They Just Don't Get It Do They....

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51208545
Wrong-Daily:"Labour had "a great set of policies" at the general election but got its "messaging" wrong" - err no, you got your butts kicked.
Agent COB: "We won the argument" - then why are you not in no 10?

[ludwig]

// I don't agree that defeat in an election, or a debate generally, is cause to abandon your core beliefs //

It depends what you want jim. The socialist workers party never abandoned their core beliefs, and consequently never had any hope of winning a single seat, let alone an election. As a result, they never achieved a single thing in helping a single socialist worker to do anything whatsoever.

They always seemed to be enjoying themselves handing out leaflets in the street though.

[jim360]

Perhaps. Labour, and the Lib Dems, need to take a long, hard look at themselves and stop lashing out at any and every other excuse.

[naomi24]

Jim, //There's very little evidence that Labour's manifesto was the chief reason for the defeat, so the idea that the electorate "saw through their abject nonsense" is probably not accurate.//

That's an insult to the intelligence of the electorate. Voters didn't want what Labour was offering - which is why they rejected it.

[10ClarionSt]

Instead, we now have a lying, racist, hypocrite of a PM who, by his own words, should be lying dead in a ditch somewhere.

As for Labour, they are all sat round on their elbows, dressed in The Emperors' New Clothes, wondering where it all went wrong.

Reality check required I think.

[ToraToraTora]

jim: "Labour's solution to their problems can hardly be to become the Conservatives in all but name." - well that's what they did last time they were in jim! The fact is they have to move away from the hard left , the public have comprehensively rejected their stance multiple times pre and post St Tony and co. If they won't or don't do that they'll be in opposition a very long time.

[jim360]

// That's an insult to the intelligence of the electorate. Voters didn't want what Labour was offering - which is why they rejected it. //

As I explained earlier, the manifesto as a whole ranks third on the list of reasons Labour was rejected. Labour's choice of leader was poor; Labour's Brexit policy was poor. Perhaps even fourth, because the antiSemitism scandal, quite rightly, played into voters' perception of Corbyn as toxic and a poor leader.

Both the leader and the Brexit policy, then, were rejected, and were more significant reasons than the entire set of policies. Indeed, this is something that's been backed up by research and polling, as well as the political narrative of the year or so leading up to the election.

[jim360]

Agreed that Labour should move from the Hard Left, although there is plenty of ground between there and the Right.

[New Judge]

//Instead, we now have a lying, racist, hypocrite of a PM who, by his own words, should be lying dead in a ditch somewhere.//

Strange how things undergo metamorphosis in the telling. The PM was asked, when addressing a meeting in Wakefield, Yorkshire, whether he would ask for an extension to A50, which was due to expire on 31st October. He replied that he would sooner die in a ditch. Unfortunately for him he was forced to ask for an extension by an intransigent Parliament. His dying in a ditch would not have altered that. I didn't see anything in his words that suggested that he would slink away and die in a ditch and let somebody else do the deed he found so distasteful.

He was expressing an opinion when asked about something he might have to do. We all do it. For example, "I'd rather poke hot needles into my eyes than live under a Labour government" is something I might say. I'd still live under a Labour government (should the electorate be foolish enough to put one into office) and my poking hot needles into my eyes wouldn't alter that so I wouldn't do it. It's called "a figure of speech."

[ludwig]

// He was expressing an opinion when asked about something he might have to do //

I wonder whether he'll metaphorically lie down in front of a proverbial bulldozer when they come to build the new runway at Heathrow NJ.

[naomi24]

Jim, //As I explained earlier, the manifesto as a whole ranks third on the list of reasons Labour was rejected.//

I guess that comes from one of your ‘polls’, which as we know are not always to be trusted. Well, my own personal poll confirms that the many people of my acquaintance who for the first time in their lives changed their vote from Labour to the Conservatives did so because they didn’t like what Labour were offering.

[New Judge]

//I wonder whether he'll metaphorically lie down in front of a proverbial bulldozer when they come to build the new runway at Heathrow NJ.//

I don't think he has too much to worry about on that score, ludders. There is more chance of me winning the 100m final in this year's Olympics than work on the Third Runway beginning during Mr Johnson's political lifetime.

[ludwig]

In no particular order : Brexit, Corbyn, a ridiculous manifesto, anti-semitism. A perfect storm of crapness.

The first two in theory are out of the equation. If they can tackle the others they have a chance to be taken seriously again but I won't hold my breath.

[jim360]

I shouldn't have to explain that "your own personal poll" is hardly going to be conducted according to more rigorous polling techniques, including but not limited to random selection of participants.

Also, don't get me wrong, I have no intention of defending Labour's manifesto either. What good stuff there may have been in it individually was squashed under the collective weight of overambition and utterly implausible timescales. But, equally, you're kidding yourself if you think that Labour would have had any chance of winning with any other set of policies as long as they had an incompetent leader and an incoherent Brexit policy.