Tony Blair - Winner
Discussion
Labour has lost its traditional voters, the Unions and workers in heavy industry largely because it has all gone. It is now the party of the public sector who in general are pretty financially comfortable. And teachers - what's their problem? So the Labour Party focus now seems to be on various minorities, real and self-identified and the very poor rather than the great mass of voters. Most people are not attracted to this sort of politics and so vote Conservative because there is no-one else. The LibDems are finished.
The vast majority of people care about the prospects for transexuals etc and the very poor but think that the core policies should be focussed on the majority who just want to get on in life and give their children the best prospects they can. Blair understood that he needed to talk to the entire country; everyone since Brown has talked back to the Labour Party only.
The country doesnt need or want anything radical but will accept a bit of tweeking around the margins to help the minorities but they dont want the whole edifice torn down. The country is as it is today largely because its how the majority like it and they wont accept a Corbyn whose motivations they dont trust trying to tear it all down to please a few comfortably-off loonies who give the impression of not even liking the place.
Blair spoke to the country. All the other Labour leaders spoke to the Labour party. The question is whether Starmer will be able to change it.
The vast majority of people care about the prospects for transexuals etc and the very poor but think that the core policies should be focussed on the majority who just want to get on in life and give their children the best prospects they can. Blair understood that he needed to talk to the entire country; everyone since Brown has talked back to the Labour Party only.
The country doesnt need or want anything radical but will accept a bit of tweeking around the margins to help the minorities but they dont want the whole edifice torn down. The country is as it is today largely because its how the majority like it and they wont accept a Corbyn whose motivations they dont trust trying to tear it all down to please a few comfortably-off loonies who give the impression of not even liking the place.
Blair spoke to the country. All the other Labour leaders spoke to the Labour party. The question is whether Starmer will be able to change it.
lockhart flawse said:
Labour has lost its traditional voters, the Unions and workers in heavy industry largely because it has all gone. It is now the party of the public sector who in general are pretty financially comfortable. And teachers - what's their problem? So the Labour Party focus now seems to be on various minorities, real and self-identified and the very poor rather than the great mass of voters. Most people are not attracted to this sort of politics and so vote Conservative because there is no-one else. The LibDems are finished.
The vast majority of people care about the prospects for transexuals etc and the very poor but think that the core policies should be focussed on the majority who just want to get on in life and give their children the best prospects they can. Blair understood that he needed to talk to the entire country; everyone since Brown has talked back to the Labour Party only.
The country doesnt need or want anything radical but will accept a bit of tweeking around the margins to help the minorities but they dont want the whole edifice torn down. The country is as it is today largely because its how the majority like it and they wont accept a Corbyn whose motivations they dont trust trying to tear it all down to please a few comfortably-off loonies who give the impression of not even liking the place.
Blair spoke to the country. All the other Labour leaders spoke to the Labour party. The question is whether Starmer will be able to change it.
Starmer is hardly making any headway so far, even after a disaster like Corbyn. I doubt that Boris has much to worry about.The vast majority of people care about the prospects for transexuals etc and the very poor but think that the core policies should be focussed on the majority who just want to get on in life and give their children the best prospects they can. Blair understood that he needed to talk to the entire country; everyone since Brown has talked back to the Labour Party only.
The country doesnt need or want anything radical but will accept a bit of tweeking around the margins to help the minorities but they dont want the whole edifice torn down. The country is as it is today largely because its how the majority like it and they wont accept a Corbyn whose motivations they dont trust trying to tear it all down to please a few comfortably-off loonies who give the impression of not even liking the place.
Blair spoke to the country. All the other Labour leaders spoke to the Labour party. The question is whether Starmer will be able to change it.
Blair was just another Trump - full of rhetoric and lies.
vulture1 said:
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 only difference being we still have the Maggie closed our coal pits still left over which is dwindling thankfully. There is huge dislike for labour and the failings in wales from them plaid hasn't got much traction and even independence isn't that high in popularity.
Edited by MG CHRIS on Sunday 7th March 18:57
Was the story along the lines that Blair was out canvassing and saw a man who lived in a council house washing his Ford Sierra (it changed to Mondeo on the re-telling aka "Mondeo Man" but pretty sure based on timelines it would have been a Sierra). Talking to the man Blair realised that the normal Labour approach that had been failing was to level down so everybody would be on the bus, while what the voters wanted was the chance to own their own car (house, whatever).
Ironic that 20-ish years later and all the parties want us to not even be on the bus, just sitting on the soft waiting for the next handout.
I also find it highly amusing in a twisted sort of way that the nasty evil racist sexist Tories have now had both of the UK's only two female Prime Ministers and have had ethnic minorities fill every role except PM (and Sunak is being groomed for that, you can see it!). While the kind tolerant progressive Labour party have ... not done any of those things.
Ironic that 20-ish years later and all the parties want us to not even be on the bus, just sitting on the soft waiting for the next handout.
I also find it highly amusing in a twisted sort of way that the nasty evil racist sexist Tories have now had both of the UK's only two female Prime Ministers and have had ethnic minorities fill every role except PM (and Sunak is being groomed for that, you can see it!). While the kind tolerant progressive Labour party have ... not done any of those things.
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.
Another way of looking at it is that the tories only managed two majority terms since 1997.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.
