UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[CaaC (John)+]

They all (Politicians) make promises before a General Election but they never keep them, once they are in power the majority of the promises are not put in the pending or out tray but are binned...yawn, a never-ending story.  

[Beelzebub]

1 hour ago, CaaC (John) said:

They all (Politicians) make promises before a General Election but they never keep them, once they are in power the majority of the promises are not put in the pending or out tray but are binned...yawn, a never-ending story.  

Never ending deception !

[Honey Honey]

21 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Most of the Labour > Conservative swingers in the North and Midlands have cited Corbyn as the reason for doing so, not the fact that they voted Leave.

What research is that?

I know People's Vote fanatics have been trying to cling on to an opinium survey without understanding the methodology or questioning the weighting applied to the 59 seats Labour lost. Something like 56 to leave voting seats. If weighting was even done like that. I've only seen it as nat rep results.

[RandoEFC+]

1 hour ago, Harvsky said:

What research is that?

I know People's Vote fanatics have been trying to cling on to an opinium survey without understanding the methodology or questioning the weighting applied to the 59 seats Labour lost. Something like 56 to leave voting seats. If weighting was even done like that. I've only seen it as nat rep results.

This was the main one, there are others as well.

https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1205510937995812864?s=19

 

Edited December 15, 2019 by RandoEFC

[The Artful Dodger]

Not sure how much those polls tell the whole story. There is a reason that the Labour vote collapsed mostly in the leave voting North/Midlands, while quire remarkably picking up the seat of Putney. The Tory majority was all about Brexit. 

Having said that, Corbyn was a problem both for himaelf and his policies. That doesn't mean I don't think he was right, but being right doesn't always make you popular. I'd hope Labour will have an adult discussion about this but it doesn't look like it's going to happen. From the poncey London left like Ash Sakar insisting it wasn't that bad to the right of Labour saying austerity is popular and trying to purge Labour of anyone even vaugley left wing, I don't see much hope. 

Being brutally honest, the working classes of the towns and cities are now on different pages. The working class of Cardiff, Liverpool and Manchester are not the 'metropolitan elite', they feel the impact of poverty, austerity etc just as much as someone from Grimsby or Leigh. They just don't buy into Tory nationalism. That is a divide that may well be impossible to bridge. I'm hearing a lot about 'Blue Labour' now, they will feel this is their opportunity. They raise some good points and were proven right on Brexit. However, all this talk of a socially conservative working class doesn't bear out. Where is the talk of strengthening marriage (I didn't agree with Corbyn's aim to take away the tax benefits of married couples), lowering divorce rates, encouraging the nuclear family, edu action, work and most importantly, stopping the corrosive influence of market consumerism on our culture? Its essentially just about immigration.

Anyway, I'm 30 now. Time to stop thinking the world will change. 

[LFCMike]

The next Labour leader can't be a remainy type otherwise there's no way back. They need someone who will appeal to those that they've lost in this election. It's going to be difficult and probably will take more than five years but the vote on next leader is massive

Edited December 15, 2019 by LFCMike

[Harry]

Looking back do you think there was an opportunity to take a guaranteed soft brexit stance and frame the election as soft (labour) vs probable hard brexit (tory)? Would that have shifted anything?

[RandoEFC+]

So what do we think of the candidates for Labour leadership?

Keir Starmer is one of the favourites. I don't know much about him but he's apparently more centrist so maybe he'd be a good option. That said, the 'left-left-wingness' of Labour this time around wasn't apparently the biggest issue. Rebecca Long-Bailey is among the favourites, I'm no expert but my gut feeling isn't positive. I don't think I've heard a good word about her since her name was mentioned. A woman would probably be good. I don't know much about Lisa Nancy but she comes across alright from what I've seen and seems well thought of. I like Angela Rayner and Jess Philips more but I don't know if they're leadership material.

[Inverted]

It's difficult because of a few dilemmas.

1 - Brexit-focused candidates for tactical reasons couldn't have been leader before, but we have no idea what role Brexit will play in 5 years in campaigning. 

2 - A lot of the more moderate candidates like Starmer and Thornberry who would appeal to centrists are also part of the London-based part of the party who supposedly alienated white northerners. 

3 - It's not clear whether an actual northern, working class candidate would appeal to "working class" voters. Voters in England tend to have a certain degree of worship for their social superiors. Many would turn their noses up at a school drop-out like Rayner in favour of their pal Boris. 

4 - Any candidate who isn't critical enough of the party before will be accused of being a puppet. Any candidate who is too critical of the last two campaigns will be a slap in the face to the tens of thousands of members who trudged for hours in the cold, dark and rain arguing for the party. Idealistic, young left wingers give you boots on the ground - Twitter centrists don't. 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Inverted

[RandoEFC+]

I already don't like Thornberry.

[LFCMike]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

So what do we think of the candidates for Labour leadership?

