Keir Starmer

[Mr Kobayashi]

This debate about Blair's legacy has been done to death loads of times and we're never going to agree. I personally think he achieved a lot and it's unfortunate that many people just think of Iraq when he gets mentioned as if a different choice would have affected the outcome as Bush was going ahead anyway whatever we did.

Isn't that like a getaway driver's defence barrister appealing for mitigation on the grounds that the stick-up guy would have just got a taxi instead?

:)

 

[inbetween]

Blair was not without political skills. Blair and Brown are political giants compared to this shower of shit, which makes the disappointment of the New Labour years even more bitter. Great politicians refashion society, Attlee did it, Thatcher did it, there is a before and after with them. There is no before and after with New Labour.

Imagine for a moment Starmer makes it to No 10, will this country be a fairer more equitable place when he leaves, will the north south divide have been tackled, will there be greater social mobility, less poverty, less crime, less income inequality, more houses, better jobs, better schools, dignity in old age, will the rich pay their fair share of taxes? Will any of these things happen? The answer is almost certainly no.

New Labour was in power for 13 years and until the crash there was eleven years of GDP growth. There was minuscule improvement on some of the above, but on most it was abject failure, because the structural reasons why these things persist were never tackled, because to do so would've required radical change to the established order and New Labour is the established order. New Labour is the cosy alternative to the Tories because it is the Tories, and that's why so many Tories in here are in favour of it.

The one thing New Labour and Blair did achieve was they brought all manners of ideology together. Ultimately what they represented was balance and that's why they won elections. The alternative in the Tories at that time was a mixture of eurosceptic old farts and that hasn't really changed today except the younger more centrist geezer is in charge.

You can't win an election by taping yourself into a corner. Corbyn found this out and he was never going to win whilst demonising a very large element of society which is literally anyone with a bit of money. He certainly would never win whilst Scotland is so vocal in its nationalism and opposition of anything English.

Things have indeed got worse under the Tories but let's not pretend that a strong and balanced Labour wouldn't do wonders today. I'm not saying Starmer is the answer but Blair almost certainly was in the late 90's. Their major downfall was not how they handled the country but rather they took us to war.

 

[The perfect fumble]

they brought all manners of ideology together. Ultimately what they represented was balance

a strong and balanced Labour

And the scales?

 

[Oldham Exile]

The key point that I was making in my previous post was:

"And there is no downside - the only ones who are going to really object and the 'purist harder-left' and they are largely irrelevant, because:

a) They, even whilst moaning, are still going to vote Labour anyway - so in terms of increasing vote share - they are not relevant or

b) Some might do some form of mini-protest and vote for some purist hard-left option - but they will be so few in numbers - they also are not relevant"

We are seeing that in the push-back from the 'harder left posters' on here - but it only reflects their frustration at this inconvenient truth.

Of course they want a 'genuine' hard-left/socialist government and despite the lessons of recent elections they are still holding to that pipedream. But - because, and I do not mean it unkindly, - it is true that they will fit into one of those 2 categories and therefore their votes are not what are needed to be chased, Starmer is getting it right and he should not be diverted by pandering to them.

The important thing is to get the Charlatan Johnson out - and his approach is likely to achieve that.

 

[Saddleworth2]

The key point that I was making in my previous post was:

"And there is no downside - the only ones who are going to really object and the 'purist harder-left' and they are largely irrelevant, because:

a) They, even whilst moaning, are still going to vote Labour anyway - so in terms of increasing vote share - they are not relevant or

b) Some might do some form of mini-protest and vote for some purist hard-left option - but they will be so few in numbers - they also are not relevant"

We are seeing that in the push-back from the 'harder left posters' on here - but it only reflects their frustration at this inconvenient truth.

Of course they want a 'genuine' hard-left/socialist government and despite the lessons of recent elections they are still holding to that pipedream. But - because, and I do not mean it unkindly, - it is true that they will fit into one of those 2 categories and therefore their votes are not what are needed to be chased, Starmer is getting it right and he should not be diverted by pandering to them.

The important thing is to get the Charlatan Johnson out - and his approach is likely to achieve that.

I think I have encountered this style of prose before, just can’t remember where....

 

[west didsblue]

Isn't that like a getaway driver's defence barrister appealing for mitigation on the grounds that the stick-up guy would have just got a taxi instead?

:)

Not really

 

[west didsblue]

You're having this conversation in your head with yourself.

It does not relate in any way to my post.

I bid you a hearty adieu.

Thanks for the reminder that exchanging posts with you is pointless.
Adieu to you too.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Not really

But he would have done it anyway :)

 

[Chris in London]

Ask yourself this, of the thirteen years of New Labour rule, what lasting change remains?

Well, just off the top of my head, devolution in Wales and Scotland, the Human Rights Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Good Friday Agreement (though that is hanging on by its fingertips I grant you), the ending of the sleaze that infected British politics in the 1990s, the beginning of movements towards cleaner energy and transport, the ordering of the most advanced aircraft carrier in the world.

Personally my view is that new Labour’s finest achievement was the introduction of working families tax credit, which did more for the redistribution of wealth via the tax and benefits system than any other Labour government.

It was of course the first thing the coalition abolished.

 

[Chris in London]

I think I have encountered this style of prose before, just can’t remember where....

It’s not enough just to have that style, you also need the political will to use it

 

[Saddleworth2]

It’s not enough just to have that style, you also need the political will to use it

Yes, that seems vaguely familiar. I wonder where I heard that?

 

[metalblue]

The key point that I was making in my previous post was:

"And there is no downside - the only ones who are going to really object and the 'purist harder-left' and they are largely irrelevant, because:

a) They, even whilst moaning, are still going to vote Labour anyway - so in terms of increasing vote share - they are not relevant or

b) Some might do some form of mini-protest and vote for some purist hard-left option - but they will be so few in numbers - they also are not relevant"

We are seeing that in the push-back from the 'harder left posters' on here - but it only reflects their frustration at this inconvenient truth.

Of course they want a 'genuine' hard-left/socialist government and despite the lessons of recent elections they are still holding to that pipedream. But - because, and I do not mean it unkindly, - it is true that they will fit into one of those 2 categories and therefore their votes are not what are needed to be chased, Starmer is getting it right and he should not be diverted by pandering to them.

The important thing is to get the Charlatan Johnson out - and his approach is likely to achieve that.

I’m not so sure the left would en-masse. We saw with Corbyn he mobilised a huge number of previously disenfranchised voters and I can see them abandoning the Labour Party again - or rather being abandoned by it.

I read an interesting statistic the other day that said only 25% of voters were working class but that 55% of voters identified with working class values. If Labour can focus on values they are already appealing to the majority of voters, although how that plays out in our FTP system would remain to be seen.

Of course the perceived easier route to power is to appeal to the centre ground like you say and bring enough voters along with you who would vote for anyone who wasn’t Tory.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Thanks for the reminder that exchanging posts with you is pointless.
Adieu to you too.

I will leave you with this.

Ask yourself why has Corbyn's defeat in 2019 consigned his politics to the dustbin of history, when Brown's defeat in 2010 merely sent New Labour to chill out on the back benches, now back, newer, better and fresher?

 

[Vic]

I am sorry that is not how it works, politicians shift public perceptions by moving the window, They may try and push very right wing policies that result in the public shifting to the right as they become acceptable, it moves in increments as politicians move one way or another and test what is acceptable in the public discourse.

Public perceptions may influence politicians, but the harder say Patel gets on immigration, the further rightwards the window goes because it becomes acceptable. Politicians can therefore exaggerate the end point as they hope to shift the window by fractions EG immigration will be limited to the 10s of thousands, never achieved but it shifted the window on immigration so controls were made more acceptable to the electorate.

My understanding of the Overton window is that it just describes where we are, not how we got there. By definition, it is the boundaries of which policies are acceptable to the electorate.

Of course anyone can make the case for a policy outside the boundary, but "Sometimes politicians can move the Overton Window themselves by courageously endorsing a policy lying outside the window, but this is rare".

Too many of Corbyn's policies were outside the window - an election campaign is not the time to highlight how far outside you are. The most depressing moment of the last election campaign was an out-of-nowhere commitment to free broadband; however good an idea it might (or might not) have been, it was just another outside the window vote-loser.

 

[Vic]

It’s not enough just to have that style, you also need the political will to use it

Now that's an inconvenient truth!

 

[meltonblue]

Errr? No




Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

That saying always reminds of George Bush

 

[west didsblue]

I will leave you with this.

Ask yourself why has Corbyn's defeat in 2019 consigned his politics to the dustbin of history, when Brown's defeat in 2010 merely sent New Labour to chill out on the back benches, now back, newer, better and fresher?

Corbyn lost in both 2017 and 2019, up against the worst government in living memory.
Brown lost in 2010 after 3 Blair victories in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and after the economy was screwed by a global financial crisis.
Ask yourself whose policies appealed to a larger proportion of the electorate and you might find the answer to the question you asked me.

 

[west didsblue]

Now that's an inconvenient truth!

An unfettered one at that. IMO.

 

[mat]

Corbyn lost in both 2017 and 2019, up against the worst government in living memory.
Brown lost in 2010 after 3 Blair victories in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and after the economy was screwed by a global financial crisis.
Ask yourself whose policies appealed to a larger proportion of the electorate and you might find the answer to the question you asked me.

Corbyn lost by a few thousand votes In 2017.

So people wanted his policies. We've already gone around in circles about how he lost 2019.

He's gone now. We move on. But we should be moving on to the challenges of this century and not as a party where the front bench still has Britpop posters up in their bedroom, harking back to their nostalgic view of a world with St Tony riding the crest of the wave on the dick of two US presidents.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Kudos to Keith he gave the pm a good kicking in pmqs.