Current Affairs The Labour Party

[tsubaki]

Very interesting to see what will happen as print media becomes obsolete, i guess its already happening with facebook campaigns...but not sure of they will have the same hold on people as newspapers

Indeed, and that is a really dangerous development - there is an awful lot of online “news” sites that are basically one articulate extremist in his mums house on her laptop.

Posters here have quoted from them, and more worryingly papers themselves repeat what they say (that even applies to ISIL propaganda as well).

 

[Charlie Sweet]

Did you learn anything at all from the last election? Take a look what happened to Brown and then Miliband when they offered the muck you applaud New Labour for serving up to the electorate. They were obliterated. It's yesterday's game plan...a game plan from the opposition play book at that.

Corbyn's 2017 manifesto won more votes for Labour since Blair's heyday precisely because they identified market failure and a contempt amongst growing sections of the electorate for the purveyors of the market. They argued that the state needed to step in and intervene in people's lives and almost overhauled a huge Tory lead to get into government to enact it...and you want to go back to Blairism.!!!

FFS, give your head a shake.

You're basing an awful lot on one election result where Labour still lost despite a shambolic Tory party and an even worse Lib Dems.

Facts are a diatinct left wing Labour party hasnt won a general election in my lifetime and I'm in my early 40s. Blair did a huge amount of good and would be a God send now in my opinion.

Some of these mad policies presented at conference are not just poison to an electorate but equally I'd caution could be simply a breach of legal/human rights and would be dragged through the courts for years. They are fantasy politics.

 

[davek]

You're basing an awful lot on one election result where Labour still lost despite a shambolic Tory party and an even worse Lib Dems.

Facts are a diatinct left wing Labour party hasnt won a general election in my lifetime and I'm in my early 40s. Blair did a huge amount of good and would be a God send now in my opinion.

Some of these mad policies presented at conference are not just poison to an electorate but equally I'd caution could be simply a breach of legal/human rights and would be dragged through the courts for years. They are fantasy politics.

I'll die to defend your right to be wrong.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Oh, New Labour did have a chance to do something..and they failed to do it. Instead they delivered a continuation of the Thatcher/Major years.

They weren't socialists, and they weren't even what could broadly be described as social democrats. They were creatures of the market with a contempt for their own party...remember the "sofa cabinets" of Blair? Disgraceful. And it all led inexorably to the Iraq War and the industrial scale carnage of shock and awe.

The 'sofa' government that you speak of was an overblown allegation due to response in delivery to keep up the pace with the changes in media and the issues that started to come in faster and in greater abundance with better communications. Where once you could have some days available for civil service to submit papers to the cabinet who then all sit around and discuss with the PM who then makes a decision was just not acceptable anymore. That doesn't mean all policies/decisions are/were conducted like that but it is just a normal process change when the old way was no longer fit for purpose.

Obviously this got up the noses of Civil servants that there were outside advisers and hence the term was unleashed on the public, but just a minute ago you were accusing the Blair government of being just another Tory one but here you are complaining about a progressive change they made to improve the flow??

 

[tsubaki]

The 'sofa' government that you speak of was an overblown allegation due to response in delivery to keep up the pace with the changes in media and the issues that started to come in faster and in greater abundance with better communications. Where once you could have some days available for civil service to submit papers to the cabinet who then all sit around and discuss with the PM who then makes a decision was just not acceptable anymore. That doesn't mean all policies/decisions are/were conducted like that but it is just a normal process change when the old way was no longer fit for purpose.

Obviously this got up the noses of Civil servants that there were outside advisers and hence the term was unleashed on the public, but just a minute ago you were accusing the Blair government of being just another Tory one but here you are complaining about a progressive change they made to improve the flow??

It absolutely was not an overblown allegation, and it (Blair ignoring advice) probably went a long way to costing hundreds of thousands of people their lives. The way in which the FO was sidelined should have been criminal.

