Options

Labour - the end is near

13567

Comments

  • Options
    leicslad46leicslad46 Posts: 3,370
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Labour have absolutely NO chance being elected. We are now in a completely different UK now. The SNP rule the roost up in scotland and thanks to the lib dems sleeping with the devil ,which they have paid for and the rise of the protest vote in UKIP here in england and wales we now have the prospect of a conservative government for the long haul
  • Options
    TCD1975TCD1975 Posts: 3,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    for the love of god.

    THE CENTRE GROUND DOESN'T MOVE!

    Stop believing the propaganda that says it does.

    Of course the centre ground moves, if majority political opinion moves.

    The centre ground is a concept, or metaphor. It's not something physical, set in stone.
  • Options
    Living4LoveLiving4Love Posts: 1,989
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    People are forgetting to factor in the 3 and a half million Labour voters who never actually went out and voted. Hoping they get their asses into gear next time things might be a little bit different.
  • Options
    MesostimMesostim Posts: 52,864
    Forum Member
    leicslad46 wrote: »
    Labour have absolutely NO chance being elected. We are now in a completely different UK now. The SNP rule the roost up in scotland and thanks to the lib dems sleeping with the devil ,which they have paid for and the rise of the protest vote in UKIP here in england and wales we now have the prospect of a conservative government for the long haul

    Who are starting on a massive 12 seat majority... yep... they'll be in power forever.
  • Options
    David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    People are forgetting to factor in the 3 and a half million Labour voters who never actually went out and voted. Hoping they get their asses into gear next time things might be a little bit different.

    Link to these stats please.
  • Options
    StykerStyker Posts: 49,863
    Forum Member
    I doubt it OP. Both Labour and the Tories have been in opposition for long periods in the past and come back to Govern and Labour can do so again and will if they stop taking their core voters for granted and stop chasing the so called swing voters.

    Its because Labour have alienated their core supporters since Blair was Labour leader is the primary reason why Labour have lost so much support over the years. Blair lost 4 Million votes for Labour from 1997-2005 and then they lost another Million votes in the 2010 election. In the election just gone, Labour's popular numbers rose by the best part of a Million but the media haven't mentioned that much. No surprise there. What is a surprise is that Labour MP's are not mentioning it.
  • Options
    corfcorf Posts: 1,499
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    more like the pollsters got it wrong with their 1500 sample size, as this was a high turnout.
  • Options
    SoppyfanSoppyfan Posts: 29,911
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mesostim wrote: »
    Who are starting on a massive 12 seat majority... yep... they'll be in power forever.

    And all it'll take is a "Black Wednesday" moment and that majority will completely vanish.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    GibsonSG wrote: »
    Unite are not the party, they contribute and are affiliated with it. Not the same thing. It will be interesting to see how long it takes the Tories before they start stabbing each other in the back. They have form for it you know.

    Is that it? Is that all you can see as a way back in for Labour?

    The current Labour Party are too centrist for Scotland, and too left wing for England.
  • Options
    trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    People are forgetting to factor in the 3 and a half million Labour voters who never actually went out and voted. Hoping they get their asses into gear next time things might be a little bit different.

    Are you really suggesting 3.5 million voters weren't concerned about the "austerity" "cost of living crisis" and "zero hours contracts" which are trumpeted on here in every other post?
  • Options
    Peter the GreatPeter the Great Posts: 14,230
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    corf wrote: »
    more like the pollsters got it wrong with their 1500 sample size, as this was a high turnout.
    It wasn't a high turn out at all. It has constantly been low since 2005.
  • Options
    Phil 2804Phil 2804 Posts: 21,846
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    Rejected by the British public the Labour party now has two choices; choose a leader who the Unions would like or choose a leader who the public might like.

    England is not going to vote for a Unite Lacky and Unite are not going to fund a New Labour leader.

    It's as good as all over for Labour.


    Ok then what happens?

    Because Britain will never be a one party state, the Liberals were replaced by Labour, so which other party do you see coming to become the second party of Government?

    BTW Labour secured 200,000 fewer votes than it took to secure a 66 seat majority in 2005. Labour have more seats in England than they did in 2010, or at any time in the 1980s and after 1992.

    Oh and as someone whose just cancelled his Unite membership because of McCluskey and co. I say good luck to them. They are a shite union with shite leadership who couldn't give two hoots about their members. We are nothing more than cash cows to McCluskey's vanity and I suspect whatever short term harm losing Unite may do it will utlimately be beneficial to the Labour party.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    Cameron and Osborne are sat in the centre ground. It is they who are sticking up for the workers.

    What is a new centre labour leader going to offer the electorate? More tax cuts, an 8 day a week NHS, another ballot on Europe?

    There is no centre ground for Labour to stand on!

