|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 25, 2018 15:23:44 GMT
Mike The voters of South Stoke will not view it as you do. They will have little or no idea of the differences in stance by May, Boris and Jacob. If they could turn out for May in that Woden-awful campaign they would love a Jacob fronted campaign echoing many of their own deep thoughts. Once we are out of the EU they will want things which the Tory Right cannot deliver. You forget thst very few are protectionist Empire Loyalist Tories like yourself but convinced economic liberals. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jan 25, 2018 17:02:16 GMT
Lots that I agree with there carlton43. I misread the extent to which a general discontent with modern life could go beyond grumbling and find a political cause - although I complain about the press, it needed that genuine discontent to have any impact. Perhaps if I lived in a different part of the country I'd have been more aware, but I suspect I'm just too unsympathetic to the view to have readily taken it on board. I think you're right on the Conservative Party, I'm not sure there's any mileage in them being anything other than a Brexit Party, so probably best to be the Brexit Party. But I think someone needs to reach out a bit - Remainers to make a pitch for British patriotism, tradition and good old live-and-let-live British pragmatism*; or Brexiteers to make a pitch for preserving the greater tolerance of the last generation. (Actually I think Labour could coherently do the latter, if they got off their arses a bit.) Otherwise we'll be stuck in this two-party stalemate. * I have a theory that British "tolerance" is really about "don't ask, don't tell" - politics, race, religion and sexuality are all provocative and not so much accepted as put in a box where we all agree not to mention them. I think Leave voters feel the bargain has been broken, that they are not allowed to just leave people alone, they have to have their own beliefs and mores criticised. mboy would probably be better on this than me. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 25, 2018 17:15:50 GMT
Lots that I agree with there carlton43 . I misread the extent to which a general discontent with modern life could go beyond grumbling and find a political cause - although I complain about the press, it needed that genuine discontent to have any impact. Perhaps if I lived in a different part of the country I'd have been more aware, but I suspect I'm just too unsympathetic to the view to have readily taken it on board. I think you're right on the Conservative Party, I'm not sure there's any mileage in them being anything other than a Brexit Party, so probably best to be the Brexit Party. But I think someone needs to reach out a bit - Remainers to make a pitch for British patriotism, tradition and good old live-and-let-live British pragmatism*; or Brexiteers to make a pitch for preserving the greater tolerance of the last generation. (Actually I think Labour could coherently do the latter, if they got off their arses a bit.) Otherwise we'll be stuck in this two-party stalemate. * I have a theory that British "tolerance" is really about "don't ask, don't tell" - politics, race, religion and sexuality are all provocative and not so much accepted as put in a box where we all agree not to mention them. I think Leave voters feel the bargain has been broken, that they are not allowed to just leave people alone, they have to have their own beliefs and mores criticised. mboy would probably be better on this than me. Most interesting and I think accurate. Agree about a pragmatic, reasoned and centre-moderate approach by Labour. If they could pull that off well and Brexit went a bit off course they could pull ahead and at least stall us to hung parliament. I am absolutely banking on Corbyn getting it wrong and going for cheap shallow attacks on our mistakes and in consequence wrong-footing his party into the appearance of being anti-Brexit and thus anti-democratic and anti-The Peoples' Choice. I have to pray that he will find the latter just too attractive to resist, because if he does we are made and might win big. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jan 25, 2018 20:18:56 GMT
Lots that I agree with there carlton43 . I misread the extent to which a general discontent with modern life could go beyond grumbling and find a political cause - although I complain about the press, it needed that genuine discontent to have any impact. Perhaps if I lived in a different part of the country I'd have been more aware, but I suspect I'm just too unsympathetic to the view to have readily taken it on board. I think you're right on the Conservative Party, I'm not sure there's any mileage in them being anything other than a Brexit Party, so probably best to be the Brexit Party. But I think someone needs to reach out a bit - Remainers to make a pitch for British patriotism, tradition and good old live-and-let-live British pragmatism*; or Brexiteers to make a pitch for preserving the greater tolerance of the last generation. (Actually I think Labour could coherently do the latter, if they got off their arses a bit.) Otherwise we'll be stuck in this two-party stalemate. * I have a theory that British "tolerance" is really about "don't ask, don't tell" - politics, race, religion