Keir Starmer

who would you suggest ?

because whoever is named gets the same sort of message thrown at them.

who would pass the test of being ‘competent, credible and electable’ in today’s world where anyone who is a party leader gets endless abuse and distain.

I don't see Labour as having a winnable candidate for many years because they wont pick a moderate and the issue with the attacks is that they are coming from within the party itself. Changing the way that the leader is elected is the only way that is going to happen but they wont do that, they will pick someone too far left and that cycle will continue.
In 10 years time they will still have the mindset of fuck the tories whilst continuing to be a crap opposition party and that's if they are still relevant. Maybe we seriously need a middle ground party to rise up from this now dying organisation?
 
You're in a right pickle.

image-5-nostalgia-harold-wilson-life-in-pictures-pic-mirrorpix-125999147.jpg


Go back to playing with your World Cup Willie.



Happy days those I hope kids are taught this in history lessons

A long time ago children both Labour and England were on top of the world

Fuck off sir and don’t try that Santa shit on us either.
 
In 10 years time they will still have the mindset of fuck the tories whilst continuing to be a crap opposition party and that's if they are still relevant. Maybe we seriously need a middle ground party to rise up from this now dying organisation?
You mean like New Labour ;-)

And yes, BTW.
 
I don't see Labour as having a winnable candidate for many years because they wont pick a moderate and the issue with the attacks is that they are coming from within the party itself. Changing the way that the leader is elected is the only way that is going to happen but they wont do that, they will pick someone too far left and that cycle will continue.
In 10 years time they will still have the mindset of fuck the tories whilst continuing to be a crap opposition party and that's if they are still relevant. Maybe we seriously need a middle ground party to rise up from this now dying organisation?

People are going to think I’m a stuck record here but I’m going to say it again anyway. Labour needs someone socially right but economically left. I’m not talking extremes, the 2017 manifesto was good but they are too liberal socially for the working classes.

They need to mimic the SDP or the Blue Labour movement and they’ll get in.

If you put the SDP in charge of Labour in December they’d have won. The trouble is they don’t get off the ground because of the party machines.
 
People are going to think I’m a stuck record here but I’m going to say it again anyway. Labour needs someone socially right but economically left. I’m not talking extremes, the 2017 manifesto was good but they are too liberal socially for the working classes.

They need to mimic the SDP or the Blue Labour movement and they’ll get in.

If you put the SDP in charge of Labour in December they’d have won. The trouble is they don’t get off the ground because of the party machines.
Don't agree with that mate.

People see no sense nor value in wholesale nationalisations. They may be in favour of rail re-nationalisation but that is honestly because most people don't understand the core reasons as to why the train services are currently how they are. (it's because the subsidy the government puts in, is not enough (if we want cheap, high quality rail services) and because Network Rail - which is already government owned and run - is a shambles. Train companies being privately owned, or not, has fuck all to do with it - they only make 3% profit, so they are hardly "fat cats").

But renationalising the water companies? The electricity companies? People couldn't give a toss and those who do think about it, think what an enormous waste of money that would be and couldn't that money be much better spent.

Similaraly people are not in favour of whacking up tax rates, for the rich or for anyone else for that matter. The thinkers reaiise that there are not enough rich people to pay for everything and understand that huge public spending increases would either not be deliverable or would have to be funded by everyone paying more tax, not just a few. And people don't want to pay more tax. They have aspirations to be higher earners themselves one day, if they are not higher earners already.

They do not regard businesses - and most of all their employers - as "the enemy" against which we should try to get one over and punish with punitive taxes. They understand the need for thriving private sector businesses and want to see policies to encourage that, not the opposite.

Hard left, or even middle left, policies are no longer appealing to a majority of people in this country. That is why Labour keep losing. And as long as they keep on with their position - overt or otherwise - of wanting to tax more so they can spend more - then they will keep losing.
 
Last edited:
It would appear that Rebecca Long Bailey, the Continuity Marxist candidate, has shot herself in the foot by saying she's not keen on having different limits for regular or disability linked abortions. Quite right of course but why even mention it?
 
Don't agree with that mate.

People see no sense nor value in wholesale nationalisations. They may be in favour of rail re-nationalisation but that is honestly because most people don't understand the core reasons as to why the train services are currently how they are. (it's because the subsidy the government puts in, is not enough (if we want cheap, high quality rail services) and because Network Rail - which is already government owned and run - is a shambles. Train companies being privately owned, or not, has fuck all to do with it - they only make 3% profit, so they are hardly "fat cats").
The responsibility for rail failure needs much more attention. TOCs say 75% (?) of lateness is down to network failure.
TOCs tend to overbid for franchise and are shambolic in the face of major change e.g. timetable, but generally they perform ok.
I am old enough to have commuted and travelled intercity under BR and EVERYTHING was much worse: rolling stock, reliability, customer services etc.
Under nationalization, investment in rail was cut by 30% to paltry levels. Hardly surprising: no votes in it. We are now paying the price for years of underinvestment. On the day of privatisation, UK was 25th in the table of electrification, just behind Roumania.
I dont care politically who runs the railway, but the idea that renationalization is a cure is the triumph of hope over experience.
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top