Should Labour move right or left?

[alchresearch]

Did anyone see Harriet Harman on Andrew Marr on Sunday? Agreeing with and supporting the Tories on the EU referendum.

[anarchist]

That one statement sums up the ignorance of the electorate as much as any other.

 

What it tries to do is make it look like Labours record on employment was worse that it was when it came to office.

 

What it fails to do is mention is the years before the financial crisis where in every year it was lower than the so called employment miracle we are seeing now.

 

Here’s the graph that shows it, so if the Tories are to be commended for the current figures why can’t we recognise it was even better most of the time:loopy: under Labour.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10604117

 

That's a bit lame isn't it? That's rather like saying a gambler was successful because he won on the first race before losing his shirt on the 2nd, or a runner was successful because he was leading after one lap but had nothing left for the other 3. The idea is to leave the country better off at the end of your stint, not worse off. But the fact that you consider spending the country into the financial doggy doos as Labour's achievement is a pretty good indication of why the majority don't trust Labour with the economy. Remember "No more boom and bust?"

By the way. There were more people out of work when Labour left office in 2010 than there were when they took over in 1997. You can't get away from it. Labour are not trusted to run the economy.

Edited May 26, 2015 by anarchist

[L00b]

Did anyone see Harriet Harman on Andrew Marr on Sunday? Agreeing with and supporting the Tories on the EU referendum.

I did, but in fairness to her/Labour, she painted that as a case of political pragmatism, i.e. finally stopping to charge at windmills: the Referendum is going to happen regardless, so Labour may as well stop wasting their time opposing it, take it as a fait accompli and bat for the 'in' vote.

 

Not a change of tack which I would 'blame' Labour for, nor qualify as Labour 'agreeing' with the Tories about there being a need for a referendum.

[Alan Ladd]

THE Labour party and its owner the unions has outlived all usefulness. It has always had a damaging effect on this country and it is time it was consigned to the dustbin of history.

 

Apart from failing to address the genuine concerns of the nation it has, at this time, probably the weakest set of individual talent ever.

 

Barring unknowable events such as war or natural disaster the Tories look set to sort out the economy and Europe before 2020, they will change the boundaries in such a way as to ensure that Labour cant win in England, and hopefully get rid of Scotland altogether.

 

The future is bright, the future is blue.

[DrNorm]

The future is bright, the future is blue.

 

So long as the blues are appealing to sufficient numbers of blue collar workers my great fear is that you may be right.

 

The Tory party is not a natural place to be for those who depend on their labour, rather than their capital assets for an income.

 

I'd love to hear from those who are on the left of the Labour party. I'd love to hear the sound of reconciliation rather than recrimination. It will a very sad outcome if divisions and failure to build a broad consensus force natural allies to desert to other parties. I'll be among the last to go but the current state of affairs leaves me without a huge amount of hope of change for the better any time soon.

[Tommo68]

It would appear that most comedians want to have ago at any party except labour. Now if the comedians are backing labour do you really expect anyone else to?

 

To be honest I'm really starting to go off a lot of these comedians its mainly the ones that are just starting out they attack christianity but no other religion, slag off any party that's not labour and basically go for the cheap laughs from what they perceive to be the larger part of their audiences. Either maintainan a balance or leave religion and politucs alone.

.

[DrNorm]

A bit of a strained point Tommo and you obviously didn't hear Frankie Boyle on Ed Milliband.

 

His heart was in the right place, unfortunately his nose and mouth weren't.

 

"Styling" Ed Miliband was useless ... like putting 26in rims on a wheelie bin.

 

C'mon, he's gone. We can laugh now.

[Mister M]

"Blue collar Conservatives"? I heard this term used on the radio this morning. I can't say I was listening, but it's obviously a term relating the skilled working class who have deserted Labour.

 

As I've said, the Labour party needs to bury differences and find ways to build on the common causes they share with blue collar workers (skilled working class/aspirational voters/non-union members).

After all what's the point of being a political party which focuses on the differences between its members and causing potential allies to defect to the other side?

 

There was a very good article in the paper on that point only a few days ago:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/24/middle-class-living-standards

[taxman]

It doesn't matter whether they move left, right or stay the same.

 

Blair won three elections thanks to being media savvy, "Presidential", and having the support of Murdoch.

 

Now he is derided as being smug, corporate and in the pockets of bankers. People hate him because of his warmongering. They blame his light touch over the banks for ruining the world's economy.

 

Miliband comes in and isn't sleek, isn't smug and promises to combat the excesses of bankers....suddenly everyone is bemoaning the fact he isn't Blair.

 

What do people want?

 

I was talking to a floating voter a few nights ago. He mentioned that Miliband didn't seem Prime Ministerial material. He spoke of the bacon sandwich thing and when he gave 20p to a begger. We both agreed that Alistair Campbell wouldn't have let Blair within a 100 miles of either situation.

 

So that makes Blair, more Prime Ministerial, more suited for office apparently. So we'll just forget the wars then, as if they didn't happen, because , after all he looks good on tele.

 

There are people in Labour right now who want to go back to Blairism, because it was successful. But you couldn't fit a cigarette paper between New Labour and the Tories. That's why IMHO opinion the election went down to which PM candidate could walk in a straight line and eat a sandwich without looking like a muppet.

 

If the SNP had been standing in Northern England a lot of people would have voted for them, a proper alternative to the Westminster Elite.

 

I don't vote Labour anymore. On crucial policies I don't agree with them and as progressive movement they've dropped the ball because they want to win at all costs, even if that cost is their soul.

 

The new lot of leadership candidates are just the usual, ghastly metropolitan set.

[DrNorm]

But you couldn't fit a cigarette paper between New Labour and the Tories.

 

That's an exaggeration of course but believed by many.

 

The trick is to go as far left as possible and remain electable. If politicians don't represent the views of the electorate they'll never get elected. Sure, politicians have some power to lead, influence, persuade, change people's minds, but that's limited.

 

“There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.” (possibly said by Gandhi, but I could just be repeating misinformation from others)

 

The new lot of leadership candidates are just the usual, ghastly metropolitan set.

 

I fear you may be right. I hardly dare read what's happening.