Also this idea that decisions now have to be taken in fast time to cope with the demands of modern media is sort of destroyed by the fact that Blair’s Government were sharing news grids with several of the tabloids (especially the Murdoch press). They knew in advance what many of the headlines were likely to be.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Did you learn anything at all from the last election? Take a look what happened to Brown and then Miliband when they offered the muck you applaud New Labour for serving up to the electorate. They were obliterated. It's yesterday's game plan...a game plan from the opposition play book at that.

Corbyn's 2017 manifesto won more votes for Labour since Blair's heyday precisely because they identified market failure and a contempt amongst growing sections of the electorate for the purveyors of the market. They argued that the state needed to step in and intervene in people's lives and almost overhauled a huge Tory lead to get into government to enact it...and you want to go back to Blairism.!!!

FFS, give your head a shake.

And yet when people have actually had a chance to vote since 2017 in by-elections, Labour have done poorly. They lost 16% of votes in Peterborough, 13% in Newport West, 12% in Brecon and 18% in Lewisham. Party on the up? More like 2017 was peak Corbyn and he's been in decline ever since.

 

[Charlie Sweet]

I'll die to defend your right to be wrong.

That's great to hear comrade

But seriously you either believe that opinion polls are wrong or not. When someone challenges you now with the statement that Corbyn is failing because he's so far behind in the polls despite a horrible.dogs dinner of a government - you respond by saying the polls are wrong.

Okay but if they are wrong now then they were wrong before the last general election and Corbyn was never so far behind May. Right? So that puts a whole new spin on how well Corbyn did in that last election against what was without doubt a historically bad election campaign from May's Tories.

I want rid of the Tories and honestly feel that Corbyn and Momentum in particular are almost doing their level best to make the job of removing the Tories as hard as possible.

 

[davek]

And yet when people have actually had a chance to vote since 2017 in by-elections, Labour have done poorly. They lost 16% of votes in Peterborough, 13% in Newport West, 12% in Brecon and 18% in Lewisham. Party on the up? More like 2017 was peak Corbyn and he's been in decline ever since.

The Brexit factor. And there's also a new party we have to factor in when viewing vote share since the spring.

 

[davek]

That's great to hear comrade

But seriously you either believe that opinion polls are wrong or not. When someone challenges you now with the statement that Corbyn is failing because he's so far behind in the polls despite a horrible.dogs dinner of a government - you respond by saying the polls are wrong.

Okay but if they are wrong now then they were wrong before the last general election and Corbyn was never so far behind May. Right? So that puts a whole new spin on how well Corbyn did in that last election against what was without doubt a historically bad election campaign from May's Tories.

I want rid of the Tories and honestly feel that Corbyn and Momentum in particular are almost doing their level best to make the job of removing the Tories as hard as possible.

Most polls are weaponised propaganda tools. Both major parties have lost support since 2017 with the advent of the Brexit Party especially.

 

[Charlie Sweet]

Most polls are weaponised propaganda tools. Both major parties have lost support since 2017 with the advent of the Brexit Party especially.

Agreed but you've ignored my question. Are polls right or wrong? You cant use the line that polls were right in 2017 but are wrong now. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Caolam]

If the opposition parties had a leader of any merit then they would have ousted Johnston by now. What we are seeing is the most limited politians fighting for their own scraps, if any of them had any vision and a willingness to compromise then we could salvage something from this debacle.
Somehow the Mother of Parliaments have decided to mimic the level of intellectual debate we have had in the Northern Ireland Assembly, when we have a Northern Ireland Assembly.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The Brexit factor. And there's also a new party we have to factor in when viewing vote share since the spring.

Similarly, the party lost 11% of the vote in the EU elections. So you've got declining voter share in historically Labour seats (in bi-elections), a declining vote share in EU elections, and terrible polling figures for Labour as a party and especially Corbyn as the leader, and yet we're to believe that he's still the messiah. That his loss to the Maybot in 2017 is somehow used as evidence that he's got huge, widespread appeal is rather sad.

