Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Eggs]

….if Labour win the GE Starmer will have done a terrific job turning their fortunes around but he needs to put ego & power to one side and transition to a new leader in 5 years time. Andy Burnham has hinted he’d come back, I can see him connecting with voters.

 

[davek]

Because Trump and whomever follows Sunak are better? Good grief.

That's not the corollary of what I said.

 

[davek]

I do dave - as I've said before, they are in a far weaker position than they think they are. The measures that the top of the party is taking - imposing candidates, restricting open selections, attacking internal opposition, manipulating the rulebook - are the actions of weak leadership; if they had political support they wouldn't need to fix things because they'd be popular enough to win and do what they want. As a government things will be even worse for them, as they need institutional backing to do things and that requires either a coherent, sensible and well-thought-out policy and ministerial ability - and they lack both.

Most of the current top of the party do not have the genuine internal or electoral political support that they would need to survive a crisis and so, when a crisis comes along, they will have to either change position (unlikely given that the lack of support means they are reliant on donors and media exposure) or will be replaced. There aren't enough of them at the top to survive many crises, or indeed one big crisis.

I think probably quite quickly a Starmer government will come up against a big issue, the clique at the top will try what it thinks are standard measures of the kind that any post-1979 government would have done and it will not work. When it doesn't work, they will try and stick to their guns and will get overrun. Starmer will dismiss them and, out of a sense of self-preservation, will appoint more competent people who change course. When that works, the argument for the right wing at the top of the party will be lost.

Maybe. I'm not a big fan of the belief that a democratic challenge to Starmer and his team will happen. MPs are by and large happy to go along with things if their own seat is safe. Those in the party with morals (not that many now when you look at how much they've stood by and watched the Gaza slaughter) looking to loosen Starmer and Co.s grip might stand a better chance if there's a hung parliament, and the leadership have to take note of conditions demanded for support by the likes of the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs. Outside that I cant see how the leadership machine is toppled and replaced any time soon. And they'll move to tighten their rules to avoid challenges once in power.

The only real option for anyone who describes themselves as socialist is to form another party outside of it.

 

[Jebus_lives]

….if Labour win the GE Starmer will have done a terrific job turning their fortunes around but he needs to put ego & power to one side and transition to a new leader in 5 years time. Andy Burnham has hinted he’d come back, I can see him connecting with voters.

Starmer, by and large, has just towed an uncontroversial line. He's done things to appease the media and to court middle class voters, but I'm not sure the success of labour is attributable to good politics or just woeful politics on behalf of the other parties.

I think for many Starmer and this Labour is the least bad option.

 

[tsubaki]

Maybe. I'm not a big fan of the belief that a democratic challenge to Starmer and his team will happen. MPs are by and large happy to go along with things if their own seat is safe. Those in the party with morals (not that many now when you look at how much they've stood by and watched the Gaza slaughter) looking to loosen Starmer and Co.s grip might stand a better chance if there's a hung parliament, and the leadership have to take note of conditions demanded for support by the likes of the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs. Outside that I cant see how the leadership machine is toppled and replaced any time soon. And they'll move to tighten their rules to avoid challenges once in power.

The only real option for anyone who describes themselves as socialist is to form another party outside of it.

I disagree - a hung Parliament or a small majority is just going to result in a coalition with the Lib Dems, and insistence that sensible centrism is the only thing on the menu because that is the only thing the partners would agree on.

As for the leadership, any attempt to avoid challenges will indicate how weak they really are.

 

[Eggs]

Starmer, by and large, has just towed an uncontroversial line. He's done things to appease the media and to court middle class voters, but I'm not sure the success of labour is attributable to good politics or just woeful politics on behalf of the other parties.

I think for many Starmer and this Labour is the least bad option.

…at least they’ve become an option, which they certainly weren’t previously. I agree, the Conservatives are largely defeating themselves but Starmer is doing what it takes to win power.

In years to come, I can see the Greens overtaking the Lib Dem’s, they will take votes off Labour.

 

[Jebus_lives]

…at least they’ve become an option, which they certainly weren’t previously. I agree, the Conservatives are largely defeating themselves but Starmer is doing what it takes to win power.

In years to come, I can see the Greens overtaking the Lib Dem’s, they will take votes off Labour.

He's doing what he needs to do to be elected, but he's done nothing to shift political ideology or a change in public identity.

His entire appeal is that he isn't the Tories which is problematic because that puts him in competition with every other party that isn't the Tories.

He'll become prime minister but it will become a struggle for him from day 1.

 

[Eggs]

He's doing what he needs to do to be elected, but he's done nothing to shift political ideology or a change in public identity.

