He's still saying it today.
I think we knew it was effective, we laughed at how empty it is, but that's all the people fucking care about. I wish the left could have something like that for an election.
Labour backed Brexit in the previous election it would have meant a compromise for the worse but wouldn't have been a change in known labour policy and kept them more competive in marginals at the cost of safe seats. More importantly they would have had a say in the crucial brexit period rather than no say at all.Voting through Boris' deal would have been incredibly damaging to Labour Remainer support, even in a post-Brexit world. Pretty sure I remember the Lib dems crowing about the <20 Labour MPs that voted for the bill's second reading.
That's a hell of a swing they need to get back. Looking at Tory government for another 10 years.
Yep.They were too much left all at once, Labour are going to need to start off more focused around some core left wing ideas, gain trust and build left over time. A mirror of Blair if people can stomach that image.
I mean if we're honest we all knew how effective it would be before the election. It polled well in key labour marginals and throughout the election there was not a single piece of good news coming out from them. We were hoping Labour's campaigning would be good enough to counter this but instead they were a liability.He's still saying it today.
I think we knew it was effective, we laughed at how empty it is, but that's all the people fucking care about. I wish the left could have something like that for an election.
Yep.
My mate who is in favour of pretty much everything being ripped up and started again, and would even like mobile phones as a state provided service was saying that you can't just go all the way in one hit.
The quality of the discussion is just frustrating as fuck. The answer isn't going Lib Dem, and it isn't keep going as they were. There has to be compromise, it's inevitable in politics.
The issue is that Labour never managed to explain why their deal would be better for the Leave voters. And it was surely not better than revoke for the remain voters. So they were offering a middle ground that nobody wanted in fact. That's even before going to the referendum.
They did. It's just that people don't want a close alignment with the EU post-Brexit. They don't want a CU. That isn't real Brexit to them.
They want freedom of movement to stop.
They backed it in terms of not opposing the referendum result and vaguely offering a better Brexit deal than May but were able to steer the conversation away from it. Passing Johnson's deal would have been getting a hard Brexit over the line. There's no distracting from that point. Labour support would collapsed and they could have passed a motion for an election.Labour backed Brexit in the previous election it would have meant a compromise for the worse but wouldn't have been a change in known labour policy and kept them more competive in marginals at the cost of safe seats. More importantly they would have had a say in the crucial brexit period rather than no say at all.
I mean if we're honest we all knew how effective it would be before the election. It polled well in key labour marginals and throughout the election there was not a single piece of good news coming out from them. We were hoping Labour's campaigning would be good enough to counter this but instead they were a liability.
I don't understand how the feet on the ground were so badly used, it sounds like an utter shambles of arrogance. I thought that was meant to be the one thing we could count on.
Doesn't really matter how good it was because there being a referendum meant it would be poison to leave voters which is why they didn't bother and focused on the policy they did well on (the NHS).The issue is that Labour never managed to explain why their deal would be better for the Leave voters. And it was surely not better than revoke for the remain voters. So they were offering a middle ground that nobody wanted in fact. That's even before going to the referendum.
The issue is that Labour never managed to explain why their deal would be better for the Leave voters. And it was surely not better than revoke for the remain voters. So they were offering a middle ground that nobody wanted in fact. That's even before going to the referendum.
Probably the people on the ground were also paying attention more to Dr. Moderate than the people there.
Doesn't really matter how good it was because there being a referendum meant it would be poison to leave voters which is why they didn't bother and focused on the policy they did well on (the NHS).
In an ideal scenario Corbyn would have left before the election and Labour bothered to argue to the public why they're spending plans reasonable and didn't go into detail about all their tax increases that would be poison to the middle class.
Still would have lost but maybe not as catastrophically.
not if they're a leftist extremist, we should never see them on TV againThe tories have a massive fucking majority now, can we have some people on the news who want to hold them to account. I'm sick of these fucking polo club cunts.
LongerLol "purity tests"
It's gonna be 5 years of this bullshit isn't it?
Labour's loss had nothing to do with its policies. Even John Curtis said labour's policies were polling very favourably. Let's get real, Labour lost because of a media hit job on Corbyn, leaking remain voters to the Lib Dems and leavers to the Tories on brexit and the fact that much of the white working class vote that had traditionally voted labour are actually quite racist and didn't want a leader who "supported" the IRA.
get brexit done was only so powerful because the 2017 parliament blocked brexit for so long and kept trying to overturn the result. this strategy created a hard remain block, it created a huge leaver backlash that drove thursday's mess and it alienated from politics anyone who could buy into a vision radical change (as they can't even do brexit) which was meant to be the corbyn pitch.
this was due to a tacit alliance between corbyn's leadership who wanted to use a short term strategy based around may failing to deliver brexit damaging the tories reputation and swinging labour into government (blew up in their face, ended in huge tory majority) and remainers who got high on their own supply, decided they didn't actually lose the last referendum because of a bus and agitated for a completely ridiculous policy that was never going to get majority consent in an election (blew up in face, ended up with the hardest brexit).
they both went down hand in hand as victims of their own incredible incompetence, outplayed by mark francois.
The only silver lining is that Boris's Labour leave switchers are probably only lending their votes to Boris for Brexit. When that goes tits up, they could easily switch back.
you'd think they'd be in full support of the bbc considering everything running up to the electionApparently the Tories have just announced that they are going to look at decriminalising the non-payment of a TV licence
And we're off!
The four day work week was such a disaster of a policy for them. Which is insane because it's a thing that every single study has shown is better for productivity, for mental health and just in general better. But any time Labour were asked about it they fumbled and had no answer for questions. Like "How will the NHS work with a 4 day work week?" the easy answer is "We'll be increasing funding and number of doctors and nurses so that the overlap means you'll always have access to health care and also the health care professionals you see will be less overworked and tired."And the four day working week sounded too much like the winter of discontent for a lot of older voters.
The policies are wrapped in the Corbyn socialist fear that he would steal their money and bankrupt the nation. They didn't trust Corbyn which I believe is why a lot of Remain Labour voters bounced.I really don't think the policies themselves are what sunk Labour. Sure, some of them didn't help one bit, but going by what studies we've seen so far is due to Brexit and the total lack of confidence in Corbyn.
Talking about not losing catastrophically, picking one side of Brexit and sticking with it (especially the remain side) would have guaranteed that.
Yeah, I don't get the doom, it isn't a normal election result, it is the popping of a boil, it might clear up pretty quickly if Boris fucks it up enough, the fun has been had.
The four day work week was such a disaster of a policy for them. Which is insane because it's a thing that every single study has shown is better for productivity, for mental health and just in general better. But any time Labour were asked about it they fumbled and had no answer for questions. Like "How will the NHS work with a 4 day work week?" the easy answer is "We'll be increasing funding and number of doctors and nurses so that the overlap means you'll always have access to health care and also the health care professionals you see will be less overworked and tired."
Done, easy. Instead every time it came up they dropped the ball and had no answer. It was a policy that apparently nobody in the party actually knew how to sell.
you'd think they'd be in full support of the bbc considering everything running up to the election
seems like the bbc can't win, lefties and righties hate 'em
you'd think they'd be in full support of the bbc considering everything running up to the election
seems like the bbc can't win, lefties and righties hate 'em
I think Tories fighting among themselves over brexit was fine. Don't interrupt an enemy when it's making a mistake but eventually Corbyn had to make a move. After May's deal failed to get through parliament 3 times the window of opportunity for a 2nd referendum was open.
That was the time to sell to leavers what a mess the whole brexit situation was and the only solution was to ask the people again.
Instead Labour continued to sit on the fence criticising the tory brexit mess but not offering any alternate solution.
The BBC will always be naturally left leaning because of the people that work in that industry. Yes, they've done heel turn recently in News but that was very much an enforced top-down editorial decision. Liberal, multi-cultural values pervade the organisation organically in most other areas.
The policies are wrapped in the Corbyn socialist fear that he would steal their money and bankrupt the nation. They didn't trust Corbyn which I believe is why a lot of Remain Labour voters bounced.
Corbyn's approval rating has always been low and that's in part due to the backed in red scare and anti-british smears.
The fact he was in fact promising a heavy tax increase for a sizeable section of the upper and some middle class added to belief it was a choice between two bad options.
I think you're still thinking of the old BBC that did everything in house and had a culture of its own, long gone and dead.
That's not very different to what ended up happening, the problem is people by and large actually really did want Brexit which is an unavoidable fact. There's no way a second election ticket would would result in a hung parliament it was simply a question of how big the majority was going to be. This was an unwinnable election for labour. The only way to minimise the damage was to change the game one way or another.I think Tories fighting among themselves over brexit was fine. Don't interrupt an enemy when it's making a mistake but eventually Corbyn had to make a move. After May's deal failed to get through parliament 3 times the window of opportunity for a 2nd referendum was open.
That was the time to sell to leavers what a mess the whole brexit situation was and the only solution was to ask the people again.
Instead Labour continued to sit on the fence criticising the tory brexit mess but not offering any alternate solution.
They were too much left all at once, Labour are going to need to start off more focused around some core left wing ideas, gain trust and build left over time. A mirror of Blair if people can stomach that image.
I'd quite like Keir Starmer to be Labour leader bit I worry his remain stance will hurt him a bit at first but he'd forensically pull Boris apart at PMQs. Far better option than Nandy et al.
Those policies are poisonous to the upper class and upper middle class regardless who made the arguement (and a lot of people like to think their are or will do better financially than they currently are). That's their purpose and Labour made no attempt to hide this. If it wasn't for Brexit the majority of those types wouldn't vote for Labour in a million years.Because people perceived the policies as being Corbyn's utopia instead of well reasoned ideas. The messenger matters sometime more than the ideas themselves. Great ideas fail all the time because the one who should sell them is not able to do that properly.
This is a good thing though, surely? It's ridiculous that you can go to jail for not paying a bloody tv license. And I can only imagine that it's poor people that end up in this situation because let's face it, I can't see many better off people willing to risk jail for £12.83 per month.Apparently the Tories have just announced that they are going to look at decriminalising the non-payment of a TV licence
And we're off!
CU does not allow freedom of movement, being in the single market does. Turkey is in the Customs Union too and Turkish citizens cannot move to EU countries freely. Being neither in the single market nor in a customs union with the EU is the hardest of Brexits.They did. It's just that people don't want a close alignment with the EU post-Brexit. They don't want a CU. That isn't real Brexit to them.
They want freedom of movement to stop.
90 in 2017 apparently, but that was for non payment of the fine/sHow many people get banged up over the BBC license? I don't think I've seen a detector van since about 1985.
90 in 2017 apparently, but that was for non payment of the fine/s