and sexuality are all provocative and not so much accepted as put in a box where we all agree not to mention them. I think Leave voters feel the bargain has been broken, that they are not allowed to just leave people alone, they have to have their own beliefs and mores criticised. mboy would probably be better on this than me. Most interesting and I think accurate. Agree about a pragmatic, reasoned and centre-moderate approach by Labour. If they could pull that off well and Brexit went a bit off course they could pull ahead and at least stall us to hung parliament. I am absolutely banking on Corbyn getting it wrong and going for cheap shallow attacks on our mistakes and in consequence wrong-footing his party into the appearance of being anti-Brexit and thus anti-democratic and anti-The Peoples' Choice. I have to pray that he will find the latter just too attractive to resist, because if he does we are made and might win big. I see the problem for Labour as being that currently they ride the reaction of those who were antagonised by Leave, but they have no intention of coming out for "Remain" (for perfectly sound practical reasons). Ideally they want to be able to accept Brexit to avoid antagonising the Leave constituency but present Remainers with the sort of social policies that the latter associate with voting Remain. For this to work it seems to me it is best if Brexit is defused as an issue, hopefully with the Tories having reaped opprobrium, at which point Labour steps forward to say to Remainers "terribly sorry, but there's nothing you can do about Brexit now, but have this nice new shiny policy on Equal Opportunities" (not sure what yet; maybe something on university education for the poor? maybe some help for ethnic minorities?) while simultaneously pumping money into council housing, the north and midlands to boost regional economies; and perhaps producing some showy immigration legislation with a big fanfare about fairness? The latter reaches out to Leavers and is in line with their core vote on either side of the Brexit issue. I think they'll give you a clear run on Brexit. (Of course, they have to find the money.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2018 20:26:19 GMT
I think if Burnham wins in this parallel universe, the Labour Party will be more pro a proper Brexit. Coming from a northern constituency Burnham will have realised the sword of Damocles currently hanging over Northern Labour seats, unlike the current condescending, smug and complacent Islington and Westminster set. You think Corbyn is an uncritical Europhile? The policy is as it is now because of those northern seats. No I think those around him, who hold substantial influence over policy, are. Those around him seem to hold Northern English, Welsh and Scottish Leave voters in contempt. Fisheries, Immigration, Democracy these concerns seem parochial, odd and even racist to many of them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2018 20:30:20 GMT
I disagree with that commonly held belief. I always believed that Eurosceptism was/is deep rooted enough and broad enough to make the referendum Leave’s to lose. I won a nice wee bet on that assumption. Actually I agree. Many usual non voters turned out who by definition weren't interested in what any politician had to say. Also the Remain campaign was utterly hopeless. Its hardly surprising that you can't complain about an organisation for years, expect to get more concessions than anyone else, still carry on complaining and expect to be taken seriously when you mount a thin and weak campaign based entirely on perceived economic benefit - or more, the fear of not receiving that benefit. When so many people didn't see that benefit in their own lives it sounded rather hollow.That’s the key. All people see are downsides. These so called benefits don’t really affect ordinary working class people but the huge downsides do. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 25, 2018 22:33:33 GMT
Actually I agree. Many usual non voters turned out who by definition weren't interested in what any politician had to say. Also the Remain campaign was utterly hopeless. Its hardly surprising that you can't complain about an organisation for years, expect to get more concessions than anyone else, still carry on complaining and expect to be taken seriously when you mount a thin and weak campaign based entirely on perceived economic benefit - or more, the fear of not receiving that benefit. When so many people didn't see that benefit in their own lives it sounded rather hollow.That’s the key. All people see are downsides. These so called benefits don’t really affect ordinary working class people but the huge downsides do. I'm not disagreeing. I voted Remain and actually our area did vote Remain - it was the Southport end which was mire strongly Leave. Bootle voted Remain and the tellers said that was clear. So I think here people could recognise the benefits that the EU had brought us under Objective One. However I do get why people voted Leave and I don't like the snotty, superior attitudes of some Remainers who talk about people who live in the north of England as if they are stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on Jan 26, 2018 0:00:28 GMT
