Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hold your nose and vote Labour?

Will you vote Labour?

  • Yes

    Votes: 66 31.0%
  • No

    Votes: 147 69.0%

  • Total voters
    213
There are multiple mistakes in thinking that voting for Labour will produce something less bad than not voting for Labour.

First, it depends where you’re voting. Quite aside from the obvious reality that in most seats, your vote wont be important anyway, there is also the fact that in there are many seats in which Labour is not the first or second place party. Then there is the fact that some seats might have a candidate that is simply preferable to Labour’s option, and your vote for Labour is a vote against that candidate. These things all matter.

Second, if we ignore the above, the implication is that the best option is for Labour to win all 650 seats. For them to be unchallenged. I really dispute this. An unchecked Starmer government, with no fear of rebellion, would be horrendous. It needs to be concerned that the combined internal and external opposition might prevent its agenda. So that means there needs to be seats that don’t go to Labour.

Third, I contest in any case that the best immediate, pragmatic, short-term outcome is necessarily a Starmer government with a Tory opposition. To me, that is not dissimilar to the above scenario of an unchecked right-wing Starmer landslide. I would actually prefer no overall majority and Labour’s right-wing agenda to this be discredited as a winning strategy. That has a chance of seeing Starmer replaced with someone less right-wing, who could either prevent a minority Tory government from its agenda or form a less right-wing Labour minority government.

Basically, what I’m saying is that if you want to play realpolitik then you have to do it properly. Even if you want to be “pragmatic” and think about the short-term outcomes, you still have to follow all the possibilities through to their end. And I can’t see that our needs are best served by a blind vote for Starmer’s Labour Party
 
There are multiple mistakes in thinking that voting for Labour will produce something less bad than not voting for Labour.

First, it depends where you’re voting. Quite aside from the obvious reality that in most seats, your vote wont be important anyway, there is also the fact that in there are many seats in which Labour is not the first or second place party. Then there is the fact that some seats might have a candidate that is simply preferable to Labour’s option, and your vote for Labour is a vote against that candidate. These things all matter.

Second, if we ignore the above, the implication is that the best option is for Labour to win all 650 seats. For them to be unchallenged. I really dispute this. An unchecked Starmer government, with no fear of rebellion, would be horrendous. It needs to be concerned that the combined internal and external opposition might prevent its agenda. So that means there needs to be seats that don’t go to Labour.

Third, I contest in any case that the best immediate, pragmatic, short-term outcome is necessarily a Starmer government with a Tory opposition. To me, that is not dissimilar to the above scenario of an unchecked right-wing Starmer landslide. I would actually prefer no overall majority and Labour’s right-wing agenda to this be discredited as a winning strategy. That has a chance of seeing Starmer replaced with someone less right-wing, who could either prevent a minority Tory government from its agenda or form a less right-wing Labour minority government.

Basically, what I’m saying is that if you want to play realpolitik then you have to do it properly. Even if you want to be “pragmatic” and think about the short-term outcomes, you still have to follow all the possibilities through to their end. And I can’t see that our needs are best served by a blind vote for Starmer’s Labour Party

Even if electorates could act collectively to game the outcome, which they obviously cannot, this is unsound.

We’ve had hung parliaments or ruling parties hamstrung by internal division for fourteen years. It results in horrendous government. Administrative sclerosis and political triangulation engenders a culture of lies and spin and frustrates decision-making. Astonishing that anyone would want another five years of it.
 
Even if electorates could act collectively to game the outcome, which they obviously cannot, this is unsound.

We’ve had hung parliaments or ruling parties hamstrung by internal division for fourteen years. It results in horrendous government. Administrative sclerosis and political triangulation engenders a culture of lies and spin and frustrates decision-making. Astonishing that anyone would want another five years of it.
The worst excesses by far of these Tory governments has come during the points they’ve had a clear majority to deliver their agenda of hate. It would have been better to have no policy at all for 14 years, frankly.
 
And this…
Even if electorates could act collectively to game the outcome,
Is exactly the thing I am saying people should not do. I’m calling for people to vote for things they actually believe in, rather than playing the game of saying “well I better vote for Labour even though I don’t like them because that will somehow work out better”
 
Thatcher was a visionary. Her vision of the future was terrifying, but you can’t deny that she had one.

Don't know where you live however I think you should test this out by putting a poster with Thatcher was a visionary, in large letters, in a room facing the street. I'd imagine you'll either have the local Tory club phoning you up to join or you'll be phoning the local glaziers.
 
Thatcher was a visionary. Her vision of the future was terrifying, but you can’t deny that she had one.
She was indeed, but of course mentioning any facet of the enemy that might b construed as a positive feature is damned to provoke the sort of reaction 39th alludes too both out in the real world and figuratively in here
 
When I first moved into my current flat, the constituency had a rock-solid 20,000 Tory majority, so I used to vote Green or possibly a smaller left party (can't recall now). Over the years, demographic changes round here have whittled the Tory majority down to a mere 1,000 votes at the last GE, so there's a real chance that if I voted Labour, it could "make a difference" ( 🤮 argh, I loathe that phrase).

