendum respected regardless though.
 
[


I totally understand and appreciate your point but I’m by no means saying we shouldn’t change anything - I think sometimes when you talk with different people on a forum across a number of fragmented posts some of the points are lost.

My point was that “Corbynism” has been widely condemned this morning by the “told you so” brigade, however, I feel Corbynism represents me and clearly others in my age group/demographic

Now obviously your point is very relevant, because it’s also not representing or not getting through to other demographics

I’m saying we should resist this temptation to try and simplify every narrative to Corbyn good or Corbyn bad, I think we’re all sick of that to be honest! :-)

I conpletely agree that it's not so much about what Corbyn represents. But it IS about how he and momentum have handled the past 10 or so years, no?

And that's where the wires should become uncrossed, where we can make more sense of each other's side. Hopefully ;)
 
But you then also see the problem with straight away bringing up Blair, right?

My issue with you guys, isn't what you are saying and what you represent. It's with the failure to take on board what's actually being said, you've been guilty of jumping to extremes of what I've said to you too, now the dust has settled you might even see that. I don't want a centrist as such, I definitely don't want another Blair and I don't want to abandon what Labour 100% should stand for. But what I do want is the party and you guys who defend them to just step out of that bubble and look where the last 15 years of momentum has got us and admit there is now a lot of real hard thinking and changes to be made.

Like it's no crime to suggest the new leader should be a great public speaker and be able to take the fight to the opposition. That doesn't mean giving up your morals and getting nasty. It's no crime to suggest that there should be a plan to tackle the media. That doesn't mean Blair. It's no crime to suggest stuff like the Broadband issue just looks like standard Labour promises (despite being deeper). That doesn't mean we suddenly hate free stuff.

But most of all, I want the excuses to stop. Media, brexit, old voters, we knew all of this years ago. It's simply ridiculous to defend Corbyn and his acolytes on those fronts, when they had so much time to at least get a coherent game plan. That's not giving up on Labour Ideals, that's just pure common sense.
Remember, I'm not British. I don't give a feck about Corbyn, I don't even know a lot about him. If he is out on his arse tomorrow, so be it. I have about as much attachment to him as to the president of, I don't know, Germany. And I don't even remember who that is right now.

My point is that the left is facing similar issues and difficulties everywhere and it would be a mistake to conclude that this election turned on nothing but Corbyn. You pointed out several times in this thread that the 2017 election result for Labour wasn't a success - I'm saying that in the current environment, that's the best they could have hoped for on Thursday. And that it's not worth giving up leftist ideals for that. And again, I do not equate Corbyn with leftist ideals. Labour can kick Corbyn to the curb and represent actual leftist values at the same time, no problem. Just, you know, it shouldn't become a second Lib Dem party. The first is pointless enough on its own.

Basically, I believe Labour lost the election because it's not on the right. And they can't change that. If by getting rid of Corbyn they can position themselves as a more credible and serious leftist party then they should do that, absolutely. Just don't expect miracles from it, and don't expect that there is some magical centrist idea that can rally the nation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.