I was wrong about starmer

As corbyn showed, you cannot try and move too far to the left in a single election cycle.

I loved corbyn's policies on the whole but this country is packed full of turkeys who happily vote for Christmas.

The electorate in this country is rather right wing unfortunately.

I don't think they are. Probably centrist on balance if anything, but the non-right wing vote is split and the right wingers are better spread across more constituencies.

Whereas left wing or centre left voters tend to be concentrated in metropolitan areas which crucially, amongst other factors, tend to have younger demographics.

Everyone has a vote, but not everyone's vote carries the same weight. Allows us to pretend we're a proper democracy though.
 
The electorate in this country is rather right wing unfortunately.
This is not true.

Right of centre holds the power in any country where the democratic process is a two party system. Any country with a more representative system is more left of centre. People are broadly the same in most places. The majority of the country do not want a right wing government. The majority is not in the top 1%, the majority use public services, they use public infrastrtucture and they want to see inequality reduce and happiness increase. The reason we have a right of centre government is because morons like Keir Starmer insist on chasing right wing voters by moving the party to the right instead of staying in their own lane and winning the argument that what they are offering is better for people. By moving to the right to court voters he is just playing into their hands. Why bother going through the trouble of actually being in power when the opposition is just going to implement your policies anyway.
 
Have to say I think the centrists overegg how tactical and strategic every utterance is.

Take last week for example. Days before local elections and apropos of nothing Starmer decides to (re)announce u-turning on tuition fees.

This week briefing MPs to confirm a Labour gov won't repeal the anti-protesting legislation or the migration bills. Only weeks after he had the party debating and voting against these laws.
I think this demonstrates some misunderstanding of how parliament works. To repeal the anti protest Bill will take about a year or more. To amend the worrying parts of the bill can be done quickly. It's politics.

On tuition fees I think as they stand they are wrong, abolishing them entirely is also wrong.
 
I will also be holding my nose to vote for Labour- then hope that when he gets in unleashes the real Labour policies- I am hoping it is all deception (he's good at that) to get the votes.
But when he will not repeal inhumane and illegal Tory legislation on Strikes, Migration, or Protests, U turns on student loans, allows the private sector inside the NHS, no PR- no mention of chasing the Covid PPE fraudsters, no mention of chasing BJ for his criminality, then if that happens I can see only one term as a Labour Government then back to the same old grind that we have now. Because nothing would have changed.
 
It's difficult isn't it? The party strategists seem to think the priority is winning over a certain type of voter. The type that used to vote labour, but whose politics are socially quite to the right and so have been suckered into voting against their own interests with rhetoric that appeals to them alongside unrealistic promises.

I'm not a strategist, I've not done the analysis, but they seem pretty sure this is the approach needed to beat the Tories. It's not just numbers of voters they need to win, it's voters in the right places.

They can afford to lose voters in cities in order to pick them up elsewhere.

Is that the only option they have? Don't know. But seems that's what they think.

What I do know is it's F***ing depressing that we've got a system in this country so broken that a minority of voters have disproportionate influence on our politics.

And that that minority happen to largely hold out of date views and are easily manipulated.

Is pandering to them a bit a price worth paying to remove the Tories? For me yes, no doubt about it. I don't know if evil is too strong a word, but the Tories are not far off it.

Doesn't mean anyone has to like it though. I certainly don't, it's bloody depressing.
That is a fair summary of the situation and what Labour NEED to do to get into power. It is largely what i was saying in 2019. In order to win power, somebody has to win over the centre ground, our archaic 2 party system leaves no choice for Labour to do otherwise. Contrary to what many on here think, Starmer is a bright enough man and so are most of the men and women on his team. He can’t come out and say he will do x,y and z on some of the policies we may like to see straight away, privatisations of rail, water, energy etc, there really isn’t the money. I genuinely think the aim is to win power, then he has 5 years to implement reforms. I am sure he will do many left of centre things once power is won, if he goes all in now it will scare off voters he needs and it will not all be affordable and the country will know that.
Totally agree with all of this. When it comes to it, I will be putting my cross in the red box and holding my nose as I do it. I hate that that's the case, I hate that my vote will be taken as an endorsement of their stance / policies, I hate that Starmer is not courting my vote and hate that our electoral system means I have no other alternative unless I want to help the Tories back in. Either way I am gonna get screwed ... so I have no option than to just pick the one that'll be more likely to use lube and maybe give me a cuddle afterwards if I'm lucky :-(.

