|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Mar 21, 2021 21:54:03 GMT
All this talk of a progressive alliance forgets that any progressive alliance will have to go through the Lib Dems, which will inevitably shift a Labour government supported by them to the right. Probably not what MerseyMike thinks he can get from a progressive alliance. That does assume that the Lib Dems are still the party of David Laws, Andrew George, and Lembit Opik, rather than an attempt to insert a fag paper between Sir Keir Starmer and Leila Moran. |
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Mar 21, 2021 21:57:10 GMT
All this talk of a progressive alliance forgets that any progressive alliance will have to go through the Lib Dems, which will inevitably shift a Labour government supported by them to the right. Probably not what MerseyMike thinks he can get from a progressive alliance. That does assume that the Lib Dems are still the party of David Laws, Andrew George, and Lembit Opik, rather than an attempt to insert a fag paper between Sir Keir Starmer and Leila Moran. Im saying this in a context of the Lib Dems target seats being in Winchester and Cheltenham, not Hornsey and Wood Green and Bristol West. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2021 22:20:58 GMT
Can't see Andrea Jenkyns keeping her seat. Naughty... 😉 |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,754
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Mar 21, 2021 22:21:39 GMT
All this talk of a progressive alliance forgets that any progressive alliance will have to go through the Lib Dems, which will inevitably shift a Labour government supported by them to the right. Probably not what MerseyMike thinks he can get from a progressive alliance. That does assume that the Lib Dems are still the party of David Laws, Andrew George, and Lembit Opik, rather than an attempt to insert a fag paper between Sir Keir Starmer and Leila Moran. I think you can at least delete Lembit Öpik from that comparison. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 21, 2021 22:22:14 GMT
Which is why Labour should give up its majoritarian aims and support electoral reform. It can then be - as it should be - the party of the left, and their job should be to promote and win support for the politics of the left. Mike, I don't want to put words in your mouth but is your implication here that being 'a party of the left' is inconsistent with appealing to sufficient voters to win seats like the ones I mentioned in my post? If so, why? The Labour Party of Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson achieved it. Or was Labour not left wing in their day?
It's more about voter distribution. Effectively we have polarised towards living in the same places as those who broadly agree with us. Labour's vote is very concentrated in the cities. Small town white working class voters are pretty right wing, small c-conservative, and now tribal affiliation has gone there isn't an obvious reason why they should vote Labour. I think there has certainly been a shift rightwards on socio-economic issues - the reluctance to pay more tax being the obvious example. The Thatcher settlement was never really challenged. Of course Labour should try and change hearts and minds but I just can't see the point in being another version of the Tories. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 21, 2021 22:23:53 GMT
All this talk of a progressive alliance forgets that any progressive alliance will have to go through the Lib Dems, which will inevitably shift a Labour government supported by them to the right. Probably not what MerseyMike thinks he can get from a progressive alliance. I don't believe in "progressive alliances" other than to get electoral reform. Nothing more. I don't think the LibDems are aching for another coalition under FPTP either |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Mar 21, 2021 22:34:12 GMT
All this talk of a progressive alliance forgets that any progressive alliance will have to go through the Lib Dems, which will inevitably shift a Labour government supported by them to the right. Probably not what MerseyMike thinks he can get from a progressive alliance. That does assume that the Lib Dems are still the party of David Laws, Andrew George, and Lembit Opik, rather than an attempt to insert a fag paper between Sir Keir Starmer and Leila Moran. Lembit is now advising the Tories. He describes the LDs as a parody of their former selves. nation.cymru/news/lib-dems-hit-back-at-former-leader-for-advising-tories-on-how-to-beat-the-party/ |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 21, 2021 23:03:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Mar 21, 2021 23:11:58 GMT
Don't wish to change the topic or start a long list of these but a lot of people said that about Leigh, Blyth Valley, etc... The same of course could be said in reverse for Canterbury, and I'm sure for many LD gains over the years. Quite. In another thread I posted the following back in October 2018: "Well, yes. Changing demography is a factor, as is differential turnout. There's certainly more to it than simple vote-switching.
