How it Works2 mins ago
David Miliband Turns On His Brother
Well, obviously.
http://
I wouldn't want to be at the Miliband's family Christmas this year.
http://
I wouldn't want to be at the Miliband's family Christmas this year.
Answers
// There was "absolutely no point" blaming voters for Labour's defeat, he added //
Well, obviously one can't "blame" the voters. The voters voted for the government they wanted.
That's how an election works, David. Look it up on Wikipedia, if you're not clear.
Although, the fact that David M even raises the idea of "blaming the voters" suggests that he probably does. Which suggests that David M, like a significant number of Trots, has complete contempt for the concept of democracy.
Well, obviously one can't "blame" the voters. The voters voted for the government they wanted.
That's how an election works, David. Look it up on Wikipedia, if you're not clear.
Although, the fact that David M even raises the idea of "blaming the voters" suggests that he probably does. Which suggests that David M, like a significant number of Trots, has complete contempt for the concept of democracy.
You may be going to far, JJ. Then again, maybe not. But if others in the Labour intelligentsia have been busy trying to blame the voters, it stands to reason that the way to address this is to mention that there is no point in blaming the voters.
Or is that not enough, and you have to say that it's "absolutely wrong" to even consider blaming the voters? Also there's the question of what it means to blame the voters anyway. If you wonder aloud that the opinion polls pushed people away from risking a Lab-SNP coalition and towards a Tory majority, it doesn't follow that this was the voters' fault. The reason a Lab-SNP coalition was in the air is that Labour didn't seem to be capable of attracting enough support to win an outright majority. Thus it's still their fault. While the polls became a part of the narrative, the story they told against Labour wasn't really twisting the facts, even if it's regrettable that it became such a large part of the campaign.
Anyway, Labour lost, and hopefully they will come back in 2020 with a position that actually has a chance of challenging the Tories.
Or is that not enough, and you have to say that it's "absolutely wrong" to even consider blaming the voters? Also there's the question of what it means to blame the voters anyway. If you wonder aloud that the opinion polls pushed people away from risking a Lab-SNP coalition and towards a Tory majority, it doesn't follow that this was the voters' fault. The reason a Lab-SNP coalition was in the air is that Labour didn't seem to be capable of attracting enough support to win an outright majority. Thus it's still their fault. While the polls became a part of the narrative, the story they told against Labour wasn't really twisting the facts, even if it's regrettable that it became such a large part of the campaign.
Anyway, Labour lost, and hopefully they will come back in 2020 with a position that actually has a chance of challenging the Tories.
-- answer removed --
I think it quite clear David was referring to others in the party who are looking for a reason that the party didn't do better that doesn't blame the party. Just human nature, but probably less helpful than seeing what the party could have done better.
But for sure it isn't going to improver family relationships to criticise his brother's leadership in public. David may be under the delusion that what the party needs is to be more Blair than Blair, but it wouldn't help the party to mimic the Tories even more than they have in the past. It still needs "clear water" between the party options, and the ability to convince the public that it would have done better during the next 4 years.
But for sure it isn't going to improver family relationships to criticise his brother's leadership in public. David may be under the delusion that what the party needs is to be more Blair than Blair, but it wouldn't help the party to mimic the Tories even more than they have in the past. It still needs "clear water" between the party options, and the ability to convince the public that it would have done better during the next 4 years.
What really did for Labour as much as anything was the baffling failure to stand up for their record on the economy and their borrowing plans. The Tories lied repeatedly about the reasons for the deficit and on all honesty the recession caused by the banking crisis was do severe that even I could probably have been chancellor and seen some sort of improvement. As it was, Osborne spent the last 3 years of the coalition using more or or less the same economic plan as his predecessor Alistair Darling and presumably now proposed to revert to the failed approach of 2010-12
Mind you the real killer was probably the rise of the SNP and the fear that that successfully instilled in the electorate combined with the doubts over Labour's economic plan which was so hazily presented
Mind you the real killer was probably the rise of the SNP and the fear that that successfully instilled in the electorate combined with the doubts over Labour's economic plan which was so hazily presented
I don't think he 'turned on him'. He was asked questions about why Labour did badly and he answered them quite reasonably and without any nastiness. Compare and contrast with Peter Mandelson.
http://
http://
Aah, yes ... Peter Mandelson exposes the underlying truth about the Trots.
We failed because of Ed's "anti business" stance, he said.
And then, in essence ...
We need to go back to impersonating the Conservatives.
If we dress like the Tories, behave like the Tories, and adopt policies like the Tories, then we will get back in power.
Err, yes.
Which just illustrates the point ...
The need for a Labour Party has gone. The whole concept of a Labour Party is utterly obsolete.
So Peter, instead of going back to being Tories in red ties, go back to Labour HQ, pull down the blinds, lock the door, and go home.
We failed because of Ed's "anti business" stance, he said.
And then, in essence ...
We need to go back to impersonating the Conservatives.
If we dress like the Tories, behave like the Tories, and adopt policies like the Tories, then we will get back in power.
Err, yes.
Which just illustrates the point ...
The need for a Labour Party has gone. The whole concept of a Labour Party is utterly obsolete.
So Peter, instead of going back to being Tories in red ties, go back to Labour HQ, pull down the blinds, lock the door, and go home.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.