neither do a Labour left, as 18 months ago proved.
the left aren't popular and lose hundreds of seats, it's the "right's" fault.That's because the right sabotaged the party and wouldn't play broad church. Whatever Starmer's travails are now they're not down to the left sabotaging the party.
Starmer wants the left gone so that he can refashion Labour along the lines of the US Democratic party and he's paying the price.
the left aren't popular and lose hundreds of seats, it's the "right's" fault.
The centre left are voted in as it's recognised things need to change and from then on aren't supported by the left because they can't get their own way and it's the "right's" fault.
Right...
the public think Labour is more than left enough for them, so that's the definition of left that matters.Even if you're correct and you're not, you can't have a centre left party with no left.
It's one of the principle reasons why social democratic parties are dying everywhere.
If you haven't, strongly recommend you read Piketty's Capital and Ideology. The main premise of the book is why social democratic parties all over the western world (and beyond) are in the shit, and it's not what you are describing above.Even if you're correct and you're not, you can't have a centre left party with no left.
It's one of the principle reasons why social democratic parties are dying everywhere.
the public think Labour is more than left enough for them, so that's the definition of left that matters.
The voting public make their judgement on the left's ideology and they've taken their ball home ever since rather than step up and accept if they want anything then they need to bring more harmonious, relevant and socially palatable policies to the fore. Instead we get resentment, pettiness and covert operations through the likes of Stonewall which only build the divide instead of bridging it.
You're confusing your terms, herding people in to Blairite or Corbynite pigeonholes might be too broad brush, ignoring overlaps and areas of agreement, but crude as these categories are they are ideologically based not identity based.
New Labour third way exists, socialism exists, calling them Blairism or Corbynism might be puerile and over simplistic, but they are rooted in very different political philosophies and not on the colour of ones skin or gender identity.
I just don't live on an ideal like people who don't want to win elections and change the country for the better instead of let this shit show continue. I've just reflected what Cummings would call the silent voters, the ones who if left disregarded deliver us the results we don't really need. But pontificating and doubling down makes the noise and attention they crave so each to their own, it's not actually getting us anywhere productive but we have a "live in the moment" society based on feelings so there we go.Your selective memory is delightful and serves you well.
Coming home to find a local Tory MP banging their wife.Just seen him on the news “Labour is coming home”, what an utter pillock.
If you haven't, strongly recommend you read Piketty's Capital and Ideology. The main premise of the book is why social democratic parties all over the western world (and beyond) are in the shit, and it's not what you are describing above.
I just don't live on an ideal like people who don't want to win elections and change the country for the better instead of let this shit show continue. I've just reflected what Cummings would call the silent voters, the ones who if left disregarded deliver us the results we don't really need. But pontificating and doubling down makes the noise and attention they crave so each to their own, it's not actually getting us anywhere productive but we have a "live in the moment" society based on feelings so there we go.
I know what you mean. A mate recommended me a book near the beginning of lockdown last year and I'm finally going to start it next week when i finish my current one (arguing with zombies by paul krugman. not particularly in depth, but a damn good read). Regardless of how long it takes you to get round to it though, anyone interested in where our politics currently lies should read that book (the piketty one). It's outstanding.Thanks, but as I'm presently enjoying The World Crisis 1911-1918 by Winston Churchill, I'm afraid it'll have to go on a rather long list.
I was a bit yeah, it was a surprise though, i expected another Hartlepool. It appears though the big factor was Hancock and his against the rules shagging. The Tory woman who was on SKY News this morning got a proper grilling over it from Kay Burley.Are you being sardonic?
A reduction in the majoriy by 3000 and getting through by just over 300 vote isn't comfortably imho
However it keeps the wolves from the door a while longer.
The bigger worry is over 8000 people in B&S were willing to vote for that dickhead galloway, though it probably saved labour as he will have took tory votes as well as labours
I didn't know you were the Shadow Education Secretary.As Shadow Education Secretary I was disappointed Labour couldn’t choose an MP capable of knowing how to use was / were correctly. She’s an absolute liability.
Just seen him on the news “Labour is coming home”, what an utter pillock.
Just a few hundred votes in it, so quite plausible that there were enough folk swayed by Hancock breaking his own rules and shitting on the wife and kids to make the difference. It's nice to see the Tories not winning for once ,but as I don't see anyone that I regard as on the actual left with a chance of taking the labour leadership from Keith I'm fairly ambivalent about this short stay of execution. Unite leadership election will be the next big marker in terms of whether labour has any future as a socialist party or is condemned to become a vanilla centrist tory-lite option for a few years every couple of decades when the electorate need a rest from full on tory rule.I was a bit yeah, it was a surprise though, i expected another Hartlepool. It appears though the big factor was Hancock and his against the rules shagging. The Tory woman who was on SKY News this morning got a proper grilling over it from Kay Burley.
The best news was fascist Frandsen got 50 votes, which was 57 less than the Monster Raving Loonies
Just a few hundred votes in it, so quite plausible that there were enough folk swayed by Hancock breaking his own rules and shitting on the wife and kids to make the difference. It's nice to see the Tories not winning for once ,but as I don't see anyone that I regard as on the actual left with a chance of taking the labour leadership from Keith I'm fairly ambivalent about this short stay of execution. Unite leadership election will be the next big marker in terms of whether labour has any future as a socialist party or is condemned to become a vanilla centrist tory-lite option for a few years every couple of decades when the electorate need a rest from full on tory rule.
If you assume that every vote cast for him would have otherwise been cast for labour then yes - he'd love us to believe that.If it wasn’t for Galloway doing everything he can to stop Labour winning - then they would have romped it.