Independent Leyton Orient Forum

slacker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 20, 2020 12:32 pm That Labour GE review seems long on what went wrong - and I’d broadly agree with the findings - but very short on how to fix things and win back those Red Wall and Scottish seats without losing their metropolitan vote. I suspect Starmer’s team will just be hoping Johnson’s Govt continue to make such a mess of things that, post Brexit (and Corbyn), those provincial town voters just drift back to them in large enough numbers.

Tory mess or not with a better leader people will drift back to Labour. It’s a question of how many. Not enough to win this time round is my guess. But the gap will close, of that I’m sure.

The review in highlighting what went wrong by the same token highlights where improvements are needed and the how detail is probably something for Starmer and his top team to work on over the next 12/24 months. Well done to Labour in both producing this review and having the courage to make it public.

Unfortunately it also gives an insight into Labour’s issues to the Tories who will, no doubt, find a way to exploit this.

I just posted this on the 'Tory watch' thread but it fits here as well.

"So glad that somebody had the guts in April to leak a detailed report of what was going on in Labour HQ.
So far, it seems, correct action is being taken ……..

https://novaramedia.com/2020/06/20/labo ... e-oldknow/

but will there be a 'trying to sweep it under the carpet' at the end (given that Starmer has elevated the noisiest Corbyn haters to his shadow cabinet)?"

Here an article by Peter Oborne, a Tory by allegiance and proper journalist by profession:

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/k ... emy-corbyn

Last comment for tonight:

When Corbyn included in the 2019 manifesto "free internet access for everyone within 10 years", he was ridiculed. This pledge was regarded as final piece of evidence that he is bonkers.

Now, a few months on an epidemic stopped life as we know it. Children can't attend school but can access learning and teaching via the internet. Unless of course they are one of the many thousands who don't have access to a PC and the internet. They are excluded in a major way. Under Corbyn's manifesto they would not have been.

Bonkers? or a visionary?

And all it took was a once in a century pandemic

Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:59 am And all it took was a once in a century pandemic

Just like that.

E10EU wrote: ↑Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:23 am Last comment for tonight:

When Corbyn included in the 2019 manifesto "free internet access for everyone within 10 years", he was ridiculed. This pledge was regarded as final piece of evidence that he is bonkers.

Now, a few months on an epidemic stopped life as we know it. Children can't attend school but can access learning and teaching via the internet. Unless of course they are one of the many thousands who don't have access to a PC and the internet. They are excluded in a major way. Under Corbyn's manifesto they would not have been.

Bonkers? or a visionary?

He was ridiculed about the price it would take to buy BT, who said that the price would cost the government about 10 times more than he thinks. That's what he was ridiculed for as he did not have a clue about the market price of such a business. His policy did not say it would provide free laptops or whatever device to connect to the internet either.

Report suggests the Tories are now more popular than Labour among the poor and working classes.

Poorer voters helped Boris Johnson landslide by choosing Tories for first time
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... n-22242120

It concludes “The Conservatives are no longer the party of the rich, while Labour is no longer the party of the poor.”. It examined the British Election Study which found 45% of low-income voters backed the Tories, with 30% backing Labour.

I suspect it had a lot to do with Brexit and anti-Corbyn feeling and may only be a temporary blip but it does beg the question who does Labour represent, apart from the middle class metropolitan woke elite?

I'd say it's three pronged of Brexit, Corbyn AND the anti-woke sentiment in the UK. (Woke is used far too much though).

That being said, it's silly to say they only represent the 'middle class metropolitan woke elite' when 10.2 million people voted for them. 1 in 6 are not in that category.

Labour gonna be in for a nasty shock when it finds out many of its core BAME voters are also socially conservative and couldn’t give a toss about gender identity and trans rights

Labour take the BAME vote for granted (as the chap who did worse than Michael Foot shows with his tweet below).

They used to take the Working class vote for granted too though and that slowly trickled away culminating in the 2019 landslide.

You can already see early signs of some BAME groups going Tory. Indians voted 40% Tory in 2017 and once the data for 2019 is released I fully expect that to rise.

And that's a big part of it. Labour HAVE to answer those questions, the Tories do not.

If someone like Liz Truss comes out and tries to reduce trans rights, as she currently is, no one is particularly surprised as that's a pretty conservative position, so there isn't a big story. So they ask Long-Bailey. Then Rayner. Then Whittome. Then we have a whole 'Labour care about the silly fringe issues and don't shut up about them!' debate, even though they are being questioned on it constantly. And here we are.

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:34 pm And that's a big part of it. Labour HAVE to answer those questions, the Tories do not.

If someone like Liz Truss comes out and tries to reduce trans rights, as she currently is, no one is particularly surprised as that's a pretty conservative position, so there isn't a big story. So they ask Long-Bailey. Then Rayner. Then Whittome. Then we have a whole 'Labour care about the silly fringe issues and don't shut up about them!' debate, even though they are being questioned on it constantly. And here we are.

