• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

The Labour Party under Andy Burnham

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
The issue with that analysis is that, quite simply, newspapers don't sell anymore. Newspapers aren't profitable.

This means that they have become hobbies for very rich people who want a veneer of respectability. It also means that they no longer have to chase circulation. They have increasingly become nothing more than the mouthpieces of the people who own them. Look how the Independent and the Evening Standard lurched to the right when Lebedev bought them, likewise look how the i lurched to the right when Rothermere bought it.

The only exception seems to be the newspapers owned by Reach PLC. And Reach just take the sensible business decision by hedging their bets and covering all bases; the Daily Mirror and the Daily Express are published from the same offices by largely the same people.

I certainly hope so.

People who want Reform policies want full fat Reform policies. They don't want the sugar-free version. As I've been saying for a long time, you don't go and see the tribute act when the real band are in town.

Labour are in the position because their rogue political adviser Dominic Cummings Morgan McSweeney spent so long briefing and leaking against his opponents that they're all damaged goods. A year ago I'd have said someone like Rayner would have been a good replacement but she's still damaged goods because of the stamp duty thing (and I wonder who in Labour leaked that, eh, Morgan?)

I live in fear that they'll go for someone like Wes Streeting, who is one of the most unpleasant people I have ever had the misfortune of having to work with.
If newspapers do not sell then what do they do?

You suggest that they are playthings for rich people to write whatever they like?

Selling is not just about copies sold to customers, but about selling spaces to advertisers. I do not read newspapers, but assume that not all advertisers within each paper are the owners of said papers?

You are right that Reform voters want full fat Reform. I just do not think there are that many of them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

We must remember that some voters from 2024 stayed at home yesterday, and some absent voters in 2024 turned out today. Vote swings is not as black and white as seen on paper.
That is true. However, mobilising the vote is a thing. IF Labour voters chose to stay at home yesterday, then that is still a bad thing for Labour.

Where voters who previously stayed at home chose to mobilise, then that is a good thing for democracy.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,244
Location
UK
2. Papers do what sells. Businesses may be "evil" but they are businesses. They switch around to make sure that they make money. If the middle papers are going right it is because they believe that is the angle to sell.
I feel that ignores that many papers are owned by Billionaires, and thus work for their owner's financial interests.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,616
Location
Isle of Man
If newspapers do not sell then what do they do?

You suggest that they are playthings for rich people to write whatever they like?
What do they do? That is a very good question.

They are playthings for their owners to write what they want. And that's not just the case in the UK (e.g. Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post). And it's not even just the case in the anglophone media: Axel Springer's owner Mathias Doepfner has some interesting opinions. It is no surprise that Bild are the AfD's biggest cheerleader and even Die Welt gave Elon Musk the front page to sing the praises of AfD.
 

MP33

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2011
Messages
634
Heidi Alexander was on the BBC this morning. Putting the boot into Reform UK. Should she not be commenting on The Greens and their policies instead, as they won the By-Election? Save the talk about Reform UK, until they win a seat off Labour.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
I feel that ignores that many papers are owned by Billionaires, and thus work for their owner's financial interests.
Which neglects that the best interests of the owners lie in a stable Conservative government.

Sensationalism and Reform would not deliver the financial stability needed for business. In the US it is a bit different because the choice is between Trump and Democrat. If the choice were Labour or Reform then you would take Reform. However, that is not the choice in the UK.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Heidi Alexander was on the BBC this morning. Putting the boot into Reform UK. Should she not be commenting on The Greens and their policies instead, as they won the By-Election? Save the talk about Reform UK, until they win a seat off Labour.
It takes a long time to turn a tanker, but the Labour tanker is not turning yet.

However, it should be said Starmer did accuse the Conservatives of talking down the economy at PMQs on Wednesday. I am more than 100% certain that the main rhetoric from the Labour government was how bad the economy was due to Conservative mismanagement.

Perhaps there is a slight move after all.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,692
Location
Nottingham
Heidi Alexander was on the BBC this morning. Putting the boot into Reform UK. Should she not be commenting on The Greens and their policies instead, as they won the By-Election? Save the talk about Reform UK, until they win a seat off Labour.
Reform won Runcorn off Labour, admittedly by a very small margin in a by-election caused by the unacceptable behaviour of the previous Labour MP.

The total Labour plus Green vote at Gorton & Denton was enough that however voters split between those two, Reform would not have won.
 