The big problem for the labour movement was the wrong Milliband. Had t'other one got voted in as leader, as all the polls indicated (as they didn't ask McClusky), there would have been at least one more labour term and probably more. Getting the runt of the litter more or less killed the party for the foreseeable.
His replacement was a chap who galvanised a section of the electorate, albeit because, some might suggest, he was only fighting Cameron, the man who only just beat Brown.
As for whether you'll be alive by the time of the next election of labour, remember that the most significant change was the so-called red wall constituencies that turned the election. The reasons for the change of voting habits has been argued over since, and it seems no one knows. Certainly there was the Corbyn factor, but many reckon that the most significant force was brexit. Whatever; the next election will be fought over something different.
It would appear that, if commentators are to be believed, the change was not down to the normal floating voter. Make of that what you will.
Next time labour will have Starmer at their head, and whatever you think of him, he's somewhat more charismatic than Corby, the wrong Milliband and Brown combined. He'll be tougher opposition.
Most elections are lost on the economy. If a party is keeping most people employed and solvent, there's a reluctance to dump them.
What could go wrong for the tories? There's the obvious elephant in the party, yet, despite an ineffective Covid management record, his approval rating has increased slightly, mainly, it might be assumed, because of the vaccination programme. We've gone a long time waiting for the expected Johnson disaster, but his management team have kept him out of the limelight and his only public appearances have been at the pm's question time. But there's got to be some ticking, and getting louder. Or can he hide forever?
There are also dark recesses of his cupboards. Now's not the time to expose them, but come the next election, there might be some interesting revelations to force him out into the open.
Starmer hasn't done much in public. He's got little to gain from going against the tories and Johnson at this time, at least as far as votes are concerned. He too, it seems, is being managed. He's good at off the cuff, and this might be something to build on come the next election.
The main problem is the economy. There's the massive, and ever increasing, debt. This will hurt our recovery, maybe delaying, stopping, or even reversing spending by the public. Not only that, can the government put much money in the way of the red wall?
Brexit has been a bit of a disaster so far, with major hold-ups at ports and such. If there are any scarcities of essentials, it won't be forgiven as there's no excuse. There was never going to be a brexit bounce, as we all knew, but Covid has put even greater pressure on spending.
Next election is, as they generally are, up for grabs.
On top of that, there's Scotland. The SNP's struggles are fun for the uncommitted viewer, but it is possible that voters might look elsewhere. If I was in strategy planning for labour I'd push towards Scotland at the next election. There's the possibility of some gains.
Will you see another labour government in your time? No one knows, and only those who don't know how little they know will say they know the answer.
Edited by Derek Smith on Monday 8th March 07:58
Jasandjules said:
biggbn said:
Jasandjules said:
I can think of a slightly different word to winner in order to describe him, albeit my word does start with W, has an N in it and ends with an R...
Is it winner? 
Gecko1978 said:
Reality is the UK is most (based on number of voters) center right, I would argue that scotland is also given the sucess of the torys under Ruth Davidson etc. Its just a split with labour etc. I don't know total labour plus tory votes Scotland v SNP but my guess is the SNP are not 50%
Sorry but what on earth are you talking about “success of the torys under Ruth Davidson”? Also since when would votes ever be split between Labour the Tories.SNP have done considerably well taking into account the system we have up on Scotland which is meant to make it impossible for a party to have a majority.
[quote=Derek Smith]
The big problem for the labour movement was the wrong Milliband. Had t'other one got voted in as leader, as all the polls indicated (as they didn't ask McClusky), there would have been at least one more labour term and probably more. Getting the runt of the litter more or less killed the party for the foreseeable.
Completely agree. It was the same process that led apparently sensible people to add Corbyn to the list of nominees for leader. It's an attermpt to add a bit of lustre to their personal myths that they are open-minded and caring. I think voters enjoy a bit of personality and eccentricity but they won't vote for an f'ing weirdo.
The big problem for the labour movement was the wrong Milliband. Had t'other one got voted in as leader, as all the polls indicated (as they didn't ask McClusky), there would have been at least one more labour term and probably more. Getting the runt of the litter more or less killed the party for the foreseeable.
Completely agree. It was the same process that led apparently sensible people to add Corbyn to the list of nominees for leader. It's an attermpt to add a bit of lustre to their personal myths that they are open-minded and caring. I think voters enjoy a bit of personality and eccentricity but they won't vote for an f'ing weirdo.
I worry that if Sturgeon takes Scotland out of the UK, then England and Wales will likely become a one-party state. And it won't be Labour.
While i am not a Labour voter, i do think that democracies need a vibrant opposition to work well.
FWIW I thought Blair did well at the beginning, but lost the plot in the end. Macron has followed his example in France. They tend to start believing that what they say must be correct and so acceptable to the majority of people.
While i am not a Labour voter, i do think that democracies need a vibrant opposition to work well.
FWIW I thought Blair did well at the beginning, but lost the plot in the end. Macron has followed his example in France. They tend to start believing that what they say must be correct and so acceptable to the majority of people.
rdjohn said:
I worry that if Sturgeon takes Scotland out of the UK, then England and Wales will likely become a one-party state. And it won't be Labour..
Why would it? Tony Blair would still have had his 3 majorities without Scotland.https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/20...
All Labour needs is a competent electable leader and acceptable policies.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff