Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[Sangria]

They’re just people who have different opinions ....

Better to tackle the ideas you think are wrong ...

Momentum are (were?) the biggest issue to defeat now.  How a non affliated body can have so much power in the Labour Party is of great concern.

They were a specifically targeted organisation whose support for their chosen candidate paid off. That's where their power came from. And their supporters have since tried to shape the debate on the left in such a way as to ensure their victory or at least significant influence.

[TepidT2O]

They were a specifically targeted organisation whose support for their chosen candidate paid off. That's where their power came from. And their supporters have since tried to shape the debate on the left in such a way as to ensure their victory or at least significant influence.

Starmers biggest (and most important) success has been to largely remove their grip on the party so quickly.

That was essential in order to make the party in any way electable.  But there’s a huge way to go.

[Sangria]

There's a lot of vague accusations and generalisations here.

If you were to draw Venn diagram of people who were utterly loyal to Corbyn, people who have never given Starmer a chance, peopel who care about social isses etc, sure they there would be some crossover, but it wouldn't be a circle by any means. Yet you just lump them all into the same group and call them Corbyn loyalists.

I'm not on social media myself. But having seen the influence of Cambridge Analytica, and having recognised many memes from the Corbyn wing, I have little doubt that there are social media groups that perpetuate a particular line of debate, where most of the discussion takes place in private forums in these social media, and simply repeating a meme rallies the group. The most extreme manifestation of this kind of social media-enabled political grouping was, of course, the Trumpists (at least in the west), whose activities are probably being investigated for historical as well as legal purposes.

[Sangria]

Starmers biggest (and most important) success has been to largely remove their grip on the party so quickly.

That was essential in order to make the party in any way electable.  But there’s a huge way to go.

But how prevalent is the kind of subthread that Cpt Reina posted a few pages ago? Where Corbyn loyalists are on the lookout for any way of attacking Labour, and direct the discussion to show how they are the true left and the current Labour party are traitors. I'm assuming that the main line of communication is Facebook, and friended media like the Canary, Novara, etc. Or maybe twitter; I'm not au fait with these media other than named websites.

[Snail]

But how prevalent is the kind of subthread that Cpt Reina posted a few pages ago? Where Corbyn loyalists are on the lookout for any way of attacking Labour, and direct the discussion to show how they are the true left and the current Labour party are traitors. I'm assuming that the main line of communication is Facebook, and friended media like the Canary, Novara, etc. Or maybe twitter; I'm not au fait with these media other than named websites.

No, mate, it just people with different opinions to you, who have different thoughts and would like to see different things from politicians for different reasons. That really is all there is to it.

[TepidT2O]

Politics is really depressing right now...

But it could be worse, in France, nearly half of under 30s support LePen ....

Thank heavens for small mercies.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

About as likely as Starmer supporters stopping blaming everything under the sun on "the left"

Starmer supporters?

You mean Labour supporters?

Who supports a leader over the party? That sounds fucking nuts to me. Supporting a Leader over a Party is basically a cult.

[Elmo!]

Starmer supporters?

You mean Labour supporters?

Who supports a leader over the party? That sounds fucking nuts to me. Supporting a Leader over a Party is basically a cult.

Was that same logic applied under Corbyn?

[Snail]

Starmer supporters?

You mean Labour supporters?

Who supports a leader over the party? That sounds fucking nuts to me. Supporting a Leader over a Party is basically a cult.

Hmm.

[Sangria]

Starmer supporters?

You mean Labour supporters?

Who supports a leader over the party? That sounds fucking nuts to me. Supporting a Leader over a Party is basically a cult.

Somewhat answering this, and my own question from earlier, yougov's poll of Labour members shows that those who voted for Starmer in 2020 are overwhelmingly towards him (+84), as are those who voted for Nandy (+62), but those who voted for Long-Bailey are strongly unfavourable towards him (-44).

Parallel with this, the equivalent numbers for Corbyn are -12 (Starmer voters), -8 (Nandy voters), and +94 (Long-Bailey voters). The numbers for Blair are +34 (Starmer voters), +25 (Nandy voters), and -72 (Long-Bailey voters).

I think it's fair to say that one of these groups is extremely unlike the others.

