Brexit Day! | Page 145 | Vital Football

Brexit Day!

Status
Not open for further replies.
in_the_top_one said:
You really only need to listen to the first one minute and 12 seconds. It is the left wing contingent of the labour party that he is having a pop at. RLB got sacked; "One of your own".

You're projecting.
Have another go.
Click to expand...

It couldn't be any clearer; it's about the 'woke'/liberal left. It doesn't really matter anyway as it's just a satirist making a living (who happens to be very left-wing when not in character)
 
Last edited:
InvincibleBrianMan said:
The Labour party is supposed to represent the left wing of politics though, that was what they were created for?
Click to expand...
I thought they were created for the common man, the ‘labourers’... They were only ‘left’ in comparison to the Tories.

At the end of the day though it doesn’t matter. They want to take power from the Tories and govern this country. To do that they need votes and to do that they need to appeal to as many people as possible.

Left wing politics just aren’t appealing enough to the voting masses so Labour either becomes more centrist to stay relevant and electable or it becomes irrelevant.
 
InvincibleBrianMan said:
The Labour party is supposed to represent the left wing of politics though, that was what they were created for?
Click to expand...

No, it was formed out of frustration that the Liberal Party didn't have working class candidates standing for election. It actually had very similar policies on social reform - to such an extent that they agreed not to run candidates against each other. It wasn't until 1918 that it changed to a socialist leaning party.

For a 'scientist' you're not so big on facts and knowledge are you?
 
Basha73 said:
I thought they were created for the common man, the ‘labourers’... They were only ‘left’ in comparison to the Tories.

At the end of the day though it doesn’t matter. They want to take power from the Tories and govern this country. To do that they need votes and to do that they need to appeal to as many people as possible.

Left wing politics just aren’t appealing enough to the voting masses so Labour either becomes more centrist to stay relevant and electable or it becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Exactly correct, they were formed because the liberal party only had poshos standing but they actually were very similar for a long time.
 
Basha73 said:
I thought they were created for the common man, the ‘labourers’... They were only ‘left’ in comparison to the Tories.

At the end of the day though it doesn’t matter. They want to take power from the Tories and govern this country. To do that they need votes and to do that they need to appeal to as many people as possible.

Left wing politics just aren’t appealing enough to the voting masses so Labour either becomes more centrist to stay relevant and electable or it becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter how far to the right the party moves, the media will still portray it as too far left. The party is much less radical than it was at its conception or at any time prior to the 1990s.
The party has lost the majority of the working class vote ( more voted Tory than Labour) some of that is due to Brexit, a lot is due to the party no longer representing the needs of the workers.
There are a substantial number of voters who make a binary choice in an effective two party state and vote for the better of two bad options. But there are also a substantial number of voters who see both sides as not representing them.
A large portion of the Labour support actually want left wing policies! You cannot get into government by denying that support base. Blair did not get into government by denying the left, he appealed to the left, he made promises to the left, the left voted for him. The Labour party needs to appeal to the left and centre to gain power, then they need to do something to help the workers who have suffered 40 years of stagnating wages, and neoliberal politics in order to keep that vote.
That means a coalition of the left. The centrist need to understand this
 
Calvin Plummer said:
No, it was formed out of frustration that the Liberal Party didn't have working class candidates standing for election. It actually had very similar policies on social reform - to such an extent that they agreed not to run candidates against each other. It wasn't until 1918 that it changed to a socialist leaning party.

For a 'scientist' you're not so big on facts and knowledge are you?
Click to expand...
The Liberals were the left wing of British politics before the Labour party was formed Turnip.
 
InvincibleBrianMan said:
It doesn't matter how far to the right the party moves, the media will still portray it as too far left. The party is much less radical than it was at its conception or at any time prior to the 1990s.
The party has lost the majority of the working class vote ( more voted Tory than Labour) some of that is due to Brexit, a lot is due to the party no longer representing the needs of the workers.
There are a substantial number of voters who make a binary choice in an effective two party state and vote for the better of two bad options. But there are also a substantial number of voters who see both sides as not representing them.
A large portion of the Labour support actually want left wing policies! You cannot get into government by denying that support base. Blair did not get into government by denying the left, he appealed to the left, he made promises to the left, the left voted for him. The Labour party needs to appeal to the left and centre to gain power, then they need to do something to help the workers who have suffered 40 years of stagnating wages, and neoliberal politics in order to keep that vote.
That means a coalition of the left. The centrist need to understand this
Click to expand...
A large portion of Labour may want left wing policies but a large, possibly larger part of their support want more centrist policies. That went largely forgotten under Corbyn as he chased the young and the middle class vote.

It’s all well and good criticising the centrists of the party but the left have been just as guilty. Even more so when you consider that the only version of Labour that’s had power in recent decades has been a largely centrist one.

You have to get elected if you want to change things and a totally Left Wing Labour will never be elected if history is anything to go by.
 
Basha73 said:
A large portion of Labour may want left wing policies but a large, possibly larger part of their support want more centrist policies. That went largely forgotten under Corbyn as he chased the young and the middle class vote.

It’s all well and good criticising the centrists of the party but the left have been just as guilty. Even more so when you consider that the only version of Labour that’s had power in recent decades has been a largely centrist one.

You have to get elected if you want to change things and a totally Left Wing Labour will never be elected if history is anything to go by.
Click to expand...
If so why did 10 million vote labour? There is already a centrist party.
I am not calling for a totally left wing party but in order to gain power we need left wing policy that assists the working people. Otherwise we may as well just rename the party " The Management party"
We need a broad coalition that represents the working people.
 
InvincibleBrianMan said:
If so why did 10 million vote labour? There is already a centrist party.
I am not calling for a totally left wing party but in order to gain power we need left wing policy that assists the working people. Otherwise we may as well just rename the party " The Management party"
We need a broad coalition that represents the working people.
Click to expand...
Because people like me voted labour despite our misgivings. I didn’t think labour represented me at all in the last election but I wouldn’t ever vote Tory.

How many people, though did vote Tory? How many that Labour should have targeted but didn’t?

I have no problem with a Labour Party that leans toward the left, in fact I welcome it. But only so far. The party needs to appeal to the masses and that means being slightly more pragmatic and widening its sphere of influence.

Starmer has started well but he needs to unite the party and show people that there is an alternative.
 
Basha73 said:
Because people like me voted labour despite our misgivings. I didn’t think labour represented me at all in the last election but I wouldn’t ever vote Tory.

How many people, though did vote Tory? How many that Labour should have targeted but didn’t?

I have no problem with a Labour Party that leans toward the left, in fact I welcome it. But only so far. The party needs to appeal to the masses and that means being slightly more pragmatic and widening its sphere of influence.

Starmer has started well but he needs to unite the party and show people that there is an alternative.
Click to expand...
Unite the party? Imposible.
 
Basha73 said:
Because people like me voted labour despite our misgivings. I didn’t think labour represented me at all in the last election but I wouldn’t ever vote Tory.

How many people, though did vote Tory? How many that Labour should have targeted but didn’t?

I have no problem with a Labour Party that leans toward the left, in fact I welcome it. But only so far. The party needs to appeal to the masses and that means being slightly more pragmatic and widening its sphere of influence.

Starmer has started well but he needs to unite the party and show people that there is an alternative.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree. And Starmer cannot afford to precide over what can be viewed as a witch hunt of the left. He has to walk a very careful line.
 
Last edited:
jbacsta said:
6
You do realise that we are talking about a collection of people who need to convince the electorate that they can run the country? Pretence just wont cut it.
Click to expand...
Of course. At the very least they need a working and workable truce. The Tories regularly implode so Labour need to take advantage.
 
Basha73 said:
Because people like me voted labour despite our misgivings.
Click to expand...
And, importantly, many did not ..because of their misgivings.

The Conservatives gained very few extra votes but their share increased dramatically. In fact they only added about 330,000 votes, up just 2% on the previous election: 13,636,684 up to 13,966,454.
This does not represent a whole bunch of voters in the red wall deciding that the tories better reflected their values and buying into an oven ready brexit.

What the result reflects is a whole bunch of voters in that area not wanting to vote for Corbyn's Labour. They abandoned Labour. 2.6 million of them!


People will always point the finger away from themselves in the aftermath of defeat. The left of the party were in charge and it was a shit show.
The facts are clear. Cons went up by only 2%; Labour went down by a whopping >20%!
There was no endorsement of Brexit despite historical rewritings, just a kicking for Labour. Polling suggests the leadership was strongly the number one reason for that.
 
mao tse tung said:
Boris has the very same problems; he just happens to have the luxury of a good majority or his opponents in the party and the malcontents would be scheming behind is back.
Click to expand...
I agree. But they won the last election largely because of him not despite him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.