His entire appeal is that he isn't the Tories which is problematic because that puts him in competition with every other party that isn't the Tories.

He'll become prime minister but it will become a struggle for him from day 1.

….he’s shifted Labour to the electable middle-ground, that’s the big difference. After working 40 years in the Public Sector, services are always better under Labour and that’s where they’ll make a difference, I’m sure of that. He’s done a terrific job but in this day and age persona is such a big issue and it’s where he’s lacking.

 

[Amw79]

….he’s shifted Labour to the electable middle-ground, that’s the big difference. After working 4m years in the Public Sector, services are always better under Labour and that’s where they’ll make a difference, I’m sure of that. He’s done a terrific job but in this day and age persona is such a big issue and it’s where he’s lacking.

You’re older than I had you down as.

 

[Amw79]

I just cant see how a 'Labour' Party like this one avoids all those problems I bullet pointed above to make a seismic grab for power. To get a landslide you have to have a vision, you cant just not be the unpopular opposition. That's why they'll be a one term government.

Don’t necessarily disagree with this, but the framing is weird. “A landslide” and multiple terms of government isn’t the primary objective for Labour. Victory and taking power is the objective.

If things get marginally better in the next 5 years - whether it be cost of living, NHS waiting times, a less inhumane immigration system, or even just a change in the perpetual culture war narrative, or slightly less corruption and incompetence - people will see this, and recognise that things are marginally better, and a second term becomes more likely.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

All those concerned Starmer is a closet Tory can chill. One of the Telegraph's columnists knows the truth:

Voter apathy will unleash a Labour government far more dangerous than many realise​

Starmer’s cautious approach appears to be paying off. But make no mistake: he is a socialist in centrist’s clothing

As nights go, the local elections heralded a great one for Labour. Think after-work drinks, kissing the colleague you’ve flirted with for months and ending up back at theirs. That was Labour in the early hours of Friday morning while the Tories were left looking like the halitosis-ridden bloke who’s worked at the office for years that no one wants to talk to, let alone snog.
Advertisement