You think Corbyn is an uncritical Europhile? The policy is as it is now because of those northern seats. No I think those around him, who hold substantial influence over policy, are. Those around him seem to hold Northern English, Welsh and Scottish Leave voters in contempt. Fisheries, Immigration, Democracy these concerns seem parochial, odd and even racist to many of them. There are some uncritical supporters of the EU in the Labour Party, but that's clearly not the party's position, and the other possible leaders would all have been more uncritically pro-EU and more likely to support a second referendum, not voting to trigger Article 50, trying to stay in the single market, etc. Whether they would *actually* have done these things is hard to say, as the idea of supporting them to oppose Corbyn wouldn't be there. The idea that the current leadership is part of some elitist "Islington set" has largely disappeared, because it's clearly nonsense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 6:39:49 GMT
No I think those around him, who hold substantial influence over policy, are. Those around him seem to hold Northern English, Welsh and Scottish Leave voters in contempt. Fisheries, Immigration, Democracy these concerns seem parochial, odd and even racist to many of them. There are some uncritical supporters of the EU in the Labour Party, but that's clearly not the party's position, and the other possible leaders would all have been more uncritically pro-EU and more likely to support a second referendum, not voting to trigger Article 50, trying to stay in the single market, etc. Whether they would *actually* have done these things is hard to say, as the idea of supporting them to oppose Corbyn wouldn't be there. The idea that the current leadership is part of some elitist "Islington set" has largely disappeared, because it's clearly nonsense. Look Man, It’s most of the party leadership. If you think that Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and their opponents like Chuka Umunna, Blair, Campbell, Liz Kendall etc. are not part of a bubble and thereby understand the concerns of, largely working and lower middle class, Leave voters in places like Dundee, Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim, Forfar, my patch basically, then you really don’t get it. As I said, their concerns are Immigration, Fisheries and Democracy. I know this because I spoke to them myself. Being a part of Vote Leave I spoke to hundreds of other campaigners from Scilly to Shetland, from Lewes to Lydd and they relayed the exact same messages. The leadership of Labour, on all sides, is part of a bubble. They continue to drone on about “making the case for free movement”, “staying in the Single Market and Customs Union”, “Staying in the CFP” saying “The poor things were lied to. They really don’t know what they voted for”. If Labour continue to ignore the rest of Britain, as Chuka did on This Week last night, Labour are eventually sealing their downfall. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 26, 2018 10:38:11 GMT
Well, if you think that Chuka in any way speaks for anything but a very small proportion of "Labour" that's your delusions on this topic explained right away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 10:50:21 GMT
While Chuka, Wes Streeting and Liz Kendall have argued that Labour should remain in the single market and customs union it isn't true that the leadership are saying that. The manifesto states that we will leave freedom of movement and the single market. Corbyn has repeated this line consistently since.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 11:48:13 GMT
While Chuka, Wes Streeting and Liz Kendall have argued that Labour should remain in the single market and customs union it isn't true that the leadership are saying that. The manifesto states that we will leave freedom of movement and the single market. Corbyn has repeated this line consistently since. John McDonnell, Kier Starmer and Diane Abbott are making different noises. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 12:34:29 GMT
If you think that Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and their opponents like Chuka Umunna, Blair, Campbell, Liz Kendall etc. are not part of a bubble and thereby understand the concerns of, largely working and lower middle class, Leave voters in places like Dundee, Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim, Forfar, my patch basically, then you really don’t get it. As I said, their concerns are Immigration, Fisheries and Democracy. On this specific point, I'm not sure that many voters in Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim and Forfar have ever really been part of Labour's target audience, and Dundee voted 59.8% Remain, so there's only so far that greater enthusiasm for Brexit would take Labour there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 13:11:45 GMT
Diane Abbott does not speak for anyone but herself.
As far as I am aware Kier Starmer has said we should seek to negotiate a deal that allows us to continue to benefit from the single market and the customes union. Which most people would agree with. We are leaving the single market and the customes union but there is no reason why we can't have our own free trade deal with the 27 countries of the European Union that guarentees tariff free trade with the 27 countries if the European Union.
