Tony Blair - Winner
Discussion
Alistair Campbell on TV just now came out with a great quote. "The last 11 Labour general elections have been - lost, lost, lost, lost, Blair, Blair, Blair, lost, lost, lost, lost".
So without Blair it is 1974 when Labour last won. The 1974 elections are the first I remember when I was at secondary school. Will I see another Labour govt in my lifetime? Not too sure.
So without Blair it is 1974 when Labour last won. The 1974 elections are the first I remember when I was at secondary school. Will I see another Labour govt in my lifetime? Not too sure.
Dr Jekyll said:
Yet if you ask Labour supporters which of their leaders they admire least it's Blair and Wilson.
It is odd. The Labour party expends huge amounts of energy fighting the Labour party thinking this is what the electorate need.Militant, momentum, and the other internal factions really want domination of the party rather than government.
Blair was the exception than managed to unify and gain power, but that didn't last.
Labour must do better, the country desperately needs a credible opposition to the current government.
eldar said:
It is odd. The Labour party expends huge amounts of energy fighting the Labour party thinking this is what the electorate need.
Militant, momentum, and the other internal factions really want domination of the party rather than government.
Blair was the exception than managed to unify and gain power, but that didn't last.
Labour must do better, the country desperately needs a credible opposition to the current government.
It's the thing I don't get.Militant, momentum, and the other internal factions really want domination of the party rather than government.
Blair was the exception than managed to unify and gain power, but that didn't last.
Labour must do better, the country desperately needs a credible opposition to the current government.
Whatever your opinion of Blair he won three elections.
That probably ought to be some kind of hint as to what works.
I remember once having John Major explain this. Every Labour leader, on becoming leader, faces a terrible moral dilemma - he (note that, with the Labour Party, it is always a he) can either remain true to his socialist principles or he can set out a manifesto that is capable of winning election. He absolutely cannot do both. This is because the UK electorate is essentially and intuitively Centre right in their outlook. The Uk electorate does not and - apart from 1945 - never has had an appetite to submit to genuine socialism.
Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Edited by ClaphamGT3 on Sunday 7th March 12:19
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: It's the thing I don't get.
Whatever your opinion of Blair he won three elections.
That probably ought to be some kind of hint as to what works.
I think the uncomfortable truth is that what works isn't really Labour at all.Whatever your opinion of Blair he won three elections.
That probably ought to be some kind of hint as to what works.
Blair managed to pull it together against a shambolic Tory party, mostly because he didn't promise to do anything vaguely Labour like with the economy. As soon as Brown came along the voters kicked him out at the first opportunity.
ClaphamGT3 said:
I remember once having John Major explain this. Every Labour leader, on becoming leader, faces a terrible moral dilemma - he (note that, with the Labour Party, it is always a he) can either remain true to his socialist principles or he can set out a manifesto that is capable of winning election. He absolutely cannot do both. This is because the UK electorate is essentially and intuitively Centre right in their outlook. The Uk electorate does not and - apart from 1945 - never has had an appetite to submit to genuine socialism.
Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Geographiy, where do you mean when you say the UK, as I don't see many cetre right voters in Scotland? Or Wales...?Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Edited by ClaphamGT3 on Sunday 7th March 12:19
JuanCarlosFandango said:
I think the uncomfortable truth is that what works isn't really Labour at all.
Blair managed to pull it together against a shambolic Tory party, mostly because he didn't promise to do anything vaguely Labour like with the economy. As soon as Brown came along the voters kicked him out at the first opportunity.
Probably.Blair managed to pull it together against a shambolic Tory party, mostly because he didn't promise to do anything vaguely Labour like with the economy. As soon as Brown came along the voters kicked him out at the first opportunity.
Blair recognised that though and preferred to be "inside the tent" so to speak.
Corbyn appeared to prefer being outside the tent.
The challenge Starmer has without derailing this thread is that the public don't seem interested in what they perceive Labour has to offer them and a lot of his own party seem happier fighting each other and being in opposition than they do caring about being in Government.
Blair got that you generally win from the centre and from not sounding like a lunatic.
irc said:
Alistair Campbell on TV just now came out with a great quote. "The last 11 Labour general elections have been - lost, lost, lost, lost, Blair, Blair, Blair, lost, lost, lost, lost".
