General Election 2015

[eFestivals]

For all the talk about the conservatives having a persuasive argument and labour being clueless, this election was decided on 3 out of every 100 people in the electorate who were considering red or blue, going for the latter. They are smaller margins than the analysis of the election would suggest. For all the talk about conservatives persuading the electorate, nearly 2/3 of us were far from persuaded. The voting system hands more power than they deserve, but I don't think the election was a great endorsement of the conservative party.

What you're forgetting there is that there's always a comparatively small number of people who are vote switchers, so all elections are about appealing to those.

If a party can't appeal to those, they lose. And this time around they only attracted less than 20% of the extra votes they needed above the 2010 vote - when there was a HUGE number of ex-LibDem votes up for grabs.

What fucked them up the most? Voters voting stupid, rather than Labour's actual policies - but that's an obstacle that's always there.

[eFestivals]

I agree. That said, the voting system won't change until the Tories don't have power, so it's a bit of a catch 22 situation.

Yep - there's very definitely no future victory in moaning about the system. That just shouts very loudly that they're bad losers.

After all, if the tories can win with the system we have, then that possibility is also open to other parties.

There might be a future victory with a *principled* position that the system needs changing (which will be a VERY hard sell or Labour) - but right now there definitely isn't. There was absolutely no appetite for another coalition (all polls made that clear), and that factor more than all others was what caused Labour to lose.

[eFestivals]

I remember after the previous election when some said the country voted for a coalition. No they didn't. There was no option to vote for a coalition on the voting papers.

People will read whatever they want to from the statistics. How about 75% of the country didn't vote tory?

Plenty of people weren't voting for a coalition in 2010, but they got one anyway.

Prior to this election, it was exceedingly clear that a greater majority didn't want a coalition than didn't want the tories.

Work it out, FFS.

Edited June 12, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

nobody voted for a coalition. It wasn't an option. What's your point?

My point, if you really need it said, is that you're talking big bollocks.

Plenty voted LibDem in 2010 in the hope of them forming a coalition. Plenty (tho far fewer) voted LibDem in 2015 in the hope of them forming a coalition.

most people don't have your clairvoyance skills, so I'll take your word for it

Given how you keep on telling me I'm wrong, the 'most' clearly doesn't include yourself.

Edited June 12, 2015 by eFestivals

[5co77ie]

Jeremy Corbyn has made it to the leadership race - pay £3 and vote him in.

[kaosmark2]

Jeremy Corbyn has made it to the leadership race - pay £3 and vote him in.

Absolutely.

 

He won't win the leadership, but getting him as high a vote share as possible is pretty important IMO.

[LJS]

Is Labour never ever winning again important to you or something

 

Maybe Labour having some fucking principles is important to him!

 

Time for a Labour leadership thread?

[eFestivals]

Maybe Labour having some fucking principles is important to him!

 

Time for a Labour leadership thread?

 

One of Labour's principles is the union of the UK. How's that one sitting with you?

 

Do you think Labour should abandon their principles on the advice of the people who didn't vote for them?

Edited June 15, 2015 by eFestivals

[kaosmark2]

Maybe Labour having some fucking principles is important to him!

 

Time for a Labour leadership thread?

Politicians having principles is important to me. Political parties not all being one identical lump of shite trying to represent the centre/centre-right is important to me. 

[eFestivals]

Politicians having principles is important to me. Political parties not all being one identical lump of shite trying to represent the centre/centre-right is important to me. 

 

And for me too.

 

But I don't expect those principles to mirror mine in their entirety, and I respect that policies need to gain popular support or else they're ultimately pointless.

 

Factionalism is what puts the tories in charge.

[LJS]

One of Labour's principles is the union of the UK. How's that one sitting with you?

 

Do you think Labour should abandon their principles on the advice of the people who didn't vote for them?

 

Is it? - I can't see it mentioned in clause IV of their constitution which, as I sure you are aware, deals with the party's aims & values.

 

It does say this though

 

"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few; where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"

 

(my emphasis) I suspect I am not alone in thinking this part of Labour's values is under threat from the "aspirational" wing of the Labour Party.

 

Of course I don't expect UK Labour to stop supporting the Union - as ever I respect those whose views are different from mine 

[eFestivals]

Is it? - I can't see it mentioned in clause IV of their constitution which, as I sure you are aware, deals with the party's aims & values.

you've never heard about solidarity of the working classes....?

Edited June 15, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

And for me too.

 

But I don't expect those principles to mirror mine in their entirety, and I respect that policies need to gain popular support or else they're ultimately pointless.

 

Factionalism is what puts the tories in charge.

 

Believe it or not, I largely agree with you. I don't think anyone is asking the Labour party to tailor their policies to suit any of us. 

 

I suspect you me & Kaos would all love an electable Labour Party well to the left of anything we have seen in recent years. We all know that isn't going to happen. As I've said before we only differ on the amount of compromise we can stomach.

 

You and I have both said that Labour is going about this process arse about face - they should be deciding what they stand for first & then & only then get round to electing a leader.  

[LJS]

you've never heard about solidarity of the working classes....?

 

Yup & I'm old enough to remember when Labour believed in it!

 

Does solidarity stop at National borders?

 

"Arise ye workers from your slumbers

Arise ye prisoners of want

For reason in revolt now thunders

And at last ends the age of cant.

Away with all your superstitions

Servile masses arise, arise

We’ll change henceforth the old tradition

And spurn the dust to win the prize.

 So comrades, come rally

And the last fight let us face

The Internationale unites the human race."

 

[eFestivals]

Believe it or not, I largely agree with you. I don't think anyone is asking the Labour party to tailor their policies to suit any of us.

Hmmm, this is where I get confused with snipper-voting Scots.

Mostly, those Scots would say that SLAB needs to dump London and be independent in Scotland - become a nationalist nparty (with the side consequence of making 'London-Labour' an English nationalist party.

Which I would say that no one who gets what Labour is about could go along with.

 

[eFestivals]

Does solidarity stop at National borders?

 

 

Dunno, why don't you tell me?

 

Please show us the effective cross-national borders parties anywhere in the world, to see if it does stop at national borders, or not.

[eFestivals]

Yup & I'm old enough to remember when Labour believed in it!

 

It still does. It's merely confused about what 'the people' want.

 

The problem is that it's you who's stopped believing in it, not them. You want to put Scotland first - and not those in greatest need.

[LJS]

It still does. It's merely confused about what 'the people' want.

 

The problem is that it's you who's stopped believing in it, not them. You want to put Scotland first - and not those in greatest need.

 

If you paid attention you would know that I only "converted" to Indy after losing my faith in the Labour :Party & Westminster Governments in general - I just don't believe they are capable of delivering meaningful progressive change. In the meantime, whilst we remain a United Kingdom, I am in favour of Labour being a "party of the left" rather than the aspirational centre.

 

And I don't wish to put Scotland first, I simply want to live in a country where there is a passing chance of some sort of left wing government.

[eFestivals]

it certainly is. 

they still believe in what they're confused about?

 

that sounds about right

 

 

No, I'm saying that they're trying to deliver to the working classes what they want, but they're not understanding what the working classes want.

 

Believing that all Labour need to do is go left is certainly no less flawed.

Edited June 15, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

If you paid attention you would know that I only "converted" to Indy after losing my faith in the Labour :Party & Westminster Governments in general - I just don't believe they are capable of delivering meaningful progressive change.

There's no progressive change in voting yourself poorer and so being unable to do any of what you hope.

 

 

In the meantime, whilst we remain a United Kingdom, I am in favour of Labour being a "party of the left" rather than the aspirational centre.

 

And so you condemn yourself to the tories. And everyone else.

 

Is that a bit of the Jim Swinney complex coming thru, where Scots should have to suffer until they're clever enough to think like you?

 

And I don't wish to put Scotland first, I simply want to live in a country where there is a passing chance of some sort of left wing government.

Then perhaps try supporting one...?

[eFestivals]

I can't see Labour winning with any of these candidates....  

 

I think they should go with Liz Kendall....  Best chance...

 

Liz Kendall looks like the most electable candidate today. I guarantee that's not how it'll be in 5 years time.

 

One of the problems Labour is having is that they set themselves up to win the previous election and not the future one. They need to think ahead, and not think backwards.

[eFestivals]

I don't see how any of the other will fair better in five years time.

I'm not saying they'll look any more electable. I'm saying Kendall won't look as electable as she does at the moment.

The political narrative will have moved on by 2020, and Blairism will look less attractive to the overall mass of the population than it does today.

One part of that 'tomorrow' we already know about is that public spending is going to look very different, and deficits will be outlawed in statute, and the country perhaps running a small surplus. That will be the starting position from which Labour will have to try and sell something different, and the people buy it.

And while there might be strong support for extra spending in some areas, I doubt the public will be in the mood for runaway spending to start clocking up the debts again ... and so Labour are going to have to find policies to fit within much of that if they're going to stand any chance at all.

 

 

 

[TheGayTent]

You mean Labour will have to find new clever ways of fucking the economy ?

Edited June 16, 2015 by TheGayTent

[kaosmark2]

I don't think Kendall will ever look electable. I don't think she does now and I think she'll appear even less so in 5 years time.

 

Jeremy Corbyn won't win, but I have no clue who to give my 2nd preference to. I have more respect for Yvette Cooper than Burnham, but the association with Balls will taint her in the eyes of the electorate, and the sexism in society will lead to accusations of his influence.

 

Frankly, I hope we have another choice in 3/4 years time.

Edited June 16, 2015 by kaosmark2

[kaosmark2]

If you think she's not electable AND don't agree with her political leanings, why the hell do you hope for her?