Yet as Britain wakes up to the very real prospect of a Labour government today, Tory voters must surely be asking themselves whether this one-night stand – be it with Labour, Reform or, God forbid, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens – really is marriage material. Because make no mistake, if you sleep with any of these parties, you end up shacked up with Sir Keir Starmer for a minimum of four years, and possibly 10. Let that sink in: a decade of Labour.
Trust me, I can understand the deep-rooted sense of betrayal that has driven people into the arms of the nasal knight. With his slick of Brylcreem and love of Arsenal’s terraces, I can see the appeal of this self-styled “man of the people” compared with preppy billionaire Rishi Sunak, with his patronising five-point plans and his £180 “smart mug”. When it comes to being irritatingly priggish politicians who lack a proper vision for Britain, there’s barely a fag paper between them (not that either of them would even dream of smoking a roll-up).
Indeed, such is the level of apathy that some previously wanton Tories have now become positively apolitical. Faced with the alternative prospect of a threesome with Richard Tice and Nigel Farage, they have decided not to vote altogether. I get it, honestly I do. But those voters are mistaken if they believe a socialist like Starmer, who propped up Jeremy Corbyn for four years, seriously represents continuity Conservativism. I appreciate Sunak’s wet, but come on.
When the sum total of all this protest voting inevitably results in two red lines on the political pregnancy test come October or November, Conservatives are going to realise they have given birth to a monster.
A term of Labour will leave us with the kind of unruly brat even Supernanny would struggle to put on the naughty step. Forget Doctor Spock – this enfant terrible would rather stick its fingers in its ears than listen to reason. Or perhaps it will be like living with Kevin the Teenager – but a 21st-century version, complete with pronouns, protests and neverending requests for more pocket money.
When they are not being pushed around on the world stage by Donald Trump, they will be desperately trying to ingratiate themselves with the “grown-ups” in the Civil Service, the Treasury, the EU, the international courts and all the other establishments where officials seem to think they know better than everyone else. If that wasn’t bad enough, they will be joined by a Cabinet that will flip-flop so much on policy that even a tranquillizer won’t touch the sides.
Worried about the cost of living? Don’t worry, Ed Miliband of bacon sandwich fame will be there to splurge your hard-earned cash on Greta Thunberg’s Christmas list.
Concerned about immigration? Never fear, Yvette Cooper will be on here to secure returns deals with the Taliban, Bashar al-Assad and Ali Khamenei. That’s of course when she’s finished tearing up the Illegal Migration Act and Rwanda deal – even if it ends up stopping the boats. She’ll “smash” the smuggling gangs, but only once she’s finished explaining that there are no economic migrants under Labour, only “people fleeing persecution”.
And since their chums at the Office for Budget Responsibility have already factored in a legal migration rate of 350,000 for the next five years, there’s nothing Labour can really do about it, right? Want a cap on the numbers? Forget it. This is the party who inherited net migration of around 60,000 in the 25 years to 1997 and set us on a course which saw it multiply by 100, to 6 million, over the next 25 years.
Those running their own businesses will be able to rely on Labour’s “New Deal for Workers” to overhaul what one of their many union paymasters have erroneously described as “one of the worst sets of employment rights in Europe”. That’s when they are not too busy pandering to striking workers, renationalising the railways and taxing until the pips squeak anyone who creates any wealth in this country.
Drive a car? You can look forward to per-mile road charging unless you are willing to drive an electric vehicle – but don’t bank on there being anywhere to charge it. Hoping for an end to the culture wars? Rest assured that Labour’s “rising stars” Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood have finally decided that trans women are not women, after all. They might not get it right, folks, but at least they get it last.
It doesn’t help, by the way, to take comfort in this idea that Starmer may only win a small majority. A small majority may leave him in hock to the hard-Left loons and pro-Palestinian fanatics, making the prospect of his fruitcake administration look even nuttier. And when the polling guru Professor John Curtice points out that “these are decent but not earth shattering results” for Labour, we should really be worried.
As the nation’s leading psephologist pointed out: “It’s still the case that Labour are not heading for the kind of really dramatic local election performances that they managed to achieve under Tony Blair before the 1997 general election.”
This is because the Labour leader doesn’t just lack Blair’s personality but also his moderate politics. Unlike his Thatcherite predecessor, who won two terms in office precisely because he wasn’t an anorak-wearing pinko, Starmer has described himself as a “red-green” socialist.
This is a man who has suggested in the past that trade unions should have had control over the “industry and community”. A regular contributor Socialist Lawyer, he once declared that “Karl Marx was, of course, right”.
He may have subsequently tried to pretend he doesn’t have these tendencies by banging on about patriotism and the St George flag – but we saw his true colours during the pandemic, when he was advocating for ever more draconian lockdown measures. He’s not some cuddly Blairite (should such a thing exist), he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Tories need only look at Wales, Birmingham, and indeed London to see how badly these sorts of virtue-signalling Lefties run things. And Labour won’t be inheriting a golden economic legacy, either. When Blair came into power, inflation was at 2.6 per cent, unemployment was at 1.6 million and falling and the economy had grown for almost 20 consecutive quarters. We are now confronting the reality of a big spending Labour government – with no money. That can only mean higher taxes. It’s going to be carnage... of Conservative making.

Well that's alright then

 

[davek]

I disagree - a hung Parliament or a small majority is just going to result in a coalition with the Lib Dems, and insistence that sensible centrism is the only thing on the menu because that is the only thing the partners would agree on.

As for the leadership, any attempt to avoid challenges will indicate how weak they really are.

The Lib Dems have 15 MPs. Socialist Campaign Group within the LP are 35 strong in parliament.

I suppose Starmer could cut a deal with the SNP under those circumstances, but an independence vote wicked be the price to pay...and a Unionist like him would never countenance it.

 

[tsubaki]

Unless things change radically over the next few hours, last nights chat about the London mayoral race being close seems to have been a load of wham.

In all the declarations so far Khan is up vs 2021, and Hall is doing worse than Bailey did.

 

[davek]

Don’t necessarily disagree with this, but the framing is weird. “A landslide” and multiple terms of government isn’t the primary objective for Labour. Victory and taking power is the objective.

If things get marginally better in the next 5 years - whether it be cost of living, NHS waiting times, a less inhumane immigration system, or even just a change in the perpetual culture war narrative, or slightly less corruption and incompetence - people will see this, and recognise that things are marginally better, and a second term becomes more likely.

I think if that happens - pretty much meagre improvement - they'll react to Labour the way they reacted to Brown's Government and say there's no vision there. People forget just how unimpressed the electorate were with Brown and then Miliband. They didn't inspire because they had no programme to rejuvenate the country.

The Tories do bold much better than Labour, that's why they win elections more often than not.

 

[davek]

Unless things change radically over the next few hours, last nights chat about the London mayoral race being close seems to have been a load of wham.

In all the declarations so far Khan is up vs 2021, and Hall is doing worse than Bailey did.

Is that due to inner city wards declaring first? Wards in the outer ring of London will be massively anti-Khan.