Please hold your nose as I did in 2019 when I voted for Labour despite my huge distrust of Corbyn. First things first, get the wicked tories out at all costs. I genuinely think once in power Labour will review and amend the terrible new bill re police powers etc. People need to vote tactically, it is a must to avoid another 5 disastrous years of Sunak, Patel, Raab will probably be back in too unless he lost his seat. It may not sit right, it may not be anyones utopia straight away, but once power is won, changes can be started within the funds available. He has to be seen to do it without raising taxes beforehand. Manifesto’s are broken willy nilly now and nobody bats an eyelid, see Johnsons manifesto and what happened after. If we don’t tow the Starmer line we WILL be cussing at Sunak still.

I genuinely believe the party will not forgot all its roots in the long run, but the short term is about getting the keys to No10. In order to do much that we want to see, taxes will NEED to go up and i hope traditional Labour supporters will accept that, he can’t bankrupt the country to try to do so. There will need to be some pain, some nose holding, but i hope one day soon that this rigged 2 party system can be changed to a form of PR to finally put a final nail in the Tories coffin forever.
 
Possibly because everything he says could be said by a Tory leader. Possibly because he's abandoned all the left wing things he originally pledged. Possibly because he's purged the party of anyone from the left. Possibly because he disciplined people for standing up for workers.

It's probably hard to narrow down one thing.
I asked the OP

But, for balance
The Tory Leader isn't saying they will build 300000 houses a year (in fact almost the opposite)
The Tory leader isn't pledging £28bn on green projects to drive the economy


Good article in byline times btw giving their analysis - likening him to Harold Wilson
 
I think this demonstrates some misunderstanding of how parliament works. To repeal the anti protest Bill will take about a year or more. To amend the worrying parts of the bill can be done quickly. It's politics.

On tuition fees I think as they stand they are wrong, abolishing them entirely is also wrong.

Laughing that's wishful thinking. If what Starmers cabinet meant, was that they'd supercede the legislation with new legislation they'd say that.

You need to heed your own advice! 👇

but do it with your eyes open.
 
Not repealing right wing policies if they get into power
Appreciate you coming back to me
Not sure which one's you are referring to tho

No matter.
Some reflection on R4 this morning from frustrated labour members. Their was he is being driven by the 'swing constituencies' rather than traditional labour voters. In the knowledge, of course, that if he says things that will 'upset them' the tories will get re eelected.
 
I will also be holding my nose to vote for Labour- then hope that when he gets in unleashes the real Labour policies- I am hoping it is all deception (he's good at that) to get the votes.

So then what's the plan for elections after 2024? All these right leaning swing voters he's courted will just be fine with having been conned for their vote?

This is where the idea that the whole thing is a strategic masterclass falls down. If you're basically planning on getting a one term government over the line, then you need some big policy changes. Something that has a lasting impact. Otherwise you've handicapped your own chances at power for no return - i.e. the Lib Dem 2010-15 play.
 
I asked the OP

But, for balance
The Tory Leader isn't saying they will build 300000 houses a year (in fact almost the opposite)
The Tory leader isn't pledging £28bn on green projects to drive the economy


Good article in byline times btw giving their analysis - likening him to Harold Wilson
I didn't say THE Tory Leader, I said A Tory Leader.

Building 300k houses was in the last Tory manifesto.
"Reaching Net Zero by 2050 with investment in clean energy solutions and green infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions and pollution." taken straight from the Tory manifesto

Neither of those are left wing policies anyway. 300k houses built by property developers means massive profits for the construction companies. A left wing pledge would be 300k publicly owned houses.

Spending £28bn on green projects to drive the economy also means massive money going to private businesses in the form of subsidies. There's no indication it will make anything cheaper for anyone.
 
I didn't say THE Tory Leader, I said A Tory Leader.