    Do you really believe Cam is on the centre ground? This govt. is the most right-wing govt. this country has ever seen. My conscience is clear. I didn't vote for them...and neither did the majority of the country.
  • Options
    Tom2023Tom2023 Posts: 2,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    Do you really believe Cam is on the centre ground? This govt. is the most right-wing govt. this country has ever seen. My conscience is clear. I didn't vote for them...and neither did the majority of the country.

    You just don't get it do you?

    The English public has moved dramatically to the right.

    They don't want more immigrants
    They don't like benefit scroungers
    They don't want more taxes.

    The last socialist labour government was elected in 1974. Since then they have had to keep moving to the right to get elected. Miliband stopped that shift and paid the price.
  • Options
    TelevisionUserTelevisionUser Posts: 41,417
    Forum Member
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    Rejected by the British public the Labour party now has two choices; choose a leader who the Unions would like or choose a leader who the public might like.

    England is not going to vote for a Unite Lacky and Unite are not going to fund a New Labour leader.

    It's as good as all over for Labour.

    ^^^ That is just unthinking partisan BS. In the 1997 general election, the Conservatives were left with 165 seats and they managed to recover from that situation so Labour can certainly recover from a baseline of 232 seats.
  • Options
    Louise32Louise32 Posts: 6,784
    Forum Member
    Labour has had a defeat as also has the Lib Dems but people tend to get fed up with whose in charge after a while.

    Give it time both Labour and Lib Dems will come back from this.

    People wrote the UUP off too but whilst 2 seats isn't a huge number many predicted they'd have none- parties make comebacks.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    You just don't get it do you?

    The English public has moved dramatically to the right.

    They don't want more immigrants
    They don't like benefit scroungers
    They don't want more taxes.

    The last socialist labour government was elected in 1974. Since then they have had to keep moving to the right to get elected. Miliband stopped that shift and paid the price.

    The last time I looked, 37% was no-where near a majority! The tories only increased their share of the vote by less than 1% as did Labour.

    No...the majority of the country understands that to pay for public services we value, we need higher taxes, we realise too that playing 'Little Englander' is no good and that the country is a net benefitter of immigration.

    Ah the old Daily Mail 'benefit scrounges' line... remind us, of the £200 billion benefit bill, where does the majority go?

    P.S. I thought the Tories were trying to get rid of the Nasty Party tag. I don't see much evidence of it working. We are a carying, compassionate, inclusive country who believes in equlity...that is the real UK.
  • Options
    GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That is because you are confusing being left wing and being socialist.

    Socialism is only a form of left wing policies.

    A better definition of left/right is ordinary people/establishment.


    Capitalism in it's original incarnation was left wing!

    It really doesn't matter because the contention was not about their politics but about their status as a party. In any case the business about Unite withdrawing support is debunked her:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32777771
  • Options
    Tom2023Tom2023 Posts: 2,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ^^^ That is just unthinking partisan BS. In the 1997 general election, the Conservatives were left with 165 seats and they managed to recover from that situation so Labour can certainly recover from a baseline of 232 seats.

    In 1997 the Tories were fighting a slicker version of themselves.

    Had they been fighting Ed Miliband or Andy Burnham they would have won a landslide majority.

    The only way Labour can win back votes is to move dramatically to the Right. Their paymasters won't support that so they are screwed.
  • Options
    robert_paperobert_pape Posts: 20
    Forum Member
    GibsonSG wrote: »
    Again I am going to post the '97 result - Labour; 418 seats, Tory 165.

    The significance of that stat is that both parties have come back from significant defeats, and the country did elect a left wing party with a significant majority.

    Ah yes, lady T god rest her soul, turned labour into new labour as there was no way into government otherwise. Seems this lesson needs to be re learned.

    New labour equals Tory light. Happy with that as a second choice.
  • Options
    GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    In 1997 the Tories were fighting a slicker version of themselves.

    Had they been fighting Ed Miliband or Andy Burnham they would have won a landslide majority.

    The only way Labour can win back votes is to move dramatically to the Right. Their paymasters won't support that so they are screwed.

    Two years into this parliament and we will al be screwed.
  • Options
    GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ah yes, lady T god rest her soul, turned labour into new labour as there was no way into government otherwise. Seems this lesson needs to be re learned.

    New labour equals Tory light. Happy with that as a second choice.

    Hardly, Labour lost the '92 election which was nearer to Mrs T's time as PM.
  • Options
    Tom2023Tom2023 Posts: 2,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ash_M1 wrote: »
    The last time I looked, 37% was no-where near a majority!

    I suggest you look at the House of Commons and you'll see a 37% share of the vote equals a comfortable majority.
  • Options
    GibsonSGGibsonSG Posts: 23,681
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tom2023 wrote: »
    I suggest you look at the House of Commons and you'll see a 37% share of the vote equals a comfortable majority.

    The vote or the seats?
Sign In or Register to comment.