So without Blair it is 1974 when Labour last won. The 1974 elections are the first I remember when I was at secondary school. Will I see another Labour govt in my lifetime? Not too sure.
And So without Blair it is 1974 when Labour last won. The 1974 elections are the first I remember when I was at secondary school. Will I see another Labour govt in my lifetime? Not too sure.
Alistair Campbells right
Its quite amazing looking back at old General Elections. I viewed some recently as my daughter is doing some political studies and looked at them on You Tube.
Labours position in the 70s wasnt comfortable by any stretch A minority then a majority of I think 4 in the second 1974 election
biggbn said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
I remember once having John Major explain this. Every Labour leader, on becoming leader, faces a terrible moral dilemma - he (note that, with the Labour Party, it is always a he) can either remain true to his socialist principles or he can set out a manifesto that is capable of winning election. He absolutely cannot do both. This is because the UK electorate is essentially and intuitively Centre right in their outlook. The Uk electorate does not and - apart from 1945 - never has had an appetite to submit to genuine socialism.
Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Geographiy, where do you mean when you say the UK, as I don't see many cetre right voters in Scotland? Or Wales...?Blair and Wilson were more interested in power than socialism
Edited by ClaphamGT3 on Sunday 7th March 12:19
The difference as I see it, is that Blair was focused on outcomes rather than dogma. Johnson's election win was also very much about outcomes. Blair didn't abandon Labour principles so much as focus on what they were aimed to do.
The people I know who are Corbyn fans are fanatically so, almost like a religion. But then if you're reasonably comfortable you can say that nationalisation is worth spending £billions on as it's 'the right thing to do'. But that's not a privilege a lot of people enjoy, they just want a job, home, school, medical care etc etc
The people I know who are Corbyn fans are fanatically so, almost like a religion. But then if you're reasonably comfortable you can say that nationalisation is worth spending £billions on as it's 'the right thing to do'. But that's not a privilege a lot of people enjoy, they just want a job, home, school, medical care etc etc
Very hard to argue against Alastair Campbell's observation. In my opinion, the double whammy is that as Labour have become less Blairite, the Tories have become more so. I recall Theresa May's speech when she was appointed PM. She sounded just like Tony Blair, going on about how the Tories would reach out to those "just about getting by" or something.
And now we have a Conservative government borrowing insane amounts of money and clobbering business with 25% corporation tax rate coming soon. All very Labour, really..........
One might argue that just as Blair stole the Tory playbook, so the Tories have returned the compliment and shifted to the centre, leaving Labour as an irrelevance. I know we're all supposed to loathe Tony Blair, but he and Thatcher might just be the most influential PM's of the past few decades, as judged by their legacies.
And now we have a Conservative government borrowing insane amounts of money and clobbering business with 25% corporation tax rate coming soon. All very Labour, really..........
One might argue that just as Blair stole the Tory playbook, so the Tories have returned the compliment and shifted to the centre, leaving Labour as an irrelevance. I know we're all supposed to loathe Tony Blair, but he and Thatcher might just be the most influential PM's of the past few decades, as judged by their legacies.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Probably.
Blair recognised that though and preferred to be "inside the tent" so to speak.
Corbyn appeared to prefer being outside the tent.
The challenge Starmer has without derailing this thread is that the public don't seem interested in what they perceive Labour has to offer them and a lot of his own party seem happier fighting each other and being in opposition than they do caring about being in Government.
Blair got that you generally win from the centre and from not sounding like a lunatic.
That was also quarter of a century ago Blair recognised that though and preferred to be "inside the tent" so to speak.
Corbyn appeared to prefer being outside the tent.
The challenge Starmer has without derailing this thread is that the public don't seem interested in what they perceive Labour has to offer them and a lot of his own party seem happier fighting each other and being in opposition than they do caring about being in Government.
Blair got that you generally win from the centre and from not sounding like a lunatic.
I don't know that winning from the centre holds true anymore. Or even if there is a centre in that sense. We seem to be more in an age of parties losing elections than decisively winning them, if that makes sense.
In a way Blair's foray into identity politics seems to have been a victim of its own success and it can no longer offer more to the various groups it has courted without losing ground elsewhere.
The labour party and it's supporters love to be the victims, they love a good moan and talk about how they could do things better. The last thing they want is to be given the chance because they won't be able to moan about things and blame the government for their victimisation any more.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff