|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 2, 2017 18:15:30 GMT
The problem with the SPD finding some 'accomodation' with Die Linke is that it will damage their own electability and wouldn't even be a very stable government (I don't imagine federal DL love massive compromise). Frankly, a lot of people in the SPD would (justifiably) rather have a coalition with anybody else than DL. Realistically, and I wouldn't normally encourage this in a pr system, they (or the Greens) need to get DL down to their core vote so the 'serious' left has as large a proportion of seats as possible in order a left of centre government to be formed. DL is at its core vote already - I wouldn't vote SPD as it stands because its just too right wing Any so called party of the left willing to go into coalition with the Conservatives just isn't worth the time of day. But remember that the SPD and the CDU are traditionally both parties representative of labour, particularly the more Zentrum-descended parts. The CSU were inspired quite significantly, and set up in part by, Adam Stegerwald, a hero of the Christian trade union movement. The CDA is the labour-orientated current within the CDU. As much as you find CDU-SPD co-operation odd and not to your taste, many a German on Left and Right would find the absence of it equally strange. The divides in Germany are often between parties deemed "sozial" and "nicht sozial", and sometimes "buergerlich" and not. I have encountered fairly right-wing types who would vote SPD over the FDP because the latter are "nicht sozial". |
|
albion
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,270 
|
Post by albion on Oct 2, 2017 18:30:24 GMT
Well.......not quite. 2 of the last 3 elections seem to show that the voters prefer not to give any party a majority. I appreciate that this offends your political sensitivities - but it is clearly significant in the context of electoral history. No, the electorate in 2010, 2015 and 2017 wanted a Conservative government (and in 2005 in England as well for that matter). Dream on  |
|
|
|
Post by jigger on Oct 2, 2017 18:33:00 GMT
No, the electorate in 2010, 2015 and 2017 wanted a Conservative government (and in 2005 in England as well for that matter). Dream on What do you mean dream on? I didn't vote for the Conservative Party in 2005 nor 2017 and for as long as Theresa May is the leader of the Conservative Party and Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party, the scenarios where I would vote Conservative are extremely limited. But I am a democrat and I have to accept that the party that I supported in 2017 lost the election and therefore it is right and proper that we have a Conservative government until at least 2022. |
|
albion
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,270
|
Post by albion on Oct 2, 2017 18:40:41 GMT
Dream on What do you mean dream on? I didn't vote for the Conservative Party in 2005 nor 2017 and for as long as Theresa May is the leader of the Conservative Party and Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party, the scenarios where I would vote Conservative are extremely limited. But I am a democrat and I have to accept that the party that I supported in 2017 lost the election and therefore it is right and proper that we have a Conservative government until at least 2022. They both failed to get a majority allowing them to form a government. It is why we poor taxpayers had to fund a £1 billion bribe to the DUP. |
|
|
|
Post by jigger on Oct 2, 2017 18:44:46 GMT
What do you mean dream on? I didn't vote for the Conservative Party in 2005 nor 2017 and for as long as Theresa May is the leader of the Conservative Party and Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party, the scenarios where I would vote Conservative are extremely limited. But I am a democrat and I have to accept that the party that I supported in 2017 lost the election and therefore it is right and proper that we have a Conservative government until at least 2022. They both failed to get a majority allowing them to form a government. It is why we poor taxpayers had to fund a £1 billion bribe to the DUP. Well actually the Conservative Party did get a majority of MPs from England, to which the vast majority of business these days that is conducted in the House of Commons relates - though possibly not right now with Brexit. In any event, the Conservatives won the election - they got more votes and seats that any other party across the UK - and thus not only do they have a right to govern the country for the next 5 years - in my view they have a duty to do so, (unless they are defeated at an earlier election of course). |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,761
|
Post by mboy on Oct 2, 2017 19:47:07 GMT
So we end up with three centre parties - no thanks. No we move the Overton window, Labour governments cannot last forever and if when the Tories take over there are ruled by thatcherites and Brexiteers all our progress will be rolled back. Moving the country leftwards is far more important than keeping the party pure. Woah woah woah! Common sense and objective assessment like that is not going to win you any friends in the modern Labour Party, young man! Contrary to what thetop says - Blair's leftwards impact on British political landscape lasted 20 years (mid 90s to mid 10s) until it was smashed by Brexit. No, he didn't go very far left, but yes, he took the entire nation and establishment with him. To do that he saw how much of the centre he would need to absorb to swing the balance, and then he absorbed it. Its impact on modern British politics is probably only second to the Butskellism of the Postwar-consensus. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2017 19:56:39 GMT
Certainly the equalities agenda - but that was a case of following more than leading. The hard work was done by the social movements.
I'm not convinced that there was much real change otherwise. Certainly nothing particularly left wing
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,036
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 2, 2017 20:14:44 GMT
There are more than enough threads to bicker about the grimly comic trainwreck that is British politics without taking this one over as well...
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 2, 2017 22:11:26 GMT
That's not really true; it doesn't have a core vote in the West, or to the extent that it does it's tiny. It's a sort of electoral holding pen for left-wing voters who are unhappy with the federal incarnations of their 'natural' options. Most are o/c former SPD voters (some who have sometimes also voted Green along the way; quite a few of those now actually) and many still vote SPD in other elections. Interesting but I formed that view from speaking to German friends who said that much of the old nostalgia based support has literally died off and DL now wins the votes of those who think the SPD are too centrist I think that this is true of a lot of the current voters (especially at nationwide elections), but what makes co-operation with Die Linke unacceptable at the federal level is the attitude of much of the leadership to the GDR régime, rather than that of its supporters. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 2, 2017 23:02:18 GMT
Interesting but I formed that view from speaking to German friends who said that much of the old nostalgia based support has literally died off and DL now wins the votes of those who think the SPD are too centrist I think that this is true of a lot of the current voters (especially at nationwide elections), but what makes co-operation with Die Linke unacceptable at the federal level is the attitude of much of the leadership to the GDR régime, rather than that of its supporters. Then the SPD are likely to remain in opposition or in a future grand coalition which will rule out winning over any voters from Die Linke The shift to the right of the FDP rules them out so if they want to lead a left of centre coalition it will mean Red Red Green. I take the view that parties rehabilitate via responsibility anyway. I'm one of the few on here who would vote Sinn Fein in NI |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,137
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 3, 2017 0:08:44 GMT
Would a traffic light coalition not be (overall) left of centre?
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 3, 2017 2:48:12 GMT
No we move the Overton window, Labour governments cannot last forever and if when the Tories take over there are ruled by thatcherites and Brexiteers all our progress will be rolled back. Moving the country leftwards is far more important than keeping the party pure. Woah woah woah! Common sense and objective assessment like that is not going to win you any friends in the modern Labour Party, young man! Contrary to what thetop says - Blair's leftwards impact on British political landscape lasted 20 years (mid 90s to mid 10s) until it was smashed by Brexit. No, he didn't go very far left, but yes, he took the entire nation and establishment with him. To do that he saw how much of the centre he would need to absorb to swing the balance, and then he absorbed it. Its impact on modern British politics is probably only second to the Butskellism of the Postwar-consensus. Very correct! I think, the hiatus between Blair and his predecessors is nowadays - when left journalists&politologists like to stress his NonRadicalism - underestimated. But his multicoloured and indecent infantilism - distinct from the old aristocracy's boyism (Eton&Harrow) -, his shamelessly slavish relationship to Murdoch or Bush jr. was roughly the end of merry old Britain. Though Thatcher turning the Tories from oldfashioned Conservativism to (right)liberal yuppiedom was another not so small rupture. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,946
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 3, 2017 9:51:30 GMT
Woah woah woah! Common sense and objective assessment like that is not going to win you any friends in the modern Labour Party, young man! Contrary to what thetop says - Blair's leftwards impact on British political landscape lasted 20 years (mid 90s to mid 10s) until it was smashed by Brexit. No, he didn't go very far left, but yes, he took the entire nation and establishment with him. To do that he saw how much of the centre he would need to absorb to swing the balance, and then he absorbed it. Its impact on modern British politics is probably only second to the Butskellism of the Postwar-consensus. Very correct! I think, the hiatus between Blair and his predecessors is nowadays - when left journalists&politologists like to stress his NonRadicalism - underestimated. I suspect you mean *over*estimated? And if so, you are correct. Twenty years ago, Blair stood on a basically social democratic platform that the huge majority of Labour could happily unite behind. The problem is not just that he veered to the right whilst in office, but he has moved still further in that direction since leaving it. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,761
|
Post by mboy on Oct 3, 2017 10:14:50 GMT
I don't think he has moved to the right since leaving, rather, New Labour has disintegrated and left him standing largely by himself in the field, and the Labour Party has swung steeply to the left and the party centre of gravity is now far from him.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,946
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 3, 2017 10:19:23 GMT
I don't think he has moved to the right since leaving No, he really has. Not mixing with Labour people anymore (in stark contrast to plutocrats and dictators) and surrounding himself with a small coterie of sycophants means that he has totally lost his political bearings, and even common sense. It is a deeply sad sight, and hopefully a warning to others. |
|
|
|
Post by Ghyl Tarvoke on Oct 3, 2017 13:54:43 GMT
I don't think he has moved to the right since leaving No, he really has. Not mixing with Labour people anymore (in stark contrast to plutocrats and dictators) and surrounding himself with a small coterie of sycophants means that he has totally lost his political bearings, and even common sense. It is a deeply sad sight, and hopefully a warning to others. This was the first post I saw entering this thread again and I thought it was about Schroder. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 3, 2017 14:11:03 GMT
If Conservatives are now saying treating people from diverse backgrounds equally is a left wing agenda, no wonder the intellectual momentum is with the left.
|
|
|
|
Post by jigger on Oct 3, 2017 14:19:18 GMT
If Conservatives are now saying treating people from diverse backgrounds equally is a left wing agenda, no wonder the intellectual momentum is with the left. I don't think @pjones can be described as representative of the average Conservative voter (I'm not sure he even is a Conservative voter). Certainly if his views are even close to being representative of the 13.7 million people who voted for the Conservative Party in June, then we have a very big problem in this country. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 3, 2017 15:24:35 GMT
No, he really has. Not mixing with Labour people anymore (in stark contrast to plutocrats and dictators) and surrounding himself with a small coterie of sycophants means that he has totally lost his political bearings, and even common sense. It is a deeply sad sight, and hopefully a warning to others. This was the first post I saw entering this thread again and I thought it was about Schroder. If Blair starts dying his hair we won't be able to tell them apart! |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 3, 2017 15:31:54 GMT
If Conservatives are now saying treating people from diverse backgrounds equally is a left wing agenda, no wonder the intellectual momentum is with the left. The Labour Party has a long way to go before it is even a shade of its intellectual heyday, sadly. I welcome a bit of muscular left wing thought because it can be pulled apart (works the other way too). |
|
