This Once Great Movement Of Ours

[Blair]

Meanwhile, some truly "laying it on with a trowel" expectation management about this May's elections by "Labour sources" has caused a bit of amusement. It is true that the absence of any "real votes" at all for nearly a year (save a few Scottish council byelections) makes forecasting these things even more hazardous than usual, but what was being "predicted" would actually be one of the party's worst electoral showings ever - and far more than any possible "vaccine boost" for the Tories could provide.

So draw your own conclusions......

When I saw it had 'leaked' slides from the Shadow Cabinet I did think they were making it a bit too obvious.

One part of me is convinced we're going to get absolutely baffling results, especially with turnout.

I haven't done a deep dive of the seats up in May but I expect the post night analysis will be on Labour over-performing in London but losing the now obsessed about 'red-wall' seats- and the lazy example will be the two metro mayors in Tees & West Midlands (despite the two areas being well chalk and cheese)

[Blair]

Strange to think he was Gordon Brown's PPS... but unlike others he can claim to have always believed this irrc.


https://twitter.com/jon_trickett/status/1354539788477620227

[Statilius the Epicurean]

This is rather good

https://twitter.com/FisherAndrew79/status/1354881476723138567?s=19

[CumbrianLefty]

"bUt StArMeR iS mOrE rIgHt WiNg ThAn BlAiR!!!!!!?!!!!1111!!!!!!"

[Conservatopia]

Saying the Tories will be "destroyed" does also suggest a bit of pre-emptive spin tbph

I have no reason to 'spin' though.  I genuinely think we will be walloped.

Compare polling now to when the last time these seats were up for election.

[CumbrianLefty]

Saying the Tories will be "destroyed" does also suggest a bit of pre-emptive spin tbph

I have no reason to 'spin' though.  I genuinely think we will be walloped.

Compare polling now to when the last time these seats were up for election.

That certainly applies to the seats last fought in 2017, but with those from a year earlier a bit less.

[Blair]

This is rather good

https://twitter.com/FisherAndrew79/status/1354881476723138567?s=19

Yep- they seem to be getting Starmer out into more relaxed events like this. It also does absolutely no harm to give some actual positions around issues that don't really require a major re-think for 2024.

"bUt StArMeR iS mOrE rIgHt WiNg ThAn BlAiR!!!!!!?!!!!1111!!!!!!"

Funnily enough in the same way that a lot of 'centrists' completely misunderstood Corbyn (often depicting him either as some sort of Scragill throwback or a ultra-progressive Another Future is Possible type) a lot of people seem to rather enjoy completely missing the point of what Starmer's background relative to the party is.

The best way it was described to me was that Blair spent his time at uni talking about God and playing music, while Starmer was editing a trotskyist magazine

[Conservatopia]

Saying the Tories will be "destroyed" does also suggest a bit of pre-emptive spin tbph

I have no reason to 'spin' though.  I genuinely think we will be walloped.

Compare polling now to when the last time these seats were up for election.

That certainly applies to the seats last fought in 2017, but with those from a year earlier a bit less.

Yes I suppose you are right.  Plus of course the #trends that have happened since then.  For example BathNES is very different politically now compared to then.

[CumbrianLefty]

Though that applies both ways - eg I will be surprised if Sandwell is still a one party state after May.

[Blair]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

[CumbrianLefty]

There *are* alternatives to Starmer, but large sections of the party* would like them even less.

(*different parts depending on the person concerned obv)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Though that applies both ways - eg I will be surprised if Sandwell is still a one party state after May.

Mind you, everyone was surprised that it still was after the 2019 locals!

[LabourJersey]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

The part about politicians getting absurdly restless and desperate to talk about anything/give their opinions on how things *ought to be done* to anyone strikes me as pretty accurate.

Personally I feel the line about Starmer "stalling" given elections and campaigns right now are, much like the rest of our lives, stalled. Seems like these takes can wait until the May elections, can't they?

[Blair]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

The part about politicians getting absurdly restless and desperate to talk about anything/give their opinions on how things *ought to be done* to anyone strikes me as pretty accurate.

Personally I feel the line about Starmer "stalling" given elections and campaigns right now are, much like the rest of our lives, stalled. Seems like these takes can wait until the May elections, can't they?

There was a good quote from Harold Wilson that the party was ''like an old stagecoach. If you drive along at a rapid rate everyone aboard is either so exhilarated or so seasick that you don’t have a lot of difficulty with the passengers.''

[CumbrianLefty]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

Or, maybe, should have a more prominent position within it.....

(nobody in particular in mind here, but I'm sure people can think of some possibilities)

[cp]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

The part about politicians getting absurdly restless and desperate to talk about anything/give their opinions on how things *ought to be done* to anyone strikes me as pretty accurate.

Personally I feel the line about Starmer "stalling" given elections and campaigns right now are, much like the rest of our lives, stalled. Seems like these takes can wait until the May elections, can't they?

The campaign period is only 7 weeks away now. If there's a problem with the leader, his team, or their strategy, now would be the time to air it.

There's definitely some truth to the perception of politics being in limbo until the pandemic has abated*. But the problems Starmer's having with his image and party/policy management go deeper than this. In the eyes of most voters (or, at any rate, the most relevant voters) he's still basically just the empty suit that Labour put in charge after the election disaster. He doesn't have much to define him otherwise - personal charisma, an ideological bent, a compelling backstory, etc. For the membership and activists trying to sell him and his 'vision' to the public, his foot dragging on policy has made this unenviable task even harder.

Of course, he's sort of in a catch-22 on that last point. The policies the new leadership are keen to enact are the regressive sorts they think will play in the 'red wall' seats, but are loathed by most of the membership, while the policies popular with the membership are Corbyn-style big gestures that Starmer is desperately trying to distance himself from.



*I suspect there will be a notable change in polling and attitudes once the vaccinations are all done and that that will become the new status quo until the election, barring something major happening

[CumbrianLefty]

Though a more optimistic alternative reading might be "Starmer wants to offer at least some of the big stuff that Corbyn did, but believes that will only be feasible once a sufficient number of people have been persuaded that the party he leads isn't a bunch of weirdos who hate this country".

Btw those saying Labour want to win over "Red Wall pensioners" aren't quite right - it is recognised that many in this group are lost to the left for good. Its actually the middle aged (ie 40s and 50s) who are the demographically crucial grouping. Quite a few of these actually voted Labour in 2017, only to recoil from their offering two years later.

[cp]

Though a more optimistic alternative reading might be "Starmer wants to offer at least some of the big stuff that Corbyn did, but believes that will only be feasible once a sufficient number of people have been persuaded that the party he leads isn't a bunch of weirdos who hate this country".

Btw those saying Labour want to win over "Red Wall pensioners" aren't quite right - it is recognised that many in this group are lost to the left for good. Its actually the middle aged (ie 40s and 50s) who are the demographically crucial grouping. Quite a few of these actually voted Labour in 2017, only to recoil from their offering two years later.

So long as Starmer and the rest of Labour's current leadership keep accepting - or do nothing to refute/transcend - the underlying premise of the framing that Corbyn and his supporters were 'weirdos who hate this country', Labour will not return to government, and deservedly so.

[Blair]

A rather unique take for those who waste their money on the Times.

ICYMI: Keir needs to A.) Horde all the vaccines for the UK B.) Defend Zero-Hours Contracts C.) Call Len Len Mccluskey a crook.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-will-never-warm-to-timid-keir-starmer-9hmwwhnts

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Though a more optimistic alternative reading might be "Starmer wants to offer at least some of the big stuff that Corbyn did, but believes that will only be feasible once a sufficient number of people have been persuaded that the party he leads isn't a bunch of weirdos who hate this country".

Btw those saying Labour want to win over "Red Wall pensioners" aren't quite right - it is recognised that many in this group are lost to the left for good. Its actually the middle aged (ie 40s and 50s) who are the demographically crucial grouping. Quite a few of these actually voted Labour in 2017, only to recoil from their offering two years later.