He's a busted flush. Why do you think Lansman wanted to do a number on Tom Watson? He knows that when Corbyn is inevitably shoved aside, Watson is the next cab in the rank.

 

[The binman chronicles]

It absolutely was not an overblown allegation, and it (Blair ignoring advice) probably went a long way to costing hundreds of thousands of people their lives. The way in which the FO was sidelined should have been criminal.

Also this idea that decisions now have to be taken in fast time to cope with the demands of modern media is sort of destroyed by the fact that Blair’s Government were sharing news grids with several of the tabloids (especially the Murdoch press). They knew in advance what many of the headlines were likely to be.

You say it like Blair, Campbell and Mandelson one day decided to just go to war all by themselves. Dismissing that it would have had to go through cabinet as plainly it went to vote in the HoC (which was not required by the way) and anyone who disagreed would have had to have walked, like Robin Cook did. So something that went through the cabinet and through the house is sofa government? Nah, not having it.

Yes there were mistakes but you are painting it from a very anti-Blair bias. Which almost all of old labour supporters do. It was a difficult choice and hindsight proved it was wrong but we don't live by hindsight and if we did nothing and a nuclear or chemical device found its way onto the streets of London that originated from Iraq, people would have a very different opinion to the pacifist ones now seen.

As for newspapers, the best way to respond to bad press is by trying to control what gets out there in the first place. Nothing wrong with that, very sensible. But you can't control all the press and things do get out there and you have to be on top of that as a government. But it wasn't just newspapers it was 24 hour news TV, things that people may not have seen for days afterwards suddenly are being beamed live in minutes. People want a reaction from them immediately afterwards.

 

[Joey66]

It tels me that in 1979 the Tories got on the wave of neo-liberalism and rode it for all it was worth, recasting British politics from a social democracy to one intent on upholding the interests of "entrepreneurialism" ("entrepreneurs" who built up their wealth from state cash handouts and contracts, btw) and who deregulated the economy to do so. Blair carried that work on. But no the global conditions are very different and that neo-liberal wave became a tsunami that wiped out their political economy...and now we look for new answers: some go for the Populist route that you do - *strong* centralised leadership that appeals to base emotions around nationalism; others like the LP leadership and membership see a chance to use the state to undo the tangled mess and give order and security to people's lives again. THAT is the struggle here in Britain.

It's a pity Blair and Campbell were never sent to the supreme court over the Irag war as their were no weapons of mass destruction..,..also the scientist who somehow committed suicide after addressing a government meeting to say just that no weapons of mass destruction.......
A far more worthwhile reason to take someone to the supreme court imo....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You say it like Blair, Campbell and Mandelson one day decided to just go to war all by themselves. Dismissing that it would have had to go through cabinet as plainly it went to vote in the HoC (which was not required by the way) and anyone who disagreed would have had to have walked, like Robin Cook did. So something that went through the cabinet and through the house is sofa government? Nah, not having it.

Yes there were mistakes but you are painting it from a very anti-Blair bias. Which almost all of old labour supporters do. It was a difficult choice and hindsight proved it was wrong but we don't live by hindsight and if we did nothing and a nuclear or chemical device found its way onto the streets of London that originated from Iraq, people would have a very different opinion to the pacifist ones now seen.

As for newspapers, the best way to respond to bad press is by trying to control what gets out there in the first place. Nothing wrong with that, very sensible. But you can't control all the press and things do get out there and you have to be on top of that as a government. But it wasn't just newspapers it was 24 hour news TV, things that people may not have seen for days afterwards suddenly are being beamed live in minutes. People want a reaction from the immediately afterwards.

412 vs 149 was the result of that Iraq vote. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and 'lest we forget, Chamberlain was lauded as a hero when he returned from Munich, so appeasement doesn't always work, and it's very debatable whether the people of Iraq would have done better had the west tried to appease Hussein.