Should Labour move right or left?

[*_ash_*]

If people were really interested in finding out they would have searched for that information.

 

Such as viewing a printed guide of what their policies are on key issues. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2015/aug/13/labour-leadership-candidates-comparison-burnham-cooper-corbyn-kendall

 

Interesting read. That looks like 4 different parties, not one!

 

Looking at those, Kendall looks closest to a Tory; Cooper looks like a Miliband type, Corbyn looks like a true lefty, and Andy Burnham isn't worth commenting on. I lost interest when I read the 50:50 female cabinet thing. Utter nonsense.

[Flanker7]

4 different parties?

They looked similar to me in these shorter pitches, in their own words. Lots of buzz words. Choosing what points to mention in the restricted space and showing what really matters to them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/14/labour-leadership-vote.

 

e.g.

 

Burnham - "...and we will make transport affordable again by committing to the renationalisation of our railways."

 

Cooper - " The radical approach of the future is to reform capitalism so it serves people, not to try to destroy it with nothing to put in its place."

 

Corbin - "Labour must be clearer in what it stands for and should commit to the public ownership of the railways."

 

Kendall - "– not spending billions of pounds reopening coal mines or renationalising huge swaths of the economy."

 

On these quotes Burnham has, imo, the most clarity.

[The Joker]

Some might be, but she chose to be a Labour politician not a Tory, so she obviously noticed a difference.

 

Yes. Women have a greater chance of becoming Labour MPs than Tory ones.

[mossdog]

4 different parties?

They looked similar to me in these shorter pitches, in their own words. Lots of buzz words. Choosing what points to mention in the restricted space and showing what really matters to them.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/14/labour-leadership-vote.

 

e.g.

 

Burnham - "...and we will make transport affordable again by committing to the renationalisation of our railways."

 

Cooper - " The radical approach of the future is to reform capitalism so it serves people, not to try to destroy it with nothing to put in its place."

 

Corbin - "Labour must be clearer in what it stands for and should commit to the public ownership of the railways."

 

Kendall - "– not spending billions of pounds reopening coal mines or renationalising huge swaths of the economy."

 

On these quotes Burnham has, imo, the most clarity.

...........I see no national leadership qualities amongst these candidates!and although leaning to Tory myself I would like to see a healthy opposition!

[The Joker]

Burnham, Kendall and t'other lass are all damaged goods.

 

'scuse the alliteration, but while being boot-licking Blairite's did well for their political careers while New Labour were in charge, their policies of "Me! Me! Me! We're Tory Lite with a Red Rsoette!" don't appeal to ordinary salt-of-the earth, honest-to-goodness, working-class folk like me'sen.

 

So it's Jezza for me.

[Vague_Boy]

....their policies of "Me! Me! Me! We're Tory Lite with a Red Rsoette!" don't appeal to ordinary salt-of-the earth, honest-to-goodness, working-class folk like me'sen.

 

So who voted them in at the 1997, 2001 and 2005 general elections?

 

There was a return of working-class voters to Labour in 1997, but it was brief. Fifty-eight per cent of working-class voters went for Blair in 1997, which was actually lower than the proportion who supported Labour in the 1940s and 50s.

 

Strikingly, in 2005, when Labour won again but with a reduced majority, it was mainly working-class voters who withdrew their support. Only around 2 per cent of Labour voters in the professional AB class failed to vote Labour in 2005, while in social classes C1, C2 and DE around 20 per cent of those who had voted Labour in 2001 didn’t vote for it in 2005. Labour was being sustained by the middle classes, while lower classes went back to the thing they’d been doing for decades: deserting Labour.

 

LINK

 

By "deserting Labour" the writer argues:

 

In 1966, 69 per cent of manual workers gave their X to Labour at election time. This number waned through the 1970s and 1980s until, by 1987, only 45 per cent of manual workers voted Labour. The greatest desertion was among skilled manual workers. Between 1945 and the end of the 1950s, around 60 per cent of these workers supported Labour; by the time of the mid-1980s only 34 per cent did.

 

So for the seats Labour needs to take (not hold, but take) the working class voter isn't much of a factor anymore.

 

And the current government got elected without much need of votes from "working-class folk".

[The Joker]

So who voted them in at the 1997, 2001 and 2005 general elections?

 

I don't know, I just say the first thing that comes into my head.

 

Who did indeed vote Labour in their winning elections?

 

It must have been those free-loading immigrants. Or students. Or First-time voters. Or was it the OAPS?

 

Actually, it must have been all the unemployed people. Someone with spare time than me put together a picture of someone who'd benefit the most from Tony B. Liars budget changes. . . it turned out to be a single-mum of four, living in a council house.

[El Cid]

It's been notable that the other candidates haven't criticised Corbyn themselves until yesterday when Yvette Cooper "turned her fire on the frontrunner in the Labour leadership race".

 

 

As I understand Corbyn is a well supported Labour MP, they should be very careful about criticising their own people.

[The Joker]

As I understand Corbyn is a well supported Labour MP, they should be very careful about criticising their own people.

 

Unfortunately, the three non-Corbyn's have shown that the Labour party aren't nearly as interested in supporting the electorate as they are at getting back into power at any cost and feeding from the troughs of Westminster.

[tinfoilhat]

Unfortunately, the three non-Corbyn's have shown that the Labour party aren't nearly as interested in supporting the electorate as they are at getting back into power at any cost and feeding from the troughs of Westminster.

 

Agreed. They'll just be, as you said previously, Tory lite apart from Kendall who would be full fat Tory. In many respects I wish labour had won last time out just to show how similar they are to the Tories and how much they'd cut as well, which would have been extensive.

 

I don't think of political polarisation would do the country any harm at all. At least the voting public will feel they have a choice.