"But even so ....
"I could have added NE Derbyshire, Middlesbrough S and Copeland to the three I mentioned (the comparison in the last-named being with the 2015 GE, not the intervening byelection).
"And I'm also looking at the Tory near-misses in 2017: that is, the Labour seats that they came closest to capturing. If we confine ourselves only to the ones they missed by 2500 or fewer, we have (in ascending order): Dudley N, Newcastle-u-L, Barrow, Ashfield, Bishop Auckland, Penistone, Wrexham, Wakefield, Wolverhampton SW, Stoke N.
"All I'm saying is that there's a pattern here." (The 'three I mentioned' in an earlier post were Mansfield, Stoke S and Walsall N, all very traditional Labour seats won by the Tories in 2017.) Of the ten near-misses I listed back in October 2018, all Labour seats at that time, every one fell to the Tories fourteen months later - and most of these (not W'ton SW) were very long-established Labour seats where electing a Tory was as unthinkable as it would be in Normanton, Ponty & Cas - until it happened. (It's not all one-way traffic of course. On could make similar comments about Canterbury, say, or most notably Hove - the latter not so long ago the very epitome of genteel south coast Toryism and now a rock-solid Labour seat.) There are two schools of thought about the 2019 election. One is that it was essentially an outlier, as pro-Brexit Labour voters lent their support to the Tories (or the Brexit Party), for one election only, in order to 'get Brexit done'; and now, that mission accomplished, they will return to their long-term allegiance. The other view is that the particular circumstances of the 2019 election greatly accelerated a trend that was already in evidence of a realignment of the two main parties as they shift their appeal to different sections of the electorate. It's a mug's game, asking for trouble, to make political predictions: but I'm going to line up with the 'trend' interpretation. And I'm going to stick my neck out even further and say that if the 'trend' theory is correct, there's no reason to think that the process reached its culmination in 2019. Someone calculated that of the 203 seats won by Labour in 2019, as many as 109 - well over half - supported Brexit in the 2016 referendum. And if that's true, it suggests that Labour has far more seats to lose unless it finds a way to reconnect with what Labour people sometimes describe as their 'lost electors'. (This is a telling piece of terminology in my view because these electors know precisely where they are: it's not they that are lost, it's the Labour Party.)
The reason the Hartlepool byelection is so interesting is that it will, along with the huge number of other elections taking place the same day, give us the best indication since 2019 of how the electoral sands are shifting. But there were two factors which were held to be responsible for the sharp drop in Labour support in these seats in 2019 - and indeed 2017 . Yes Brexit was significant - but so was Corbyn. Are those factors really as salient now as at the end of 2019? Brexit is effectively 'water under the bridge' - and Corbyn is gone. Difficult to believe that feelings are anything like as intense now - and today's 5% Tory lead compares with nearly 12% in late 2019. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 21, 2021 23:54:34 GMT
Mike, I don't want to put words in your mouth but is your implication here that being 'a party of the left' is inconsistent with appealing to sufficient voters to win seats like the ones I mentioned in my post? If so, why? The Labour Party of Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson achieved it. Or was Labour not left wing in their day?