But (a) the Tory MP has over the years proved to be a fairly effective constituency MP, intervening in our estate's various long standing problems with the council and HA.

And (b) I'd feel nauseous if Labour got in by a few votes and Sir Keith proceeds to do what many of us here fear he will do, that is, continue Tory policies of hate, division, cruelty and tax breaks for billionaires.

One of the first tests for me is whether he'll abolish the absurd 'deport asylum seekers to Rwanda' scheme or not.

(Incidentally, for a thorough demolishing of the Tory govt fantasy that Rwanda is now a safe and democratic country under Kagame, this looks like a good read; the author compares him to Stalin in 1930s USSR, elimination of political opponents home and abroad, rule by fear, invasion of D.R.C. etc. I've only read the Kindle sample so far, am still reading another book of hers on post-independence Congo / Zaire under Mobutu, very readable and well-researched; she tracks down and interviews Mobutu's childhood friends, schoolteachers and others).
 
I absolutely agree on the crucial point we are in history as regards climate change, and I sadly share your pessimism. But I still believe that labour is likely to be less damaging in this respect than the tories are - they'd at least hold to the principle of net zero (I believe), whereas the right wing, who will be in charge (and I include Sunak in this, as well as of course Faragists and Reform) actively want to scrap it. Ie not even try. They don't believe in it, for some reason (can't work it out personally, I suspect it's hard denial due to fear combined with doubling down on a mistake that's become part of their identity).

So, in amongst everything else I am trying to do, I look at this binary choice, and make the choice I believe to be most likely to be least damaging. To repeat - I don't like this, but there's lots about the world at the moment I don't like, and I have to try to do my best in the reality in which I live.

BIB - I get what you're saying (though don't agree) about the Labour Party being the lesser of two evils, but there's no way they themselves aren't right wing.
 
The worst excesses by far of these Tory governments has come during the points they’ve had a clear majority to deliver their agenda of hate. It would have been better to have no policy at all for 14 years, frankly.
The worst excesses were surely under the Coalition?
 
So... we do nothing and wait for the inevitable demise?
Folk who have genuinely given up generally don't post on political noticeboards, so you can pretty much guarantee this will never be the answer offered by someone who's being critical of voting Labour. I hope this clarification makes your conversations more efficient in future.

what is the necessary political action one takes with respect to the upcoming general election?
1. If you genuinely think elections are going to solve anything you'd better get canvassing in marginals. What are you doing on here?
2. Other than canvassing is there any political action that has to be geared around the upcoming general election?
 
There's a fine line, though, between targeting voters beyond your core vote, so as to appeal to the wider electorate and secure a net gain in votes/seats, and focusing so much on doing so that you're alienating your core vote and causing them to vote for other more left-wing candidates or abstain, thus resulting in a net loss of votes/seats.

I think Labour are still too complacent and still take their core vote for granted, in fact don't just take them for granted, but treat them with total and utter contempt.
The line isn’t that fine, it’s electoral maths based on the current voting system. Sadly all too predictable until that changes…
 
The line isn’t that fine, it’s electoral maths based on the current voting system. Sadly all too predictable until that changes…
According to opinion polls, re-establishing state ownership of rail, mail, water, electricity, and gas is supported by a majority of the population.
 
According to opinion polls, re-establishing state ownership of rail, mail, water, electricity, and gas is supported by a majority of the population.
Although, sadly, that will never fly with the corporate funders of the Labour Party, so it won't happen.

Incredible that they're prepared to argue that nationalisation isn't the answer, standing by while our transport/utilities are bought up by European country's state-owned utility companies.
 
Although, sadly, that will never fly with the corporate funders of the Labour Party, so it won't happen.

Incredible that they're prepared to argue that nationalisation isn't the answer, standing by while our transport/utilities are bought up by European country's state-owned utility companies.
This is an example of what I believe to be the case, that the junking of policies that are left-wing is not being done purely for electoral considerations. The Blairites simply do not believe in social democracy.
 
This is an example of what I believe to be the case, that the junking of policies that are left-wing is not being done purely for electoral considerations. The Blairites simply do not believe in social democracy.
Few policies taken in isolation are left wing, eg provision of a welfare state - the first in Europe was instituted by otto von bismarck, not known for being a lefty
 
According to opinion polls, re-establishing state ownership of rail, mail, water, electricity, and gas is supported by a majority of the population.

until the billionaire owned press tell them that those policies are socialist then they won't vote for them...
 
According to opinion polls, re-establishing state ownership of rail, mail, water, electricity, and gas is supported by a majority of the population.
Maybe, but all that is not something the Murdoch and Rothermere press is very keen on, and as Labour's strategy is to do all the things the right wing media like, then fuck what's "popular".
 
I'll see you and raise...



Media personality, The Right Honourable David Lammy PC FRSA MP, explains his organisation's source of inspiration:

keir-thatcher-1080p.png

Margaret Thatcher was a ‘visionary’ says Labour’s David Lammy
 
Even Owen Jones has given up on holding his nose.


This group he's supporting seems a bit opaque -- anyone heard of them?

 
Back
Top Bottom