[PatriotScouser]

No, mate, it just people with different opinions to you, who have different thoughts and would like to see different things from politicians for different reasons. That really is all there is to it.

Difference is one group wants the Party to be in Government and the other group don't care about things such as that they just want to control the Party.

I want my group to control the Party of course because if we do then we become electable. However never in the history of the UK have Labour ever been electable with the other group having control.

If there was evidence that this was not the case but up by historical data then people like me wouldn't have been tearing our hair up between 2015 and 2019 because we'd have had the evidence that even with turmoil and media against us there was data and evidence from the past that could show how going in that direction could lead Labour back into Government.

But go to CLP meetings, GC or Branch meetings see the momentum facebook groups from most constituencies. They don't care about being in Govt. to help people they just want to control Labour and use that as a vehicle to drum up their insane and inane ideology.

[TepidT2O]

No, both sides want to get elected.

My opinion is that one side is not prepared to sacrifice a single thing in order to achieve it though.

[Snail]

No, both sides want to get elected.

My opinion is that one side is not prepared to sacrifice a single thing in order to achieve it though.

Mate, a very large percentage of the Labout members who voted for Starmer as leader had previously voted for Corbyn to be leader. He stood as the unity candidate, he made his ten pledges, people gave him a chance and he spat in their faces the first chance he got. The left compromises too much, and the right of the party treat them like dirt every chance they get.

[Snail]

Difference is one group wants the Party to be in Government and the other group don't care about things such as that they just want to control the Party.

It’s funny, isn’t it, differing points of view. Because if you ask me, it’s the people in charge now who are quite happy not to upset the applecart and keep pocketing their MP salaries and expenses until they stumble into a nice cushy six figure job at the end of it all.

[TepidT2O]

Mate, a very large percentage of the Labout members who voted for Starmer as leader had previously voted for Corbyn to be leader. He stood as the unity candidate, he made his ten pledges, people gave him a chance and he spat in their faces the first chance he got. The left compromises too much, and the right of the party treat them like dirt every chance they get.

Agree on your first point entirely... you are of course correct.

On your second point I totally disagree. The left has to compromise with the electorate, not the rest of their party.  Because the British public (well more the English public) will never elect a party that stands for the left like that.  So the choice is between a socialist party that will never get elected, or a social Democratic Party that actually might. 

At the moment Labour is caught betwixt the two stools which helps non one.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Mate, a very large percentage of the Labout members who voted for Starmer as leader had previously voted for Corbyn to be leader. He stood as the unity candidate, he made his ten pledges, people gave him a chance and he spat in their faces the first chance he got. The left compromises too much, and the right of the party treat them like dirt every chance they get.

Not sure what you mean by that to be honest.

Any chance you can break it down for me?

What do you actually mean?

He spat in their faces?

[Sangria]

Mate, a very large percentage of the Labout members who voted for Starmer as leader had previously voted for Corbyn to be leader. He stood as the unity candidate, he made his ten pledges, people gave him a chance and he spat in their faces the first chance he got. The left compromises too much, and the right of the party treat them like dirt every chance they get.

Net favourability ratings for:

Starmer:
+84 (voted for Starmer in 2020)
+62 (voted for Nandy in 2020)
-44 (voted for Long-Bailey in 2020)

Corbyn
-12 (Starmer voters)
-8 (Nandy voters)
+94 (Long-Bailey voters)

Blair
+34 (Starmer voters)
+25 (Nandy voters)
-72 (Long-Bailey voters)

Poll conducted by YouGov among 1073 Labour members 17-24 March 2021.

[TepidT2O]

The use of the word betwixt (above) was entirely unacceptable.

Please accept my apologies folks

Only one step form that to methinks

[Sangria]

The use of the word betwixt (above) was entirely unacceptable.

Please accept my apologies folks

Only one step form that to methinks

Just ban yourself when you find yourself saying hey nonny nonny.

[Elmo!]

Agree on your first point entirely... you are of course correct.

On your second point I totally disagree. The left has to compromise with the electorate, not the rest of their party.  Because the British public (well more the English public) will never elect a party that stands for the left like that.  So the choice is between a socialist party that will never get elected, or a social Democratic Party that actually might. 

At the moment Labour is caught betwixt the two stools which helps non one.

Labour need to stop thinking they are entitled to the lefts vote, and treat them the same as they do the centre swing voters. The left are as entitled to go vote for the Greens or whatever as the centre voters are to vote Tory,

That involves compromise too.

[TepidT2O]

Labour need to stop thinking they are entitled to the lefts vote, and treat them the same as they do the centre swing voters. The left are as entitled to go vote for the Greens or whatever as the centre voters are to vote Tory,

That involves compromise too.

True enough

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Labour need to stop thinking they are entitled to the lefts vote, and treat them the same as they do the centre swing voters. The left are as entitled to go vote for the Greens or whatever as the centre voters are to vote Tory,

That involves compromise too.

Depends what you mean by 'centre votes'

When I fill the survey things in, I find that I'm very left. I came from a poor background. I've voted Labour all my life and I will vote Labour all my life. Yet I'm called 'A Tory' by some people on the 'far left'

No doubt you'd call me a 'centrist' because I've got the cheek to realise that Labour need to compromise to get into power.

So what do you mean by the 'Centre' votes? I think the 'Centre' very much depends on where you stand yourself. If you stand massively left then anything to the Right of that is, to you, Centrist. Which means that you have got very-Left leaning people being classed as Centrist or Tory.

[Elmo!]

Depends what you mean by 'centre votes'

When I fill the survey things in, I find that I'm very left. I came from a poor background. I've voted Labour all my life and I will vote Labour all my life. Yet I'm called 'A Tory' by some people on the 'far left'

No doubt you'd call me a 'centrist' because I've got the cheek to realise that Labour need to compromise to get into power.

So what do you mean by the 'Centre' votes? I think the 'Centre' very much depends on where you stand yourself. If you stand massively left then anything to the Right of that is, to you, Centrist. Which means that you have got very-Left leaning people being classed as Centrist or Tory.

You are reading far too much into what I wrote. I meant centre as in literally centre, as in between Tory and LAbour. I literally wrote swing voters...

[Sangria]

Labour need to stop thinking they are entitled to the lefts vote, and treat them the same as they do the centre swing voters. The left are as entitled to go vote for the Greens or whatever as the centre voters are to vote Tory,

That involves compromise too.

The YouGov poll suggests that they would not have been satisfied with anyone other than Corbyn or their chosen successor candidate, Long-Bailey.

The numbers for Nandy:
+65 (Starmer voters)
+88 (Nandy voters)
-5 (Long-Bailey voters)

[Elmo!]

The YouGov poll suggests that they would not have been satisfied with anyone other than Corbyn or their chosen successor candidate, Long-Bailey.

The numbers for Nandy:
+65 (Starmer voters)
+88 (Nandy voters)
-5 (Long-Bailey voters)

Sorry can you link the question? That seems to be what people who voted for RLB thought, but as Sian noted, a lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer.

But my point was more general, rather than specifically about the leadership. If you want to stop all the infighting and get everyone on the same page, the party needs to realise that it needs to actually appeal to the left of the party. You might still get most of their votes without it as their isn't really anywhere else from them to go, but you will just have this constant battle between the 2 wings of the party if you don't have a broad appeal. And a party that is plagued with infighting isn't going to win elections.

[Sangria]

Sorry can you link the question? That seems to be what people who voted for RLB thought, but as Sian noted, a lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer.

But my point was more general, rather than specifically about the leadership. If you want to stop all the infighting and get everyone on the same page, the party needs to realise that it needs to actually appeal to the left of the party. You might still get their votes without it, but you will just have this constant battle between the 2 wings of the party if you don't have a broad appeal.

What's your idea to appeal to a group who still overwhelmingly favour Corbyn (+94) and who have an over 50 net point difference with the other groups on Starmer and Nandy? I've seen dismissals of the idea that such a group exists, but YouGov suggests otherwise.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

You are reading far too much into what I wrote. I meant centre as in literally centre, as in between Tory and LAbour. I literally wrote swing voters...

Yeah but where is the centre?

I'd say that the centre is quite a lot further to the right than it was even 15 years ago.

Does 'the left', 'the centre', 'the right' have meaning in the sense that it used to?

You used to (well in my head anyway )   have the broad 'The Far Left' (Trots, Communists and so on), 'The Left' (Greens, Labour), 'The Centre' (Lib Dems and maybe a few others), 'The Right' (Tories etc.), 'The Far Right' (Fascists, NF etc..)


I might be wrong with the classifications, but there seemed to be groups which occupied each area (That went left or right depening on .. stuff....)

[Elmo!]

What's your idea to appeal to a group who still overwhelmingly favour Corbyn (+94) and who have an over 50 net point difference with the other groups on Starmer and Nandy? I've seen dismissals of the idea that such a group exists, but YouGov suggests otherwise.

I'm trying to make the point to you that in my view the best thing Labour can do to make themselves more electable, is to unite the party so you are all fighting on the same front. That involves taking on arguments and policies from all sides of the party even if you disagree with some of them. Taking on one position on an issue might not be popular with the swing voters, but if it helps the party put forward a united front, it could still be a net gain.

I absolutely acknowledge that there are a group of people that probably won't get on board no matter what, but I suspect that is actually a pretty small number, and there is a group on the other side that are the same.

It's hard to argue with you about poll numbers because you keep giving numbers without linking the actual polls with the questions asked.

[Sangria]

I'm trying to make the point to you that in my view the best thing Labour can do to make themselves more electable, is to unite the party so you are all fighting on the same front. That involves taking on arguments and policies from all sides of the party even if you disagree with some of them. Taking on one position on an issue might not be popular with the swing voters, but if it helps the party put forward a united front, it could still be a net gain.

I absolutely acknowledge that there are a group of people that probably won't get on board no matter what, but I suspect that is actually a pretty small number, and there is a group on the other side that are the same.

It's hard to argue with you about poll numbers because you keep giving numbers without linking the actual polls with the questions asked.

Here ya go. Knock yourself out.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/icjepi77jw/Internal_Labour_Member_Release_210329_W.pdf

[Elmo!]

Yeah but where is the centre?

I'd say that the centre is quite a lot further to the right than it was even 15 years ago.

Does 'the left', 'the centre', 'the right' have meaning in the sense that it used to?

You used to (well in my head anyway )   have the broad 'The Far Left' (Trots, Communists and so on), 'The Left' (Greens, Labour), 'The Centre' (Lib Dems and maybe a few others), 'The Right' (Tories etc.), 'The Far Right' (Fascists, NF etc..)


I might be wrong with the classifications, but there seemed to be groups which occupied each area (That went left or right depening on .. stuff....)

It doesn't really matter to my point.

It is often said that Labour need to win back Tory voters to win elections - these are the voters I mean. You could say that the fact they are hypothetically willing to swing between Labour and Tories makes them by some definitions 'centre' voters.

[Elmo!]

Here ya go. Knock yourself out.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/icjepi77jw/Internal_Labour_Member_Release_210329_W.pdf

Right so as was said by Sian, RLB only got 25% of the vote. A lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer.

Given his net approval has dropped from 50% to ~35%, and there isn't much room for decline amongst Starmer and Nandy voters, I can only assume approval from them was higher (can't find a similar earlier poll), which would indicate they can be appealed to.

[Sangria]

Right so as was said by Sian, RLB only got 25% of the vote. A lot of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer.

Given his net approval has dropped from 50% to ~35%, and there isn't much room for decline amongst Starmer and Nandy voters, I can only assume approval from them was higher (can't find a similar earlier poll), which would indicate they can be appealed to.

The numbers suggest they would prefer a return to Corbyn (+94).

[Elmo!]

The numbers suggest they would prefer a return to Corbyn (+94).

That just means you need to find a way to appeal to them, otherwise you just carry on this endless cycle of bickering and infighting, which is not an electable look.

[Sangria]

That just means you need to find a way to appeal to them, otherwise you just carry on this endless cycle of bickering and infighting, which is not an electable look.

As has been shown again and again, that wing is satisfied with nothing less than specifically what would repel voters who deemed Corbyn to be the biggest single reason for not voting Labour. They are determined to win the left with culture wars that play well among the left. But which strengthen the general electorate's distaste for what the Labour party has become.

[ljycb]

As has been shown again and again, that wing is satisfied with nothing less than specifically what would repel voters who deemed Corbyn to be the biggest single reason for not voting Labour. They are determined to win the left with culture wars that play well among the left. But which strengthen the general electorate's distaste for what the Labour party has become.

I’d be intrigued to see numbers on how many people who you would categorise as “Corbyn loyalists” remain in the party at this point. Such data almost certainly isn’t available but I’d be genuinely surprised if they made up even 10% of the membership.

[TepidT2O]

[TSC]

The man appointed by Johnson to chair the inquiry into the Greensill scandal is on the board of a private bank that has close ties to the Tories.  The bank’s board includes former Government staffers. 

Another cover-up incoming?

[TepidT2O]

The man appointed by Johnson to chair the inquiry into the Greensill scandal is on the board of a private bank that has close ties to the Tories.  The bank’s board includes former Government staffers. 

Another cover-up incoming?

Do they even need a cover up? If they don’t like the outcome they can just ignore it.

Although, I suspect that might not be the case, Johnson doesn’t like Cameron and would be happy to throw him under a bus.

[Elmo!]

Neil Oliver to join Andrew Neil's GB News in 'move towards news commentary'

NEIL Oliver will be joining the new television channel GB News, it has been announced.

The television presenter will host a new weekly current affairs and interview programme.

Oliver’s show will focus on “the people from all walks of life who make Britain great”, according to the announcement put out by GB News.

The author claimed that debate in the UK had been “stifled” and that the new channel “feels like opening a window and letting in some fresh air”.

The channel, which is due to launch later this year, is chaired by former BBC journalist Andrew Neil.

READ MORE: Andrew Neil's channel GB News announces signings to political reporting team

In its press release, GB News said the move marked a “further move towards news commentary” for the Coast presenter.

Commenting on joining GB News, Oliver said: "My career has always been driven by my fascination about people, whether it's trying to understand ancient people through archaeology or living ones through journalism.

"Debate in this country has been stifled for so long that GB News feels like opening a window and letting some fresh air, fresh perspectives and fresh voices.

"I never imagined my career would take this turn but I'm hugely excited that it has."

Oliver echoed that final sentiment sharing the news with his Twitter followers. He wrote simply: “Exciting times.”

The archaeologist joins former Guido Fawkes and Telegraph writer Tom Harwood, former ITV news presenter Alastair Stewart, and former Sky News presenter Colin Brazier on the GB News team.

The channel will target Conservative-leaning audiences.

Neil will present a nightly news programme on the channel containing “Wokewatch” and “Mediawatch” segments, but insisted GB News will conform to Ofcom rules on impartiality.

Critics have said the channel will aim to capitalise on the “culture wars” in the UK, offering comparisons to Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News in the US.

Figures at GB News, including Neil, have rejected the comparison. They say the channel will be aimed at the “vast number of British people who feel underserved and unheard” by the existing media in the UK.

Oliver was the president of the National Trust for Scotland until he stepped down in September 2020.

Although the presenter claimed he had always planned to step down at that time, the announcement came just days after he was embroiled in a scandal involving fellow TV personality David Starkey.

In an interview with Vote Leave’s Darren Grimes, the historian said that slavery “was not genocide otherwise there wouldn’t be so many damn blacks in Africa or Britain”.

Oliver had previously commented that he “loved” Starkey on a promotional tweet sent before the controversial interview aired.

He was also found to have “liked” another post which was widely seen as being anti-Black Lives Matter.

Former ITV man and Oliver’s GB News colleague Alastair Stewart left his original broadcaster due to “errors of judgement in [his] use of social media” which “breached” their editorial guidelines.

The news was linked to a scandal surrounding a tweet in which Stewart had appeared to compare a black man to an “angry ape”.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19239770.neil-oliver-join-andrew-neils-gb-news-move-towards-news-commentary/

Another racist gammon joining GB News.

[Red-Soldier]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19239770.neil-oliver-join-andrew-neils-gb-news-move-towards-news-commentary/

Another racist gammon joining GB News.

What a shocker!