It's more about voter distribution. Effectively we have polarised towards living in the same places as those who broadly agree with us. Labour's vote is very concentrated in the cities. Small town white working class voters are pretty right wing, small c-conservative, and now tribal affiliation has gone there isn't an obvious reason why they should vote Labour. I think there has certainly been a shift rightwards on socio-economic issues - the reluctance to pay more tax being the obvious example. The Thatcher settlement was never really challenged. Of course Labour should try and change hearts and minds but I just can't see the point in being another version of the Tories. I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,064 
|
Post by jamie on Mar 22, 2021 0:07:59 GMT
I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. Very strongly agree with this. By way of example, the BES found that left authoritarians (1/6 of the electorate that are most left wing and authoritarian) voted Conservative in 2019. This sort of group always voted Labour even when they lost nationally but because of the increasing salience and to some extent the distance from Labour on cultural issues decided to abandon them in 2019. These people are objectively just as left wing as actual Labour voters and haven’t necessarily changed their views much, but quite coherently responded to the political positioning of the majors parties and switched their vote. The loss of Corbyn and Brexit should, all else equal, help Labour regain these sorts of voters, but it’s still unclear how Starmer wants to position the party on cultural issues and therefore how much ground they can regain. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 22, 2021 0:17:50 GMT
It's more about voter distribution. Effectively we have polarised towards living in the same places as those who broadly agree with us. Labour's vote is very concentrated in the cities. Small town white working class voters are pretty right wing, small c-conservative, and now tribal affiliation has gone there isn't an obvious reason why they should vote Labour. I think there has certainly been a shift rightwards on socio-economic issues - the reluctance to pay more tax being the obvious example. The Thatcher settlement was never really challenged. Of course Labour should try and change hearts and minds but I just can't see the point in being another version of the Tories. I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. This reflects my view that being left wing is not just about economics. And that Labour cannot be culturally conservative because their new core vote isn't. I don't really get tribal politics nor this big-tent majoritarian outlook which is why I would prefer more parties and electoral reform. I would also add that if people want better public services, they have to be paid for, and that won't happen purely by getting Amazon to pay more corporation tax. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Mar 22, 2021 0:18:16 GMT
It's more about voter distribution. Effectively we have polarised towards living in the same places as those who broadly agree with us. Labour's vote is very concentrated in the cities. Small town white working class voters are pretty right wing, small c-conservative, and now tribal affiliation has gone there isn't an obvious reason why they should vote Labour. I think there has certainly been a shift rightwards on socio-economic issues - the reluctance to pay more tax being the obvious example. The Thatcher settlement was never really challenged. Of course Labour should try and change hearts and minds but I just can't see the point in being another version of the Tories. I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. There needs to be less focus on pronouns and more on poverty and tackling it. And no, it’s not bigoted or transphobic not to be willing to be engaged in this, but talking about ‘Mx’ on forms (there was an article about this last month) just causes unnecessary resentment from people who are literally struggling to put food on the table who must be wondering this is where the party’s priority appears to be? Absolutely go for social progress and equality, but do so ‘in the background’ and focus on what a government should be doing, and that is economic priorities that affect people, their pockets and their environment. As well as the NHS I’d like to see free school meals come to the fore again if they are serious about campaigning. With the ‘vaccine high’ it almost feels like everyone has forgotten about the FSM debacle. Given how ‘low’ the Tories went in their 2019 campaign (FactCheckUK, having D.Abbott on every leaflet even though she’s not a party leader, Corbyn the chicken), Labour has no option other than to “go low” as it were. Dominic Cummings and Dido Harding’s faces should be on every leaflet. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 22, 2021 0:33:46 GMT
