Labour leadership
- Thread starter oryx
- Start date
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
I didn't like either, but of the two Blair is the most reactionary. Look at his willingness to connive with American neo-cons and their destruction of Iraq. Or his current antics squalid deals with squalid potentates world-wide.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
by attacking the tories economic policies from the left, pointing out that they'd caused the recovery to fail and be delayed for 3 years, pointing out that on a GDP per capita basis we were still 5% below the pre-crash levels, that the recovery in GDP itself was almost entirely down to the immigration the tories were trying to stop, that the austerity had caused the debt to GDP ratio position to get worse not better etc. that they'd presided over the longest period to recover from recession in living memory and that this recovery only happened after they eased off on the austerity policies... etc
The tory economic policy was an open goal that Labour spectacularly failed to even attempt to score in, no wonder the SNP wiped the floor with you.
Which milliband was in charge was pretty irrelevant while the supposedly left wing one was following such a shit strategy - tbh David might have had a bit more confidence about him to have argued that position, it's not even a particularly left wing position, fair basic mainstream economics for much of the 20th century, and pretty much with new labour economic policies. Ed seemed to be so desperate to lose the red Ed tag, and ditch all association with new labour that he allowed the tories to get off entirely with their incompetence.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
The man was neither left nor credible abd I certainly never wanted him. Labour lost because of their faliure to mount a campaign of any kind
Who would you have voted for in the leadership election?
free spirit
more tea vicar?
you weren't anti-austerity, you campaigned as a pro-austerty party against another pro-austerity party - how the fuck did you expect to win on that strategy?
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
Labour move further to the right this time. Then anything further to the left of this newly conceded ground becomes "Loony Left" and impossible for Labour to recover.
This creep to the right has being going on for 30 years now and doesn't seem to ever end. It's not working, we're getting nastier and ever more right-wing governments. Labour's victories are pyrrhic. They should have stood their ground but they were too weak.
This creep to the right has being going on for 30 years now and doesn't seem to ever end. It's not working, we're getting nastier and ever more right-wing governments. Labour's victories are pyrrhic. They should have stood their ground but they were too weak.
Last edited:
What? I don't accept the premise of the Tories like you do. They won because you accept that to oppose them you have to engage in rhetoric like 'anti' or 'pro' austerity. They were clear - we weren't. I didn't campaign as an anything-austerity. In my constituency I spent hours on the doors and the swing to Labour was remarkable. What about you?
It sounds like you are 'loony left' and don't realise it. You will never be in power on that programme. You cannot deal with anything without being in power. But some people (maybe not you) like shouting from the sidelines. I'd like to be in power.
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
What programme?
Program. But given your abuse of me earlier, you're not interested in discussion.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
I was highlighting the fact that he was to the right of Major,the statement that you were challenging me on. But it is of course true that there were many things that he didn't do whilst in government that reflect how right-wing he was.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
and that right there is why you lost.
what about me?
Doing the same but for the Green Party on an anti-austerity ticket, and the amount of labour supporters who said they wished Labour were standing on that platform.... and Labour activists who couldn't explain their economic position at all, wanted to be anti-austerity, wanted to be making those arguments, but couldn't because your shadow chancellor had committed to sticking with tory borrowing / spending plans.
Basically there was no point to you at all at that election. You lost by being shit, having no clear ideas, standing for nothing, allowing the tories to set the agenda, accepting their line about labour spending being to blame for the debt levels and crash etc. not by being too left wing.
eta ps yes I'm aware of the Green Party failings, but they were the only option vaguely significant option that was campaigning against austerity and challenging the crap about immigration, benefits claimants etc.
Why didn't the Green's win then, if that was such a great ticket? Oh - because it does not encompass 37% of the population.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
If you don't think the Labour party should be on the left, where abouts on the political spectrum would you like to see them?
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
Are you a returning banned poster?
free spirit
more tea vicar?
because we started on 1%, had a much lower budget, had 3/4 of the membership join in the year prior to the election, mostly in the last few months, were in no way capable of mounting a full national campaign, and had local parties that were almost entirely used to only campaigning on local issues for local council seats and hadn't been expecting to be mounting any sort of significant campaign for the national elections.
Plus the impact of tactical voting, which halved our vote in our constituency compared to the local election results.
and some missed opportunities in the national media, and a few daft policies that came back to bite us / conflicted with the core anti-austerity / pro growth economic policies (ie having a zero growth underlying dogma trying to sit alongside a pro-growth anti-austerity set of policies).
Which is why the SNP vote is the fairer comparison.
Oh, well you'll be in power in 3/4 elections then. Or something.
What's most interesting is that when asked why you didn't get power you reference tactical voting. Loo-Lah land.
Fucking fairy story. People don't agree with you but you surround yourself with people who do and think it represents the public. Same with Marxists and anarchists. You're a rump.
You stupidly really think you might win an election but can never explain how you'll win over Tory voters. Idiots.
Favelado
J'adore South Shore
Lost Scottish voters plus voters lost to UKIP would have delivered victory in May. This could have been achieved with genuinely socially democratic polices. True right? The combination of both of those groups would have done it because those UKIP voters were in marginals.
Also, are you a returning banned user?
free spirit
more tea vicar?
ffs - you do not need to win over tory voters to win the election, can you really not see how many of your natural voters you lose / have lost by that strategy?
More people didn't vote this election than voted tory, most of them are natural labour voters.
This strategy the labour party has followed is the reason those voters have disengaged entirely from the electoral process, it's why the likes of the SNP, Greens, Plaid, and even UKIP have taken big chunks out of you this election, and why the lib dems could previously from a left of labour position.
If you want to support tory policies why not join the tory party, if you want even vaguely left of centre policies then campaign on them or they'll never ever happen.
Nuff said.
comrade spurski
Well-Known Member
we got a minimum wage set lower than what McDonalds paid, we got the ema grant for 6th form students while university tuition fees were raised, they did repeal section 28 but left all the anti union laws intact, our pensions were slaughtered, we had an ongoing pay freeze, unions did nothing for fear of damaging a labour government, billions were slashed from benefits which were then dished out to the banks...I could go on and on.
what they gave with one hand they more than took with the other.
during those years labour continuously told public sector workers that we were over paid and that the private sector pay ethos needed to be brought in - yet millions of us in the public sector were paid so little that we were entitled to claim working families tax credit (wftc)...(both me and my partner were council workers yet we still qualified for the wftc) so in effect they used benefits to help encourage low pay and to save employers money -they then complained that too many people were claiming benefits!
You can believe what you want...if the labour government was good for you then you are either a boss, rich, lucky or delusional.
If you think miliband was left wing then you are either a right winger, a liar or an idiot...there was NOTHING left wing about him or his leadership.
Similar threads