Kier has also spoken about easy movement rather than freedom of movement. Behind the buzzwords it's a similar story. We are leaving freedom of movement but would guarentee visa free travel in Europe. After all travelling for work or pleasure should be something all British citizens can do not just for those can afford it. Which should be a relief for my leave voting uncle in law who lives 6 months of the year in Spain. Kier is proposing an economic area outside the existing EEA
Not sure what JM has said that youre referring to
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 26, 2018 18:25:19 GMT
Diane Abbott does not speak for anyone but herself. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Diane Abbott is the shadow Home Secretary. Again, there may be any number of constitutional experts here who can put me straight, but my understanding is that this means - officially - that she speaks for the Labour party on Home affairs .. ? |
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,679 
|
Post by Jack on Jan 26, 2018 18:29:57 GMT
Diane Abbott does not speak for anyone but herself. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Diane Abbott is the shadow Home Secretary. Again, there may be any number of constitutional experts here who can put me straight, but my understanding is that this means - officially - that she speaks for the Labour party on Home affairs .. ? They probably wish she didn't though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 18:30:34 GMT
But when she speaks from her own opinion it isn't Labour Party policy. She may support a second referendum but it wasnt in the manifesto, it hasn't been agreed by conference and Corbyn has opposed it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 21:54:16 GMT
If you think that Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and their opponents like Chuka Umunna, Blair, Campbell, Liz Kendall etc. are not part of a bubble and thereby understand the concerns of, largely working and lower middle class, Leave voters in places like Dundee, Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim, Forfar, my patch basically, then you really don’t get it. As I said, their concerns are Immigration, Fisheries and Democracy. On this specific point, I'm not sure that many voters in Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim and Forfar have ever really been part of Labour's target audience, and Dundee voted 59.8% Remain, so there's only so far that greater enthusiasm for Brexit would take Labour there. My point, I probably didn’t make it clear enough, is that the issues that I uncovered on the doorsteps in this region, Fisheries, Immigration, Democracy etc., are the exact same across the nation. So while Labour may perform exceptionally poorly in Angus, in Carlisle, my hame toon, which is a marginalish Tory seat which voted hugely Leave, those issues are paramount. Labour ignoring them may make middle class people feel superior to the racist plebs but it will damage them in the long term. FYI Dundee did vote Remain, although by a smaller margin that I and most other Dundonian Leavers expected. The Leavers were working class people here in the Hiltoon, people in Charleston, Lochee, Douglas, Maryfield, Whitfield. IOW the places Labour needs more votes in order to win the two Dundee seats. Gaining huge amounts of votes in Riverside and the Ferry by being anti Brexit will only get them so far. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 23:03:58 GMT
But Labour per se are not anti-Brexit. As I see it, Labour need to be able to appeal to people who voted both Leave and Remain, but perhaps especially those who did so without much enthusiasm or conviction either way -- and given how little the voting patterns in the last election resembled those in the EU referendum, I'd say that they've not been doing too badly in that regard. (And as I see it, this is not wholly indistinct from the way in which Scottish Labour need to focus on those for whom the Scottish constitutional issue is not especially central, regardless of how they voted in that referendum -- and again, there's some evidence of success here, cf. Glasgow North East).
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jan 27, 2018 11:49:27 GMT
On this specific point, I'm not sure that many voters in Arbroath, Brechin, Montrose, Friockheim and Forfar have ever really been part of Labour's target audience, and Dundee voted 59.8% Remain, so there's only so far that greater enthusiasm for Brexit would take Labour there. My point, I probably didn’t make it clear enough, is that the issues that I uncovered on the doorsteps in this region, Fisheries, Immigration, Democracy etc., are the exact same across the nation. Actually, fisheries are - at best - a complete non-issue in my part of the nation. It's also worth noting that there is a complete mismatch between the perception and the reality of democracy when it comes to the EU - there are several measures by which the EU is significantly more democratic than the UK (though we probably ran that debate into the ground on a number of different threads during and after the referendum). Also, going back to the issue of whether a different Labour leader might have affected the referendum result, my recollection is that during the referendum campaign, media coverage was giving massive priority to Conservative spokespeople on both sides of the issue. If a different Labour leader had managed to get the party-political balance of coverage changed it's entirely possible that would have moved some Labour voters across to the Remain side. Though that might have been balanced by moving some Conservative voters across to the Leave side. I'm not saying that it would have made a difference, but I don't think we can entirely rule out the possibility. |
|