I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. Very strongly agree with this. By way of example, the BES found that left authoritarians (1/6 of the electorate that are most left wing and authoritarian) voted Conservative in 2019. This sort of group always voted Labour even when they lost nationally but because of the increasing salience and to some extent the distance from Labour on cultural issues decided to abandon them in 2019. These people are objectively just as left wing as actual Labour voters and haven’t necessarily changed their views much, but quite coherently responded to the political positioning of the majors parties and switched their vote. The loss of Corbyn and Brexit should, all else equal, help Labour regain these sorts of voters, but it’s still unclear how Starmer wants to position the party on cultural issues and therefore how much ground they can regain. The proportion of these left authoritarians in the electorate will be very high in Hartlepool - probably higher than just about every other constituency in Britain and almost certainly the highest in the North East. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 22, 2021 0:34:00 GMT
I'm not convinced the "small town white working class" are that right-wing, actually. Certainly not in the North East. They're certainly socially conservative (though most social issues tend to bear little weight offline, despite all the noise they create online), but on economics they're centre-left. They don't want to pay more taxes themselves, but the residents of Spennymoor aren't crying out for a Singapore-on-Thames tax haven regime - in fact they want more funding for visible public services like health and the police. Which is why Labour are sensibly downplaying their candidate's Europhile leanings and emphasising the NHS above all else. There needs to be less focus on pronouns and more on poverty and tackling it. And no, it’s not bigoted or transphobic not to be willing to be engaged in this, but talking about ‘Mx’ on forms (there was an article about this last month) just causes unnecessary resentment from people who are literally struggling to put food on the table who must be wondering this is where the party’s priority appears to be? Absolutely go for social progress and equality, but do so ‘in the background’ and focus on what a government should be doing, and that is economic priorities that affect people, their pockets and their environment. As well as the NHS I’d like to see free school meals come to the fore again if they are serious about campaigning. With the ‘vaccine high’ it almost feels like everyone has forgotten about the FSM debacle. Given how ‘low’ the Tories went in their 2019 campaign (FactCheckUK, having D.Abbott on every leaflet even though she’s not a party leader, Corbyn the chicken), Labour has no option other than to “go low” as it were. Dominic Cummings and Dido Harding’s faces should be on every leaflet. I think there should be room for a socially conservative workerist social democratic party. I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but there's clearly a constituency for it, however, the idea that one amorphous party can mop up all the non Tory vote is unlikely. As for the idea that Labour never talk about anything but trans issues, it's been notable how little they have had to say on the matter! I doubt it has any influence. I think BLM etc. does and I think the reaction to Starmer's describing it as a moment should tell you that Labour aren't going to adopt Ukip-lite policies in that area. Their current voter base won't allow it. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 22, 2021 0:37:30 GMT
Very strongly agree with this. By way of example, the BES found that left authoritarians (1/6 of the electorate that are most left wing and authoritarian) voted Conservative in 2019. This sort of group always voted Labour even when they lost nationally but because of the increasing salience and to some extent the distance from Labour on cultural issues decided to abandon them in 2019. These people are objectively just as left wing as actual Labour voters and haven’t necessarily changed their views much, but quite coherently responded to the political positioning of the majors parties and switched their vote. The loss of Corbyn and Brexit should, all else equal, help Labour regain these sorts of voters, but it’s still unclear how Starmer wants to position the party on cultural issues and therefore how much ground they can regain. The proportion of these left authoritarians in the electorate will be very high in Hartlepool - probably higher than just about every other constituency in Britain and almost certainly the highest in the North East. I'm sure that is the case. But if Labour adopts left authoritarianism to win Hartlepool, can they rely on voters who don't want that formula to stick with them elsewhere? A majority, if this remains the obsession, can't be won on post industrial small towns alone without keeping all the votes and seats held at the moment |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 22, 2021 0:50:30 GMT
The proportion of these left authoritarians in the electorate will be very high in Hartlepool - probably higher than just about every other constituency in Britain and almost certainly the highest in the North East. I'm sure that is the case. But if Labour adopts left authoritarianism to win Hartlepool, can they rely on voters who don't want that formula to stick with them elsewhere? A majority, if this remains the obsession, can't be won on post industrial small towns alone without keeping all the votes and seats held at the moment You can't win a majority on the ultra-liberal inner cities either. You need more than that. Realistically Labour can either choose to focus more on social issues and minimise economics. That will go down well in affluent parts of the South East and perhaps the outer suburbs of a few of our other big cities. Or they can choose to focus on bread and butter economic issues and minimise the social stuff - it might cost them a few votes in Putney and Brighton but it'll work a treat in small towns (and not just northern ones - the road to a majority includes working class towns in the Midlands and South too). I'd argue you should be standing up for places like Hartlepool against the London elite, not abandoning them. Ask yourself this - would you rather Labour had more left authoritarians, or right wing liberals? Eventually this government will fall, whether in 2024, 2029, or later. But do you want the replacement to be a party for ordinary Britain or for the metropolitan elite? |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Mar 22, 2021 0:55:32 GMT
There needs to be less focus on pronouns and more on poverty and tackling it. And no, it’s not bigoted or transphobic not to be willing to be engaged in this, but talking about ‘Mx’ on forms (there was an article about this last month) just causes unnecessary resentment from people who are literally struggling to put food on the table who must be wondering this is where the party’s priority appears to be? Absolutely go for social progress and equality, but do so ‘in the background’ and focus on what a government should be doing, and that is economic priorities that affect people, their pockets and their environment. As well as the NHS I’d like to see free school meals come to the fore again if they are serious about campaigning. With the ‘vaccine high’ it almost feels like everyone has forgotten about the FSM debacle. Given how ‘low’ the Tories went in their 2019 campaign (FactCheckUK, having D.Abbott on every leaflet even though she’s not a party leader, Corbyn the chicken), Labour has no option other than to “go low” as it were. Dominic Cummings and Dido Harding’s faces should be on every leaflet. I think there should be room for a socially conservative workerist social democratic party. I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but there's clearly a constituency for it, however, the idea that one amorphous party can mop up all the non Tory vote is unlikely. As for the idea that Labour never talk about anything but trans issues, it's been notable how little they have had to say on the matter! I doubt it has any influence. I think BLM etc. does and I think the reaction to Starmer's describing it as a moment should tell you that Labour aren't going to adopt Ukip-lite policies in that area. Their current voter base won't allow it. Okay, I confess the article I referred to was from the DM but I stand by the point that it should not have been a headline in the first place, it doesn’t gain any new voters that need to be won back. Other things which I think would also seem odd to the average voter yet are all the rage on Twitter are the pronoun declarations by several MPs. I’m sure it must look odd to most average people who log on to Twitter, someone with say a clearly female name and face having “she/her” slap bang in the bio (“what is the world coming to?”). Several male MPs also do it . Lindsay Hoyle has a traditionally “female” name but I have never seen him use them or seen him get mistaken for anything else. It’s these little things that may make people feel they are ‘out of touch’, and titles Mr/Ms have been around since the start of time if need be when writing letters and filling forms (and speaking of Mx I’m sure has been around for a while anyway and the census had new questions on identity but there were no headlines or furore there), so I’m not sure where the she/her he/him etc stuff originated but I’m sorry but it needs to be nipped in the bud or remain in students unions. The policy should be that those who wish to declare or identify as anything else should be free to, without discrimination but the vast majority of people who identify with their obvious characteristics should not be forced or pressured into doing so. The proportion of these left authoritarians in the electorate will be very high in Hartlepool - probably higher than just about every other constituency in Britain and almost certainly the highest in the North East. I'm sure that is the case. But if Labour adopts left authoritarianism to win Hartlepool, can they rely on voters who don't want that formula to stick with them elsewhere? A majority, if this remains the obsession, can't be won on post industrial small towns alone without keeping all the votes and seats held at the momentWithout sounding like taking votes for granted, where would they go? The demographic in question I’m sure is educated enough to realise voting for anyone else, Green, LD or a new leftwingparty,, would let the Tories in (and surely getting them out must be the priority) so it must be a case of lesser of two evils if it gets to it. Most of this demographic I’d like to think still do not forgive the LDs for the right wing coalition, as Swinson managed the unfortunate achievement of being derided by left and right, remainers and leavers alike. Davey though competent still looks like a product of the coalition era and the polls say it all. If I was KS I would have been scared if Layla had won, who does look like someone who could drain the progressive vote as it were. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 22, 2021 1:02:17 GMT
