Brexit again...

[TheSage]

I think the centre parties will merge at some point or form a loose alliance as at present we have a very left of centre Labour Party and might end up with a hard right Tory Party, with slippery Farage possibly in the background for a while.

In these circumstances it makes sense for politicians of moderate persuasion of all colours to coalesce towards the middle.

I'd like that to happen but I'm not holding my breath in the immediate term.

 

Looks like another interesting few months ahead. Johnson might be the antidote the Tories want to cure the Farage problem but he won't appeal to traditional, one nation Tories because he's too extreme and shoots from the hip in a silly immature manner. The Tories have as many Remainers and all other parties.

But if they go for a more moderate leader like a Stewart they risk losing out to Farage.

It's a dilemma that May could not solve and won't go away easily because of the numbers in the Commons where, like it or not, the majority are for remaining or a Soft Deal.

 

If Labour had a more moderate leader they'd walk the next election.

[mr.hobblesworth]

If Labour had a more moderate leader they'd walk the next election.

 

Why didn't we win under Ed then?

 

Labour's policies under Corbyn are constantly referred to as extreme or outlandish but they're nothing of the sort, and are the norm in parts of Europe and Scandinavia. Indeed, it's these 'extreme' policies that are galvanising and enthusing so many younger and previously disenfranchised voters. Neo-liberalism is a busted flush, one that the media and the old guard are desperate to keep in play; hence the vilification of Labour from the establishment. However, especially with the increasingly terrifying environmental disaster lurking around the corner, we need Corbyn's Labour more than ever.

[mr.hobblesworth]

Is it possible to get a tweet displayed on the forum? I copies a link and sandwiched it in the [tweet] brackets thingy but nothing showed up.

[TheSage]

Why didn't we win under Ed then?

 

Labour's policies under Corbyn are constantly referred to as extreme or outlandish but they're nothing of the sort, and are the norm in parts of Europe and Scandinavia. Indeed, it's these 'extreme' policies that are galvanising and enthusing so many younger and previously disenfranchised voters. Neo-liberalism is a busted flush, one that the media and the old guard are desperate to keep in play; hence the vilification of Labour from the establishment. However, especially with the increasingly terrifying environmental disaster lurking around the corner, we need Corbyn's Labour more than ever.

 

Because he wasn't seen as moderate enough - and like Corbyn lacked leadership qualities.

David maybe. Burnham may be. But Corbyn doesn't impress me as a PM in waiting.

I sympathise with many of his policies and like you wish fervently that those most in need were better cared for but I can't see Labour winning an outright victory with JC at the helm.

Labour stuck with Foot (another man of principle) but got nowhere. Kinnock the same.

 

You have to go for the middle ground where most voters are, and elect a leader of charisma, charm, wit and intelligence who is very good at PR.

Yes, I know it's the policies that count but in this day and age you have to play the game, win power first, and then you can change things.

 

The most successful Labour leaders were both in that category. Wilson and Blair.

 

The Tories are more ruthless and if they see power ebbing away they ditch their leaders at the drop of a hat. Even Mrs. T, never mind May. But they went through a whole host of lame ducks like IDS and Howard before they settled on Cameron who, for all his smarmy faults, was quite a slick PR operator, particularly at question time.

 

My hope is that the Tories implode and split irrevocably but I stand by my opinion that if say Burnham was leader Labour would be miles ahead.

[mr.hobblesworth]

Because he wasn't seen as moderate enough - and like Corbyn lacked leadership qualities.

David maybe. Burnham may be. But Corbyn doesn't impress me as a PM in waiting.

I sympathise with many of his policies and like you wish fervently that those most in need were better cared for but I can't see Labour winning an outright victory with JC at the helm.

Labour stuck with Foot (another man of principle) but got nowhere. Kinnock the same.

 

You have to go for the middle ground where most voters are, and elect a leader of charisma, charm, wit and intelligence who is very good at PR.

Yes, I know it's the policies that count but in this day and age you have to play the game, win power first, and then you can change things.

 

The most successful Labour leaders were both in that category. Wilson and Blair.

 

The Tories are more ruthless and if they see power ebbing away they ditch their leaders at the drop of a hat. Even Mrs. T, never mind May. But they went through a whole host of lame ducks like IDS and Howard before they settled on Cameron who, for all his smarmy faults, was quite a slick PR operator, particularly at question time.