Keir Starmer is one of the favourites. I don't know much about him but he's apparently more centrist so maybe he'd be a good option. That said, the 'left-left-wingness' of Labour this time around wasn't apparently the biggest issue. Rebecca Long-Bailey is among the favourites, I'm no expert but my gut feeling isn't positive. I don't think I've heard a good word about her since her name was mentioned. A woman would probably be good. I don't know much about Lisa Nancy but she comes across alright from what I've seen and seems well thought of. I like Angela Rayner and Jess Philips more but I don't know if they're leadership material.

Can I ask why you think a centrist remainer might be a good option?

[LFCMike]

15 hours ago, Harry said:

Looking back do you think there was an opportunity to take a guaranteed soft brexit stance and frame the election as soft (labour) vs probable hard brexit (tory)? Would that have shifted anything?

It would have definitely helped keep some of the traditional Labour seats if they stuck to Corbyn's original position of honouring the referendum result. Whether it would have been enough amongst all the smears to stop a Tory majority, maybe not.

[RandoEFC+]

5 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Can I ask why you think a centrist remainer might be a good option?

I don't have anything profound or insightful to offer there. More just parroting the thoughts of what that leg of the Labour Party that want to have a complete departure from the Corbyn/McDonnell/Momentum movement. I haven't really decided where I stand on that yet, but I can see the argument of picking voters up in the centre first, and moving 'leftwards' from there. It's what the Tories have done over the past decade after all, with a bit of help from Farage.

I don't think a Remainer is the worst idea in the world. If and when Brexit goes tits up for the Tories over the next few years it could be of benefit to have someone on the other side who stands for the opposite of the thing that is making peoples' lives more difficult.

[6666]

59 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I don't have anything profound or insightful to offer there. More just parroting the thoughts of what that leg of the Labour Party that want to have a complete departure from the Corbyn/McDonnell/Momentum movement. I haven't really decided where I stand on that yet, but I can see the argument of picking voters up in the centre first, and moving 'leftwards' from there. It's what the Tories have done over the past decade after all, with a bit of help from Farage.

I don't think a Remainer is the worst idea in the world. If and when Brexit goes tits up for the Tories over the next few years it could be of benefit to have someone on the other side who stands for the opposite of the thing that is making peoples' lives more difficult.

The two politicians, who were supposedly, from the left that were most against Corbyn not making things about being more anti-Brexit were Chuka Umunna and Jo Swinson. They both failed to win a seat. I don't think it would've done much to help him gain new supporters and obviously he couldn't go pro-Brexit as that'd help him lose supporters he already had. Trying to stay diplomatic in the middle was the safest tactic.

A progressive Corbyn government that would tackle corporate greed and actually reinforce the fact that governments exist to help society is exactly what we needed but when nothing outside of Brexit seems to matter, it was like fighting for a lost cause. Then on top of that you had the crazy smear campaigns.

Basically, people are fucking stupid and can't see the forest for the trees.

[The Artful Dodger]

It doesn't matter where they're from or what gender, but I think the next Labour leader needs to be definitively working class. This is the party of Bevan, the greatest political figure in British history, we need to get to old Labour values and aggressive counterattacking the Tories. Corbyn, for all I agreed with him, was meek and mild, often letting others speak for him and insults fly by without riposte.

[6666]

 

[Burning Gold]

On 15/12/2019 at 21:23, Harry said:

Looking back do you think there was an opportunity to take a guaranteed soft brexit stance and frame the election as soft (labour) vs probable hard brexit (tory)? Would that have shifted anything?

Would've shifted things towards the Tories if anything. Labour might've lost a handful fewer votes to them and the Brexit Party, but they would've absolutely haemorrhaged votes to the Lib Dems and Green.

Even with a realistic remain option on the table, people still voted for "proper Remain" parties because they were so keen to pat themselves on the back. Imagine how it would've gone if there were no other choice.

Ultimately you have to remember most Brexit voters are closer to Conservative than they are to Labour. They were always going to vote that way once Boris Johnson won the leadership and committed to Brexit. With the state of play as it was, I really don't think there was a way for Labour to win.

[Harry]

5 minutes ago, Burning Gold said:

Would've shifted things towards the Tories if anything. Labour might've lost a handful fewer votes to them and the Brexit Party, but they would've absolutely haemorrhaged votes to the Lib Dems and Green.

Even with a realistic remain option on the table, people still voted for "proper Remain" parties because they were so keen to pat themselves on the back. Imagine how it would've gone if there were no other choice.

Ultimately you have to remember most Brexit voters are closer to Conservative than they are to Labour. They were always going to vote that way once Boris Johnson won the leadership and committed to Brexit. With the state of play as it was, I really don't think there was a way for Labour to win.

Interesting. And for the next election, will Scotland still be in the picture? If not, how do labour position themselves to win a majority vote? Moving way back towards the centre?

[RandoEFC+]

The infighting from Labour and their followers is really weird after this result. People seem to want to put it down to one issue. Not surprising I guess because you always want to think everything was fine if it wasn't just for that one little thing.

You can say that Corbyn was the biggest problem without ignoring the Brexit issues.

You can say that the biased media was an issue for Labour without "blaming the defeat on the media".

You can say that Brexit was a reason that people abandoned Labour without it meaning you're ignoring the Corbyn issue.

The Corbyn leadership and Brexit stance issues heavily overlap. The middling stance on Brexit was an example of what people see as his lack of leadership even if you might argue his hands were ties.

These things aren't as simple as "it was this thing". Not when you lose that many seats.

[Harry]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

The infighting from Labour and their followers is really weird after this result. People seem to want to put it down to one issue. Not surprising I guess because you always want to think everything was fine if it wasn't just for that one little thing.

You can say that Corbyn was the biggest problem without ignoring the Brexit issues.

You can say that the biased media was an issue for Labour without "blaming the defeat on the media".

You can say that Brexit was a reason that people abandoned Labour without it meaning you're ignoring the Corbyn issue.

The Corbyn leadership and Brexit stance issues heavily overlap. The middling stance on Brexit was an example of what people see as his lack of leadership even if you might argue his hands were ties.

These things aren't as simple as "it was this thing". Not when you lose that many seats.

This navel gazing is pretty common though isn't after an election defeat? Happened here recently when our Labor party lost the unloseable election with a leader only slightly more popular than Corbyn and a suite of fairly radical policy positions. The diagnosis of what most contributed to the collapse is fundamental to sharing the direction for the future.

 

[RandoEFC+]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

This navel gazing is pretty common though isn't after an election defeat? Happened here recently when our Labor party lost the unloseable election with a leader only slightly more popular than Corbyn and a suite of fairly radical policy positions. The diagnosis of what most contributed to the collapse is fundamental to sharing the direction for the future.

 

Yeah but there are still different factions in the Labour party trying to make out different things. The Corbyn apologists say it was all Brexit and/or the media smear campaign. The centrists say it was all Corbyn and Momentum.

[Harry]

7 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Yeah but there are still different factions in the Labour party trying to make out different things. The Corbyn apologists say it was all Brexit and/or the media smear campaign. The centrists say it was all Corbyn and Momentum.

Yes that's exactly what's playing out because the future of the party is at stake to correctly understand and correct it's failings when it rises from the ashes. Sadly opportunism and peoples preference to believe what suits them come together to taint the process potentially jeopardising it when the best thing for the country and the party is to be as correct as possible at really getting to the bottom of it before moving on...

I.e. If Corbyn doesn't accept his policy stance is unpalatable to the centrists and he hands over to someone cut from the same cloth then they'll be doomed for another 5 years (example only since I have no idea if that was a factor or not).

[Burning Gold]

21 hours ago, Harry said:

Interesting. And for the next election, will Scotland still be in the picture? If not, how do labour position themselves to win a majority vote? Moving way back towards the centre?

Bloody hell mate if I knew the answer to that 

In my lifetime, Labour have done best by sticking close to the centre. It's the only way they've won. I am curious, though, as to whether a Corbyn-style agenda would do the trick if it were attached to a better, more palatable leader. Take away the Brexit issue (it won't be sorted, but won't be a massive issue in the election in 5 years) and the Corbyn issue, and how different does the picture look? How does it look after another 5 years of Conservative government? There are issues that need to be addressed, but I think those two one-off issues make the picture look bleaker than it actually is for Labour.

 

@Inverted will be able to speak more to the Scotland thing, but I get the impression Labour is pretty much done there anyway. They can rely on Scotland voting to the left, but not for them. For anti-Tory coalition purposes, that's good, but not for a Labour majority if that's what you want.

I think they'll be around next time because I can't see Johnson granting them another referendum. Why would he?

[The Artful Dodger]

I think Scotland will take the UK government to court. They have a good case that they were knowingly lied to by Cameron about the UK's membershio of the EU when he knew he was always going to call a refefendum. 

In a really cynical sort of way, disorder in Scotland might be Labour's only real hope. The breakdown of the union could be disastrous. 

[Inverted]

Most left-leaning people in Scotland are pro-indy for the reason that they feel the only chance of ever getting a left-wing gov is outside the UK. We elected a few Tory MPs out of almost 60, and they still get a crushing majority. 

The last time Labour got a majority, it was Labour's least ever left-wing leadership, and Scotland didnt even matter in the overall result. They would have won without us. 

There no longer really is a "British politics". There's Scottish politics, and then there's English politics, and no matter what happens up here, it's ultimately the latter which is decisive for us all. 

It's complex because Labour afaik are the most popular party amongst young Scots, but we also tend to support independence. Most people my age seemed to understand that even if you want independence, an SNP presence in Westminster doesn't really make that any more likely, and we like Labour's policies.

If the SNP have a Holyrood majority, they can demand independence, and if Westminster wants to block it they will, no matter how many SNP MPs are there.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Inverted