Building 300k houses was in the last Tory manifesto.
"Reaching Net Zero by 2050 with investment in clean energy solutions and green infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions and pollution." taken straight from the Tory manifesto

Neither of those are left wing policies anyway. 300k houses built by property developers means massive profits for the construction companies. A left wing pledge would be 300k publicly owned houses.

Spending £28bn on green projects to drive the economy also means massive money going to private businesses in the form of subsidies. There's no indication it will make anything cheaper for anyone.

I should have known better than to even bother on this
Lesson learnt
 
Appreciate you coming back to me
Not sure which one's you are referring to tho

No matter.
Some reflection on R4 this morning from frustrated labour members. Their was he is being driven by the 'swing constituencies' rather than traditional labour voters. In the knowledge, of course, that if he says things that will 'upset them' the tories will get re eelected.
Well the immigration bill and and anti protest bill are both right wing legislation that Labour have said multiple times they won’t repeal

at this stage I hope we get sonform of hung parliament and it forces through political reform
 
So then what's the plan for elections after 2024? All these right leaning swing voters he's courted will just be fine with having been conned for their vote?

This is where the idea that the whole thing is a strategic masterclass falls down. If you're basically planning on getting a one term government over the line, then you need some big policy changes. Something that has a lasting impact. Otherwise you've handicapped your own chances at power for no return - i.e. the Lib Dem 2010-15 play.
A one term Govt?

As well as beginning the change,you use the next 5 years to plan and demostrate how the country and its people will be better off, there is no way to do everything in one term, you legislate and demonstrate and build and create while looking after the economy and growth and improving the public services. Blair managed it, you continue to be strategic and focussed and take the people you need to in the country along with you. Blair lost direction and Brown took his eye off the ball (no pun intended). Starmer and his team need to heed lessons, stay strategically focussed and reactive to wider events beyond their control. None of it will be plain sailing though.

I can see a huge opportunity opening up with the end of the Ukraine war and growth, return to lower interest rates, inflation, energy costs and a rebuilding Ukraine, our own infrastructures and some renationalisations to boot. We can’t afford to allow the tories to claim that potential otherwise they’ll be in for good, the NHS lost forever and the super rich lauding their wealth from their Barbados homes, thire Cayman Island banks etc etc. (just my view, I appreciate you will be nowhere in agreement).
 
Well the immigration bill and and anti protest bill are both right wing legislation that Labour have said multiple times they won’t repeal

at this stage I hope we get sonform of hung parliament and it forces through political reform
I think what they have said on both is they will make changes via new legislation which will over ride previous legislation
So, you are right - they won’t repeal
But, they will change them
 
A one term Govt?

Yeah hypothetically. I was responding to the messages specifically setting out a hope that Starmer was going to go in to an election lying about what his government would do, and then once in office revealing a secret socialist agenda. Surely if your reading of the country is that only centre/right parties can get elected then a left wing government that got there by deceit would be severely punished next time they went to the polls right?

If the plan is to get in with a right wing manifesto and then stick to it and govern from the right then thats a different conversation.

you use the next 5 years to plan and demostrate how the country and its people will be better off, there is no way to do everything in one term, you legislate and demonstrate and build and create while looking after the economy and growth and improving the public services.

I don't see the logic of this. You get in with a right wing manifesto, and stick to it, whilst telling voters how much better left wing reforms would be? And then next election you change your manifesto and attack your own record in government? It just doesn't work.

Blair managed it,

Not really. His government moved to the right the longer they were in. All the big stuff people remember now - devolution, the (limited) house of lords reform, the sure start centres, the minimum wage - all of it was in the first term.

Blair lost direction

Agreed.
 
"The Establishment decided Thatcher's ideas were safer with a strong Blair government than with a weak Major government.
We are given all these personalities to choose between to disguise the fact that the policies are the same".
 
"The Establishment decided Thatcher's ideas were safer with a strong Blair government than with a weak Major government.
We are given all these personalities to choose between to disguise the fact that the policies are the same".

It is a very good point - In the main people's views are driven by what they are told.
Those with the power (the establishment) manage that agenda
They decide what the majority think
They decide the government
 
Back
Top