I'm sure that is the case. But if Labour adopts left authoritarianism to win Hartlepool, can they rely on voters who don't want that formula to stick with them elsewhere? A majority, if this remains the obsession, can't be won on post industrial small towns alone without keeping all the votes and seats held at the moment You can't win a majority on the ultra-liberal inner cities either. You need more than that. Realistically Labour can either choose to focus more on social issues and minimise economics. That will go down well in affluent parts of the South East and perhaps the outer suburbs of a few of our other big cities. Or they can choose to focus on bread and butter economic issues and minimise the social stuff - it might cost them a few votes in Putney and Brighton but it'll work a treat in small towns (and not just northern ones - the road to a majority includes working class towns in the Midlands and South too). I'd argue you should be standing up for places like Hartlepool against the London elite, not abandoning them. Ask yourself this - would you rather Labour had more left authoritarians, or right wing liberals? Eventually this government will fall, whether in 2024, 2029, or later. But do you want the replacement to be a party for ordinary Britain or for the metropolitan elite? That's why I think Labour should back electoral reform and pacts to achieve it. I don't think a majority based on voters with diametrically opposed views can be sustained. I also think the idea that Labour are going to turn back a very clear trend is unlikely. It doesn't mean all those seats are gone forever but have a look at seats which were once marginal like Warwickshire North and Walsall North. I think they are unlikely to return to Labour. And the complacent view that the cities have nowhere else to go was exactly what used to be said about the red wall seats. For me - I wouldn't vote for any socially conservative party. I don't believe in big tent catch all parties and I won't be voting for either a left authoritarian or right wing liberal party. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 22, 2021 1:08:25 GMT
I think there should be room for a socially conservative workerist social democratic party. I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but there's clearly a constituency for it, however, the idea that one amorphous party can mop up all the non Tory vote is unlikely. As for the idea that Labour never talk about anything but trans issues, it's been notable how little they have had to say on the matter! I doubt it has any influence. I think BLM etc. does and I think the reaction to Starmer's describing it as a moment should tell you that Labour aren't going to adopt Ukip-lite policies in that area. Their current voter base won't allow it. Okay, I confess the article I referred to was from the DM but I stand by the point that it should not have been a headline in the first place, it doesn’t gain any new voters that need to be won back. Other things which I think would also seem odd to the average voter yet are all the rage on Twitter are the pronoun declarations by several MPs. I’m sure it must look odd to most average people who log on to Twitter, someone with say a clearly female name and face having “she/her” slap bang in the bio (“what is the world coming to?”). Several male MPs also do it . Lindsay Hoyle has a traditionally “female” name but I have never seen him use them or seen him get mistaken for anything else. It’s these little things that may make people feel they are ‘out of touch’, and titles Mr/Ms have been around since the start of time if need be when writing letters and filling forms (and speaking of Mx I’m sure has been around for a while anyway and the census had new questions on identity but there were no headlines or furore there), so I’m not sure where the she/her he/him etc stuff originated but I’m sorry but it needs to be nipped in the bud or remain in students unions. The policy should be that those who wish to declare or identify as anything else should be free to, without discrimination but the vast majority of people who identify with their obvious characteristics should not be forced or pressured into doing so. I'm sure that is the case. But if Labour adopts left authoritarianism to win Hartlepool, can they rely on voters who don't want that formula to stick with them elsewhere? A majority, if this remains the obsession, can't be won on post industrial small towns alone without keeping all the votes and seats held at the momentWithout sounding like taking votes for granted, where would they go? The demographic in question I’m sure is educated enough to realise voting for anyone else, Green, LD or a new leftwingparty,, would let the Tories in (and surely getting them out must be the priority) so it must be a case of lesser of two evils if it gets to it. Most of this demographic I’d like to think still do not forgive the LDs for the right wing coalition, as Swinson managed the unfortunate achievement of being derided by left and right, remainers and leavers alike. Davey though competent still looks like a product of the coalition era and the polls say it all. If I was KS I would have been scared if Layla had won, who does look like someone who could drain the progressive vote as it were. I don't do Twitter, so am not aware of what goes on there. And I'm really not interested in the sort of party you propose. No, getting the Tories out is not my priority. I don't vote negatively, only positively, and what you describe sounds like old style social democracy, which is well past its sell by. There is no possibility of me voting for Starmer's Labour unless it pledges to support electoral reform and enters a pact to make it happen. |
|