BAFRA77

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2023
Messages
276
Location
Worcester
Just caught something out of the corner of my ear on radio just now - not sure if I was hearing things - but Starmer is blaming George Galloway for the by-election loss?

Strange if true
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,939
Location
Fenny Stratford
I will be interested to see some detailed data in voting in the recent gorton by election as many claims are being made about many parties!

I wonder if we can gauge what is tactical voting and what is changed voting.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
Just caught something out of the corner of my ear on radio just now - not sure if I was hearing things - but Starmer is blaming George Galloway for the by-election loss?

Strange if true
Here is the live feed from the BBC

In a letter to Labour MPs, Prime Minister Keir Starmer accuses new Green Party MP Hannah Spencer of being "more interested in dividing people than uniting them".

He says the Greens have capitalised on an endorsement from George Galloway’s Workers Party of Britain – which won 10% of the vote in the constituency in 2024 but did not stand in the by-election - and his "divisive, sectarian politics".

The PM also attacks the Green Party policy of legalising all drugs and says they "simply do not have the resources, the activist base or the local knowledge to replicate this victory across the country".

Spencer has dismissed accusations of sectarian politics, insisting her party had united voters with commons concerns about the cost of living, public services and the war in Gaza.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,519
Location
Taunton or Kent
I'm not surprised he's gone on a blaming tirade, but at the same time anyone in his position would have done the same. Too many voters, while disgusted about "it's someone else's fault" attitudes, also are not prepared to give grace to any politician prepared to take responsibility, admit they were wrong and learn from it. This is the same with politicians lying: while lies about denying/covering up dodgy behaviour are inexcusable, many politicians lie because voters don't vote for anyone who is honest (the truth hurts), except when things are so bad the truth just cannot be denied (usually during/just after a war and/or recession).
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
I'm not surprised he's gone on a blaming tirade, but at the same time anyone in his position would have done the same. Too many voters, while disgusted about "it's someone else's fault" attitudes, also are not prepared to give grace to any politician prepared to take responsibility, admit they were wrong and learn from it. This is the same with politicians lying: while lies about denying/covering up dodgy behaviour are inexcusable, many politicians lie because voters don't vote for anyone who is honest (the truth hurts), except when things are so bad the truth just cannot be denied (usually during/just after a war and/or recession).
The question with Starmer is not about his reaction in the immediate aftermath - blaming here is right.

The question is whether Starmer now leads a new vision. Whether there is a drip-drip of change that becomes a proper flow ahead of 2029. Time will tell.
 

GatwickDepress

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2013
Messages
2,588
Location
Leeds

Sir Keir Starmer has vowed to "keep on fighting" after Labour suffered a devastating by-election defeat to the Green Party in Gorton and Denton.

Labour, which took the Greater Manchester seat with more than 50% of the vote in 2024, was pushed into third place behind Reform UK.

The prime minister said the result was "disappointing" but he would "fight against extremes in politics" on both the left and the right that "want to tear our country apart".

Green leader Zack Polanski said the victory showed there were no longer any "no-go areas" for his party, as winning candidate Hannah Spencer said "this is only the beginning".

The result - in a seat Labour has held for nearly 100 years - has renewed criticism of Sir Keir's leadership from Labour MPs, with some calling for him to stand down.

It piles further pressure on the PM ahead of crucial May elections in Scotland, Wales and some English councils.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner - a possible challenger to Sir Keir - said it "must be a wake up call" and the government must be "braver".

Others blamed a decision to block Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, another potential leadership candidate, from standing in the seat by Labour's ruling National Executive Committee.

The move was backed by the prime minister but some Labour MPs argued Burnham, who is hugely popular in the region, would have been the party's best chance of winning the by-election.

Sir Keir said: "Incumbent governments quite often get results like that mid-term, but I do understand that voters are frustrated. They're impatient for change."

Asked if he had considered resigning, he said: "I came into politics late in life to fight for change for those people who need it...

"I will keep on fighting for those people for as long as I've got breath in my body."

Challenged over whether he was wrong to block Burnham from standing, the PM said: "We had an excellent candidate, absolutely rooted in her community."

The Greens' victory marks a breakthrough moment for the party, delivering its first-ever MP in the north of England.

Since taking charge of the Greens five months ago, self-described "eco-populist" Polanski has courted voters with a left-wing pitch on the economy, alongside its traditional focus on environmental issues.

Its policies include giving councils the power to control rents, extending free school meals to all children, and a imposing a new 'wealth tax' on assets above £10m.

But in a letter to Labour MPs, Sir Keir said the party had capitalised on an endorsement from George Galloway's Workers Party of Britain – which won 10% of the vote in the constituency in 2024 but did not stand in this by-election - and his "divisive, sectarian politics".

The PM also attacked the Green Party policy of legalising all drugs and said they "simply do not have the resources, the activist base or the local knowledge to replicate this victory across the country".

Spencer dismissed accusations of sectarian politics, insisting her party had united voters with commons concerns about the cost-of-living, public services and the war in Gaza, whilst Polanski accused Starmer of trying to "smear voters as extremists".

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the result "shows Keir Starmer's premiership is finished" and the PM would resign "if he had any integrity".

The by-election was triggered by the resignation of former Labour health minister Andrew Gwynne, who was suspended from the parliamentary party for offensive WhatsApp messages a year ago.

While polls had suggested a close race, the Green Party ultimately won comfortably, with nearly 41% of votes cast and a majority of more than 4,000.

The Conservatives came fourth with just 706 votes - the party's worst ever by-election result.

So far public condemnation of Sir Keir following the result has largely been confined to frequent critics of his leadership.

Labour MP Karl Turner said the result was "catastrophic", as he blamed the decision to block Burnham as a candidate and "unpopular" policies.

Another MP, Richard Burgon, who is on the left of the party, said blame for the defeat "lies squarely with Keir Starmer and his clique", who "put factional interests over having the candidate best placed to win".

"If Labour is to be the 'Stop Reform' party, then the leadership must stop treating progressive voters with contempt - and start appealing to them," he said.

Fellow left-wing MP Nadia Whittome said her party needed "change at the top" and "should be true to the progressive values that Labour is meant to stand for".

However, more MPs told the BBC on the condition of anonymity the PM should stand down.

One described the by-election result as "a punch in the face for the Labour Party and for Keir Starmer's premiership".

"Keir must reflect on how unpopular he is with the public," another said.

"Cabinet ministers might be doing good interviews on the airwaves in tough circumstances but they're like cabin crew successfully calming passengers in a plane that's crashing.

"If they manage to calm things down, the plane is still crashing. And who is in the cockpit is what matters."

Others advised caution, with one Labour MP telling the BBC: "We need to avoid knee-jerk responses that address the concerns of one wing of the support we need at the expense of losing the other, and focus on the core agenda around tackling the cost of living crisis and improving public services which all the voters we need to win back would share."

Another said there was "no obvious alternative" to Sir Keir and "a leadership contest will be disastrous".

Spencer - a plumber and councillor in Trafford - becomes the Green Party's fifth MP.

She said the result - in what the party has said was its 127th target seat - showed the Greens "can win anywhere".

Spencer added that her party's first ever victory in a Westminster by-election was "just the beginning", as she predicted further gains in elections to English councils and the Welsh Senedd in May.

Polanski said it was "an existential crisis" for Labour, which had sought to present the by-election as a two-way fight with Reform UK but ended up in third place.

"No longer can they try and scare people into saying they have to vote for something because they're worried about the least-worst option," the Green Party leader added.

Reform UK candidate Matt Goodwin said his party had "embarrassed Labour in one of their strongest seats".

He described the Green victory as a "coalition of Islamists and woke progressives", marking "the emergence of a dangerous sectarianism in British politics".
I'm not sure Starmer's centrist rhetoric is going to go down too well, especially with disillusioned Labour voters already leaning towards the Greens or Reform. As for people who have already left Labour, there's no chance that attitude is going to bring them back into the fold.

Labour's 'Red Tory' premiership so far has just felt like more of the same. I think people wanted change and feel let down. Cost of living, housing crisis, roads full of potholes, water companies dumping sewage in the ocean as bosses rake in massive bonuses...

Be interesting to see if analysts report whether Galloway not standing had any substantial effect on the election results.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,515
housing crisis,
I’ve lost count of the number of recent government’s promising to cut red tape, streamline planning & get building quicker but ultimately not delivering. Can’t believe that many truly believed Labour who historically are pro ‘big government’ would be much different.

roads full of potholes,
Rightly or wrongly labour have a history of increasing taxes/charges on motorists so anyone who thought they’d hugely increase road spending without doing so must’ve been naive at best especially as they basically told us the country was skint before winning the election.
 
Last edited:

Purple Train

Established Member
Joined
16 Jul 2022
Messages
2,467
Location
Exile or exile
Starmer really does have the political nous of a ham sandwich. In the aftermath of a by-election that came very close to proving that Labour and the Greens fighting like cats in a sack is only going to lead to a far-right Reform government in the long run, what does he do? Continue fighting...

Yes, I don't like the Class A drugs plan, so what? I'd take it over a country ruled by masked ICE goons snatching people off the streets.

Yes, Galloway is an unpleasant little man feeding off sectarianism. So what? He's yesterday's politician, he's in his seventies, and, much as he'll fracture the left vote if he stands, I highly doubt that his King George People's Front will get anywhere nationally against the Popular Front of Jeremy and the Sultanan Campaign for a Non-Free Membership Portal. So why bother giving him any more oxygen than is necessary?

I was speaking to someone I know on Thursday and fortunately he misheard me saying "pole" as the word "poll", i.e. the by-election. I say fortunately because I was about to launch into a very niche and not desperately funny joke about the Hagia Sophia mosque in Istanbul. Having started off by saying he planned to stay up for the result (which I planned on doing but didn't), he then said that he had friends, and friends of friends, who had gone to Gorton & Denton to campaign for the Greens, and regretted not being able to himself. This is in Slough, so quite a long way from Gorton & Denton.

I haven't heard anybody that enthused by Labour in years, even before the General Election. I was possibly the most optimistic, but then I like Starmer's personality for being boring enough not to distract from the business of governing the country, but not being completely humourless like Corbyn (who is not a bad speaker but takes himself far too seriously). Unfortunately he's completely wasted what credit he did have in the bank by employing McSweeney for longer than the five minutes it took most of us on here to realise that he is calculating enough to make Dominic Cummings look fair-minded and above-board, and reducing the Labour party to a single one of the five leftist factions there are. Certainly as someone who'd call myself a fairly old-school socialist, I have no idea who to vote for. Tactically I would feel able to vote for anyone on a spectrum from Zack Polanski to Dominic Grieve if necessary, with an exception for the Corbyn/Sultana/Galloway groupings, and for one specific Scottish Greens politician who shall remain nameless as I'm sure I would never be in a position where I could vote (or rather, not vote) for them. But if Labour and the Greens worked on some sort of common-sense pact basis, then I would be able to cast a ballot without hesitation, and one that I know wouldn't let in some racist, faux-Christian, light-blue mob through the back door.

Lucy Powell seems to get this. Evidently Starmer is worried about the prospect of doing another U-turn. Someone probably needs to tell him the difference between a duplicitous U-turn and a conciliatory U-turn. The sooner he realises he might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb, i.e that he won't get an easier ride from the media by trying to be Reform-lite, the better. Maybe in 2029. I live in hope.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,348
Heidi Alexander was on the BBC this morning. Putting the boot into Reform UK. Should she not be commenting on The Greens and their policies instead, as they won the By-Election? Save the talk about Reform UK, until they win a seat off Labour.
The labour right is unable to conceive that the much abused labour left would ever actually leave, no matter how many purges there are.

They believe that they can "my way or the highway" the party and the voter base will just obey them.

The idea of a green win in the by-election was simply unthinkable for them - that's why they kept acting like they were going to win.

They will not effectively attack the Greens because their world-view cannot cope with them being a threat.

EDIT:

The war on drugs stuff is, I think, just an old man who spent half his career fighting the war on drugs refusing to countenance the idea that maybe it wasn't a good idea.
I do not think it is an effective attack.

But maybe I am too cynical.
 
Last edited:

martin butler

Member
Joined
9 Oct 2018
Messages
883
The question though is, or should be this, Is Starmer an asset , or a liability to Labour winning in 2029,

If he's seen as an liability, then he needs to be replaced, but at the same time, If the party swings too far left, will they lose votes?

The next election is going to be tight, as many will be saying a plaque on all your houses, so it's very possible that there could be a three-way split, with no one party having enough seats to form a working majority.
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,583
A lot of the decline in the UK is based on two significant cultural problems - using broadly the same economic model since 1980, and refusing to address boiling frog issues. Governments here are afraid of enacting policy by fiat and we are subjected endlessly to rounds of consultation, compromise and capitulation.
Don't recall the 70s being a spectacular economic success either.
 

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
The question though is, or should be this, Is Starmer an asset , or a liability to Labour winning in 2029,

If he's seen as an liability, then he needs to be replaced, but at the same time, If the party swings too far left, will they lose votes?

The next election is going to be tight, as many will be saying a plaque on all your houses, so it's very possible that there could be a three-way split, with no one party having enough seats to form a working majority.
He's a liability. He abandoned the left wing platform that the party have been known for decades to chase the right. Now Zack Polanski has filled the vacuum and he's flanked on both sides. It's too late to turn back, the man has shattered all trust, credibility and respect from their core supporters, many of whom have had families vote Labour for generations now switching to Green.

Not much point swapping leaders either, it will only accelerate their demise. Labour will reap what they have sowed.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
He's a liability. He abandoned the left wing platform that the party have been known for decades to chase the right. Now Zack Polanski has filled the vacuum and he's flanked on both sides. It's too late to turn back, the man has shattered all trust, credibility and respect from their core supporters, many of whom have had families vote Labour for generations now switching to Green.

Not much point swapping leaders either, it will only accelerate their demise. Labour will reap what they have sowed.
Wasn't it Tony Blair who abandoned the left?

Corbyn almost moved things back (with predictable electoral consequence)

My only concern about Corbyn is that it might have been Brexit, rather than the left-wing policies, that ruined his chances. Of course the right-wing media wanted it to be Corbyn's left-wing stance that was the problem. But actually, what if it was just that Brexit needed doing. What if the country wanted to get Brexit done and then crack on with Corbyn's agenda?

I certainly did not want to crack on with Corbyn's agenda, and won't vote Labour, but do we actually know that it is being left focused that stops Labour getting elected?
 

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
Wasn't it Tony Blair who abandoned the left?

Corbyn almost moved things back (with predictable electoral consequence)

My only concern about Corbyn is that it might have been Brexit, rather than the left-wing policies, that ruined his chances. Of course the right-wing media wanted it to be Corbyn's left-wing stance that was the problem. But actually, what if it was just that Brexit needed doing. What if the country wanted to get Brexit done and then crack on with Corbyn's agenda?

I certainly did not want to crack on with Corbyn's agenda, and won't vote Labour, but do we actually know that it is being left focused that stops Labour getting elected?
I think the results speak for themselves here. Being left wing doesn’t make you unelectable. I would also like to point out that Corbyn got more votes than Starmer did.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,348
Don't recall the 70s being a spectacular economic success either.
The stats show that they were quite successful by today's standards, just not by the standards of the 1960s.

Growth decried as stagnation in the 1970s would be stunning today. Decadal growth has been falling pretty much every decade since the 1960s.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
I think the results speak for themselves here. Being left wing doesn’t make you unelectable. I would also like to point out that Corbyn got more votes than Starmer did.
Maybe someone will point that out to Sir Kier at some point.

The centre right is a well-occupied ground with both colours of tories.

Of course, votes and constituencies won are different things.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The stats show that they were quite successful by today's standards, just not by the standards of the 1960s.

Growth decried as stagnation in the 1970s would be stunning today. Decadal growth has been falling pretty much every decade since the 1960s.
I suspect other economic indicators from the 1970s would not be so welcomed though.
 
Joined
2 Feb 2019
Messages
1,039
I think the results speak for themselves here. Being left wing doesn’t make you unelectable. I would also like to point out that Corbyn got more votes than Starmer did.
The problem was that many voters, including some I know who usually vote for the Labour Party, did not want Jeremy Corbyn to be Prime Minister so they voted against the Labour Party in the 2019 General Election. Conservative supporters were motivated to vote because they did not want a Government with Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister.

The reason the Labour Party won the 2024 General Election is that the Tory vote fell by half from just under 14 million in 2019 to just under 7 million in 2024. The Labour Party received about 10 million votes in both general elections but in 2024 many Conservative supporters did not vote. They were not happy with the record of the Conservative Government and they did not see need to vote to stop a Labour Government led by Sir Keir Starmer despite the Conservative Party writing to voters and appealing for them to do this. The turnout fell from 67% in 2019 to 60% in 2024.
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Associate Staff
International Transport
Railtours & Preservation
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
4,583
The stats show that they were quite successful by today's standards, just not by the standards of the 1960s.

Growth decried as stagnation in the 1970s would be stunning today. Decadal growth has been falling pretty much every decade since the 1960s.
Is growth falling very surprising as economies grow larger? Surely difficult to increase growth by a significant amount when economy reaches size it is now? What's it like in other European countries with economies similar to ours? Genuine questions as I don’t know.
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,341
Wasn't it Tony Blair who abandoned the left?

Corbyn almost moved things back (with predictable electoral consequence)

My only concern about Corbyn is that it might have been Brexit, rather than the left-wing policies, that ruined his chances. Of course the right-wing media wanted it to be Corbyn's left-wing stance that was the problem. But actually, what if it was just that Brexit needed doing. What if the country wanted to get Brexit done and then crack on with Corbyn's agenda?