 

My hope is that the Tories implode and split irrevocably but I stand by my opinion that if say Burnham was leader Labour would be miles ahead.

 

Sorry, but I think that's a pile of horse ****! You don't have to go for the middle ground. That's where the status quo is, where nothing changes, where loads of centrist politicians sit pulling sad faces as they bring in a load more austerity but feel guilty for it. We need change (and not Chuka's bunch of clowns) and to-and-froing between centrist parties isn't going to change anything. People are sick of it. Far better to have a leader who stands for something (let's just ignore Brexit for the purposes of this) and draw people towards you. It's a battle and we have practically every force fighting against us but it will be worth it. Already the policies Labour are announcing are genuinely exciting and there's no way that Andy Burnham or David ******* Miliband would be doing that. I have never seen such widespread astonishment and positive reaction as the party got for their 2017 manifesto, and if we build on that, we can fundamentally change the country for the better.

[Heatwave]

Sorry, but I think that's a pile of horse ****! You don't have to go for the middle ground. That's where the status quo is, where nothing changes, where loads of centrist politicians sit pulling sad faces as they bring in a load more austerity but feel guilty for it. We need change (and not Chuka's bunch of clowns) and to-and-froing between centrist parties isn't going to change anything. People are sick of it. Far better to have a leader who stands for something (let's just ignore Brexit for the purposes of this) and draw people towards you. It's a battle and we have practically every force fighting against us but it will be worth it. Already the policies Labour are announcing are genuinely exciting and there's no way that Andy Burnham or David ******* Miliband would be doing that. I have never seen such widespread astonishment and positive reaction as the party got for their 2017 manifesto, and if we build on that, we can fundamentally change the country for the better.

 

Corbyn is being vilified by an almost universal Tory press, most of whom are content to portray him as a 'Marxist' (I know he's not but they're hoping not everyone knows enough about Labour's policies for this diktat from Tory Central Office to take root). Blair never got this treatment and one or two of them even supported Labour for a while.

 

Whatever you think of the centre it's incontrovertible that they succeed where the extremes fail.

[mr.hobblesworth]

It depends what you mean by 'succeed', I guess.

[TheSage]

We'll see.

But the same thing was being said about Foot and to a lesser extent Kinnock.

Since Atlee no markedly left wing Labour leader has won an election. The two most successful ones - Blair and Wilson, who won 3 each - were centre left. History tends to be on my side but, as I say, we shall see.

I'm not arguing against your support and concern for the less well off but we perhaps differ in the road we want to take to get there.

 

You have to win the middle ground and seats in the south, if you want to win an election.

Labour has also been hit by the rise of the SNP and changes to electoral boundaries.

[Heatwave]

It depends what you mean by 'succeed', I guess.

 

In this context it means to win an election.

 

After Iraq Blair, under normal circumstances, would not have won another. What opposed him in 2005 was one of the most right wing Tory leaders of recent times and was seen as such. The result? Blair wins. Admittedly he had to hand over to Brown during the Parliament but if Corbyn had been in charge, could he have won in 2005? Doubtful. Anyone occupying the centre ground could have won in that scenario, even the Lib Dems.

[mr.hobblesworth]

In this context it means to win an election.

 

After Iraq Blair, under normal circumstances, would not have won another. What opposed him in 2005 was one of the most right wing Tory leaders of recent times and was seen as such. The result? Blair wins. Admittedly he had to hand over to Brown during the Parliament but if Corbyn had been in charge, could he have won in 2005? Doubtful. Anyone occupying the centre ground could have won in that scenario, even the Lib Dems.

 

I'm not so sure. Corbyn got the highest increase in the Labour vote since the war by enthusing the young and previously disenfranchised. Arguably, that is leading to the fragmentation of the political scene as the left no longer has to lure voters over from the right which is what Ed M tried to do, bless him. He got called a Marxist too, I think for policies that the tories pinched wholesale in the following years.

[mr.hobblesworth]

We'll see.

But the same thing was being said about Foot and to a lesser extent Kinnock.

Since Atlee no markedly left wing Labour leader has won an election. The two most successful ones - Blair and Wilson, who won 3 each - were centre left. History tends to be on my side but, as I say, we shall see.

I'm not arguing against your support and concern for the less well off but we perhaps differ in the road we want to take to get there.

 

You have to win the middle ground and seats in the south, if you want to win an election.

Labour has also been hit by the rise of the SNP and changes to electoral boundaries.

 

Agree with much of that. Whatever happens, something's got to give. I'm absolutely ashamed of this country sometimes when I see how we treat some sections of society.

 

Read this thread here today and it's ******* disgusting.

 

 

I was an immig lawyer during the entire time @theresa_may was Home Secretary. Here are a random selection of tears:-

 

Radiographer. Resident for 6 ys. Wife & 5 kids (all at school here 6 ys). Refused settlement for £70 traffic fine. It meant they all had to leave the UK.

 

Son of a woman who had suffered catastrophic stroke while she was on a visit. The Home Office were trying to deport her whilst she was in a vegetative state. She had nobody in her home country. She died. He sobbed telling how devastated, yet relieved, he was at her death.

 

Woman who escaped appalling dom violence to protect her kids. She had a new application with the Home Office. However, she was not allowed to receive medical treatment until the decision. Denied access to anti depression medication, so social services took her kids away.

 

Theatre nurse for 7 years. Submitted photos that were"too dark". Her application took ages so her employer checked with Home Office. They called her to a meeting, told her Home Office had refused application & she would have to leave work immediately.

 

Man who was brought here as a teenager, who was waiting the final few months until he had reached 14 years residence and was able to apply for legal status (right to work, GP etc). I had to tell him that Mrs May had changed the qualifying period to 20 years

 

Student in final months of study. Accused of using a substitute in Eng lang test as she couldn't describe the test centre building (from 3y previously). Visa cancelled & barred from UK for 10y. Her family would be in debt for generations to pay for her incomplete degree.

 

To all of the above (and all, whose tears I saw); know this. I did not feel a single shred of sorrow for @theresa_may when I saw her tears. I thought of all of you instead. I hope you saw her tears, in far happier circumstances than you were in, when you cried yours.

[JohnJames]

Is it possible to get a tweet displayed on the forum? I copies a link and sandwiched it in the [tweet] brackets thingy but nothing showed up.

 

I just Copy the link from Twatter and paste it the text box.

Then wait for the denials

[geosname]

Sorry, but I think that's a pile of horse ****! You don't have to go for the middle ground. That's where the status quo is, where nothing changes, where loads of centrist politicians sit pulling sad faces as they bring in a load more austerity but feel guilty for it. We need change (and not Chuka's bunch of clowns) and to-and-froing between centrist parties isn't going to change anything. People are sick of it. Far better to have a leader who stands for something (let's just ignore Brexit for the purposes of this) and draw people towards you. It's a battle and we have practically every force fighting against us but it will be worth it. Already the policies Labour are announcing are genuinely exciting and there's no way that Andy Burnham or David ******* Miliband would be doing that. I have never seen such widespread astonishment and positive reaction as the party got for their 2017 manifesto, and if we build on that, we can fundamentally change the country for the better.

 

The middle ground is where common sense sits...... the people who don't want austerity measures in the extreme but don't want to spend more than we can afford to ..... don't want to stop immigration completely but recognise that services are stretched to breaking point...... don't want to scream like a banshee but do want to be heard... don't want to be represented by the far left or the far right.

Sadly politics doesn't work like that, whichever extreme comes to the fore the opposite comes out of the woodwork to counter it.

 

The centre is where normality lives..... where common sense lives..... where the people live...... sadly where not many politicians visit.

[For Us All]

I just Copy the link from Twatter and paste it the text box.

Then wait for the denials

 

Are you allowed to copy and paste?🤔

[mr.hobblesworth]

The middle ground is where common sense sits...... the people who don't want austerity measures in the extreme but don't want to spend more than we can afford to ..... don't want to stop immigration completely but recognise that services are stretched to breaking point...... don't want to scream like a banshee but do want to be heard... don't want to be represented by the far left or the far right.

Sadly politics doesn't work like that, whichever extreme comes to the fore the opposite comes out of the woodwork to counter it.

 

The centre is where normality lives..... where common sense lives..... where the people live...... sadly where not many politicians visit.

 

No, completely disagree. The middle ground is where the status quo sits. If you want - need - things to change, you need to go elsewhere. Neo-liberalism isn't working for vast swathes of our country and you're not going to find the answers in some rosy little New Labour/ soft tory middle ground.

 

The other thing is, Labour aren't hard-left at all. We're just so used to Labour running to the centre to try and cadge votes off conservatives that a proper Socialist Labour government looks extreme. It's not. The policies unveiled at the last election were extremely popular and made the tories' continuation of the old system look tired.