So long as Starmer and the rest of Labour's current leadership keep accepting - or do nothing to refute/transcend - the underlying premise of the framing that Corbyn and his supporters were 'weirdos who hate this country', Labour will not return to government, and deservedly so.

Yes, the only way for Labour to return to government is argue with the public that Corbynism Was Good. Really?

Differentiating the party from the most unpopular opposition leader since records began is what any new leadership would be doing in their first year. Including RLB's team, if she had won.  

[cp]

Though a more optimistic alternative reading might be "Starmer wants to offer at least some of the big stuff that Corbyn did, but believes that will only be feasible once a sufficient number of people have been persuaded that the party he leads isn't a bunch of weirdos who hate this country".

Btw those saying Labour want to win over "Red Wall pensioners" aren't quite right - it is recognised that many in this group are lost to the left for good. Its actually the middle aged (ie 40s and 50s) who are the demographically crucial grouping. Quite a few of these actually voted Labour in 2017, only to recoil from their offering two years later.

So long as Starmer and the rest of Labour's current leadership keep accepting - or do nothing to refute/transcend - the underlying premise of the framing that Corbyn and his supporters were 'weirdos who hate this country', Labour will not return to government, and deservedly so.

Yes, the only way for Labour to return to government is argue with the public that Corbynism Was Good. Really?

Differentiating the party from the most unpopular opposition leader since records began is what any new leadership would be doing in their first year. Including RLB's team, if she had won.  

I'm not saying the new leadership shouldn't try to differentiate itself. I'm saying it needs to be willing to challenge conventional wisdom and their own (mis)conceptions - about Corbyn and much else about British politics - if it wants to succeed.  

From the moment Corbyn took over the party, the old guard of Blair/Brownites - the people who are in charge again under Starmer - insisted Corbyn's policies and style of leadership would be a disaster and rejected by the public. They operated off the underlying premise that Corbynism, in the sense of a non-neoliberal/New Labour style of left wing policy proposals, was the pipe dream of a 'bunch of weirdos who hate this country'. But then in 2017 Labour gained votes, seats, and percentage of the electorate at a rate not seen since 2001. Like it or not, and to the immense chagrin of the old guard, it turned out the only style of politics that had Labour make *any* meaningful gains against the Tories in the past 15 years was Corbynism.

Obviously, the 2019 election belies this narrative, not least because Corbyn as a political personality/caricature got completed monstered in the ensuing two years (thank you, British media*). But I'd argue that disaster had at least as much to do with the recalcitrant Labour centre's refusal to grant Corbyn or his policy/ideological perspective the endorsement and symbolic capital that his electoral success in 2017 ought to have earned him. Had the old guard had the humility to admit *their* style of politics was the one that was out of step - and that Corbyn's supporters/policies were not something aberrant or traitorous - events would have turned out quite differently.

That, of course, is history. But my point is a key lesson of the recent past is that Labour's not going to get back into government until it gets its factions - all of them - to sing from the same song sheet. Uncomfortable though it may be for Starmer and his team, he won't be able to do that without challenging the received wisdom about Corbyn and the nature of his appeal.


*And Corbyn and his team, to be clear. They could and should have done better.

[EastAnglianLefty]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

The part about politicians getting absurdly restless and desperate to talk about anything/give their opinions on how things *ought to be done* to anyone strikes me as pretty accurate.

Personally I feel the line about Starmer "stalling" given elections and campaigns right now are, much like the rest of our lives, stalled. Seems like these takes can wait until the May elections, can't they?

Even more so with journalists: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/05/britons-drama-keir-starmer-labour-leader-competence

This is a classic case of somebody who is a gossip columnist by background mistaking their short attention span and love of drama for a national characteristic.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Though a more optimistic alternative reading might be "Starmer wants to offer at least some of the big stuff that Corbyn did, but believes that will only be feasible once a sufficient number of people have been persuaded that the party he leads isn't a bunch of weirdos who hate this country".

Btw those saying Labour want to win over "Red Wall pensioners" aren't quite right - it is recognised that many in this group are lost to the left for good. Its actually the middle aged (ie 40s and 50s) who are the demographically crucial grouping. Quite a few of these actually voted Labour in 2017, only to recoil from their offering two years later.

So long as Starmer and the rest of Labour's current leadership keep accepting - or do nothing to refute/transcend - the underlying premise of the framing that Corbyn and his supporters were 'weirdos who hate this country', Labour will not return to government, and deservedly so.

Yes, the only way for Labour to return to government is argue with the public that Corbynism Was Good. Really?

Differentiating the party from the most unpopular opposition leader since records began is what any new leadership would be doing in their first year. Including RLB's team, if she had won.  

I'm not saying the new leadership shouldn't try to differentiate itself. I'm saying it needs to be willing to challenge conventional wisdom and their own (mis)conceptions - about Corbyn and much else about British politics - if it wants to succeed.  

From the moment Corbyn took over the party, the old guard of Blair/Brownites - the people who are in charge again under Starmer - insisted Corbyn's policies and style of leadership would be a disaster and rejected by the public. They operated off the underlying premise that Corbynism, in the sense of a non-neoliberal/New Labour style of left wing policy proposals, was the pipe dream of a 'bunch of weirdos who hate this country'. But then in 2017 Labour gained votes, seats, and percentage of the electorate at a rate not seen since 2001. Like it or not, and to the immense chagrin of the old guard, it turned out the only style of politics that had Labour make *any* meaningful gains against the Tories in the past 15 years was Corbynism.

Obviously, the 2019 election belies this narrative, not least because Corbyn as a political personality/caricature got completed monstered in the ensuing two years (thank you, British media*). But I'd argue that disaster had at least as much to do with the recalcitrant Labour centre's refusal to grant Corbyn or his policy/ideological perspective the endorsement and symbolic capital that his electoral success in 2017 ought to have earned him. Had the old guard had the humility to admit *their* style of politics was the one that was out of step - and that Corbyn's supporters/policies were not something aberrant or traitorous - events would have turned out quite differently.

That, of course, is history. But my point is a key lesson of the recent past is that Labour's not going to get back into government until it gets its factions - all of them - to sing from the same song sheet. Uncomfortable though it may be for Starmer and his team, he won't be able to do that without challenging the received wisdom about Corbyn and the nature of his appeal.


*And Corbyn and his team, to be clear. They could and should have done better.

Labour will only win the next election by supporting popular stuff. "Challenging the recieved wisdom about Corbyn" to be blunt literally who cares? Maybe highly engaged political anoraks but not voters.

[CumbrianLefty]

An interesting view; as always it was interesting to read Stephen Bush's responses to his article where he said was unsure how much of this was boredom (journos can't write Labour splits story or Keir cleans house anymore & need something to do), people in the party egging it on (who believe they should be in the shadow cabinet) or just general weakness in Keir's team.

It's interesting that this appears to have been briefed by people in the Shadow Cabinet.

My only mild annoyance is towards people from all wings of the party who seem to be convinced that there's some sort of alternative in the wings...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2021/02/consensus-forming-among-commentariat-keir-starmer-not-job-does-it-matter

The part about politicians getting absurdly restless and desperate to talk about anything/give their opinions on how things *ought to be done* to anyone strikes me as pretty accurate.

Personally I feel the line about Starmer "stalling" given elections and campaigns right now are, much like the rest of our lives, stalled. Seems like these takes can wait until the May elections, can't they?

Even more so with journalists: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/05/britons-drama-keir-starmer-labour-leader-competence

This is a classic case of somebody who is a gossip columnist by background mistaking their short attention span and love of drama for a national characteristic.

Hyde's almost literal cult following amongst a certain sort of #FBPEish/"Sensible" Labour type is one of the slightly bizarre side effects of our political discourse since 2015.

[EastAnglianLefty]

It's actually extremely similar to Johnson's original appeal, in that it rests on daft similes and sentences deliberately designed to appear as if they're getting away from themselves. The style substitutes Latin tags for popbitch-style asides, but otherwise it's very close.