Not sure she's reducing them as opposed to opting to stick with the status quo.

Fair to say that I doubt it's on the the Shadow Cabinet' top 10 issues. But if you look at the backlash someone like JK Rowling faces for her comments (whether right or wrong) it clearly is up there as an issue for large swathes of the left who see any divergence from their position as heresy and try to destroy the livelihoods of the unbelievers

Would you be happier if I edited that to say 'is trying to' or 'is open to'? Happy to do so.

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:41 pm Would you be happier if I edited that to say 'is trying to' or 'is open to'? Happy to do so.

Don't really care

I would agree it isn't on their top 10 agenda either. But people think it is. And that is a problem. Ask most people to choose 10 things most important to them for securing their vote and hardly any will say transgender rights, but it's often used as a stick (as above by MS) to beat Labour with and stirs up the 'anti-woke', 'PC gone mad!' type of people that have migrated over to the Tories recently.

Aren't you on the left though, DCS? Or are you very, very, very soft left?

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:44 pm I would agree it isn't on their top 10 agenda either. But people think it is. And that is a problem. Ask most people to choose 10 things most important to them for securing their vote and hardly any will say transgender rights, but it's often used as a stick (as above by MS) to beat Labour with and stirs up the 'anti-woke', 'PC gone mad!' type of people that have migrated over to the Tories recently.

Aren't you on the left though, DCS? Or are you very, very, very soft left?

Maybe, depends on ones definition of it.

A particular chap on here likes to describe Starmer as Right to Far right wing so to him, probably not. To some of our older fans who think "Poofs shouldn't be allowed to marry let alone have kids" I probably am.

I meant based on your own definition, so thanks for the info. Do you think you could in the near future vote for the Tories? I ask because I recognise Starmer as on the left, I recognise Blair as on the left (in both of their times in particular) and I recognise what is left and right changes by decades, but I find it difficult to see how those on the 'soft left' find their way to the Tories. But I know it is happening regularly.

PoliticOs wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:00 pm I meant based on your own definition, so thanks for the info. Do you think you could in the near future vote for the Tories? I ask because I recognise Starmer as on the left, I recognise Blair as on the left (in both of their times in particular) and I recognise what is left and right changes by decades, but I find it difficult to see how those on the 'soft left' find their way to the Tories. But I know it is happening regularly.

I think you're a bit too obsessed with labels

There’s some really good points made here.

Picking up and expanding on one, I think Labour took some of its traditional voters for granted for too long during the Blair years, and as a result lost votes – and I’m one who has gone. I’d always voted Labour from my first election in 1983, departed them in 2010, and haven’t (yet) returned, putting my cross in the Conservative box for the first time last December, chiefly to ensure that the democracy of the referendum result was implemented.

Corbyn is essentially a protest politician, not a leader, and his weaknesses were badly exposed. Policies which many doubted could be funded, chuck in anti-Semitism, the impasse on Brexit, some anti-woke sentiment may have played a part as suggested in the thread above, and Labour were always going to lose.

Starmer is of much higher calibre as leader, will be interesting to see how the party progresses under him, but he’s got a long haul back to get near being PM.

Millennial Snowflake makes a good point re many socially conservative BAME voters not giving a toss about gender identity & trans rights. Widening that point out, Starmer must ensure that the core message to the voters mainly coincide with the issues which those voters care about most, to have a chance of tempting back those who have been lost. That’s not to say that other issues don’t matter or need addressing, it’s all about convincing the voters that the main focus will be where it should be.

Labour started shedding its working class votes at a noticeable rate in 2005. Blaming Corbyn and Momentum for this is unfair. They were certainly never going to be the solution, but they were not the cause either.

The problem is that the popular vote in England is left on the economy, but right on social policies. They're happy to have a decent welfare state, but they don't want immigration. This isn't about logic or reasoning, it's about feelings. Therefore all of the attempts from the liberal left to argue that they are wrong will be fruitless and just cause further entrenchment in this awful culture war.

Starmer and his cohorts will please the newer Labour voters, but I don't yet see him appealing to the red wall. I actually like him, but he epitomises the stereotype of the metropolitan liberal elite. I really have no idea what the solution is. But I think we need to accept that the safe, boring age of centrist social/liberal democratic politics is over.

I don't agree with everything this geezer says, but his analysis of the decline of the Labour party is very interesting:

Long-Bailey shares an article by an anti semite making antisemitic claims.... calling said antisemite a diamond then backtracks........

The Corbynites dont even try and hide their racism any more

https://www.politicshome.com/news/artic ... t-services

Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:02 pm Long-Bailey shares an article by an anti semite making antisemitic claims.... calling said antisemite a diamond then backtracks........

The Corbynites dont even try and hide their racism any more

https://www.politicshome.com/news/artic ... t-services

Oh wow, proper leadership for once, well done Keir for acting

For antisemitism. Who would have thunk it?

Thank f*** we have a leader with a pair of balls