I certainly did not want to crack on with Corbyn's agenda, and won't vote Labour, but do we actually know that it is being left focused that stops Labour getting elected?
Far left policies do stop Labour winning elections. Just as Corbyn lost in 2019, Michael Foot lost in 1983. A clever, intelligent mam, but unelectable because too many people would never vote for him.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
Is growth falling very surprising as economies grow larger? Surely difficult to increase growth by a significant amount when economy reaches size it is now? What's it like in other European countries with economies similar to ours? Genuine questions as I don’t know.
The House of Commons Libarary offers these projections:

983a581b-62ed-4d43-867c-54f124b04a6e.png



Meanwhile:

8pa9mk12z5ge1.jpeg


In essence the UK does ok.

Also for those who like stats it was the UK and not Germany which went through Brexit.
 

Sorcerer

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2022
Messages
2,160
Location
Liverpool
My only concern about Corbyn is that it might have been Brexit, rather than the left-wing policies, that ruined his chances. Of course the right-wing media wanted it to be Corbyn's left-wing stance that was the problem. But actually, what if it was just that Brexit needed doing. What if the country wanted to get Brexit done and then crack on with Corbyn's agenda?
Some of Corbyn's domestic policies appeal to people, which is why Zack Polanski is popular with much of the same demographics in places like Bristol, but the man himself was definitely a liability. Even if you accept him as naive rather than foolish he would've definitely made us look weak on the world stage. Maybe if Starmer stuck with the original promises he made during his leadership campaign he'd have been a much better alternative.

I think the results speak for themselves here. Being left wing doesn’t make you unelectable. I would also like to point out that Corbyn got more votes than Starmer did.
Corbyn got more votes in areas that already leaned heavily towards Labour, which in our first-past-the-post system isn't any good for winning elections when the key marginal seats are leaning towards your opponents. Not only did he lead Labour to it's worst defeat since 1935, but even against Theresa May's abysmal campaign in 2017 he still fell short 64 seats. The only reason that could be considered a victory is because people expected a lot worse.
 

Topological

Established Member
Joined
20 Feb 2023
Messages
4,319
Location
Swansea
An interesting "what if...?" is whether Reform would have gained popularity with Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party.

As noted, Labour had a stronger support in many Labour constituencies. Once the red wall had completed the dalliance with Johnson to get Brexit over the line, would those constituenices have gone firmly back to Labour?

The stongholds of Reform, might not be so strong if Labour was following Corbyns ideas.

I suppose this is what those who would like to see a Rayner Labour are after. It would be a good electoral experiment to run.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,348
Is growth falling very surprising as economies grow larger? Surely difficult to increase growth by a significant amount when economy reaches size it is now? What's it like in other European countries with economies similar to ours? Genuine questions as I don’t know.
That was expressed in percentages, so in theory it should not matter. But I think its probably just a trend towards secular stagnation due to demographic factors and possibly the change in politics after the collapse of the postwar consensus.

However, my main point is primarily that the 1970s, whilst often portrayed as some terrible time, represented a continuation of the post-war great accumulation.
People in 1979 were considerably better off than they had been in 1969, on average.
 

Cardiff123

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2013
Messages
1,657
Location
South Wales
Labour's 'Red Tory' premiership so far has just felt like more of the same. I think people wanted change and feel let down. Cost of living, housing crisis, roads full of potholes, water companies dumping sewage in the ocean as bosses rake in massive bonuses...
This 1000%. Labour literally went into the 2024 GE campaigning with a one word slogan, "CHANGE". Then within days of getting elected, Starmer & Reeves were announcing that things were going to get worse, people should brace themselves for austerity mark 10, more "difficult decisions", mysterious billion £ "black holes" etc, when we'd had 14 years of that and the country was sick of it.
Then they started attacking the sick & disabled.

Wales doesn't get noticed much, but in May, all the polls are showing that Labour will lose in Wales after dominating Welsh politics and winning every election here for over 100 years, and will lose control of the Welsh Parliament for the first time ever, after running the Welsh Government consecutively for 27 years since devolution in 1999. The polls are not just predicting Labour will lose, but will be reduced to just a handful of seats in the Senedd, a political wipeout.

Labour will lose the land of Aneurin Bevan and the birth of the NHS under Starmer.
It will be historic in Wales. But Starmer will continue to "fight", just for what exactly is anyone's guess.........
 
Last edited:

Top