This Once Great Movement Of Ours

[lividnyx]

Labour frankly needs to be honest about the possibility of a coalition, because it is very likely to need a supply and consent arrangement at best.

Problem is that if they acknowledge the possibility of a coalition with the nationalists, they'll lose support in heavily unionist areas.

Add that to the fact Labour could very well govern alone on the recent polling numbers, they're probably not in a huge rush to draw attention to the possibility.

[Oryxslayer]

Labour frankly needs to be honest about the possibility of a coalition, because it is very likely to need a supply and consent arrangement at best.

Problem is that if they acknowledge the possibility of a coalition with the nationalists, they'll lose support in heavily unionist areas.

Add that to the fact Labour could very well govern alone on the recent polling numbers, they're probably not in a huge rush to draw attention to the possibility.

Labour needs a landslide to govern with a majority these days, that's just math thanks to Scotland. Maybe Labour will win by 8% and reverse 2019, but you don't bet on that. Rather, the realistic expectation if we look at the last few months should be closer to 270-290 Labour, with Cons a ways back. In this situation, minority or coalition is all but inevitable, given that the same math which makes this a Labour win necessitates that the Tories get close to or over the majority threshold on their own to govern.

The question should be rather about the Lib-Dems. We are seeing the Lib-Dem recovery, thanks to Tory failures lowering their appeal in the south. Most of these are seats where Labour would be putting up paper candidates at best. It obviously would be beneficial for Labour to have the Lib-Dems win as much as possible in territory they cannot win, but they cannot go full force in their favor. Cross-endorsements and withdrawal of candidates could very will hurt the Lib-Dems more than it helps. Selectively encouraging tactical voting though might not be enough. Internal Labour politics probably couldn't agree to such actions openly either.

That all said, the appropriate response to Lab-SNP fearmongering is to agree it is detrimental, which is why Lab-Lib in whatever fashion desirable is favorable, stable, and competent by comparison.

[lividnyx]

Labour needs a landslide to govern with a majority these days, that's just math thanks to Scotland. Maybe Labour will win by 8% and reverse 2019, but you don't bet on that. Rather, the realistic expectation if we look at the last few months should be closer to 270-290 Labour, with Cons a ways back. In this situation, minority or coalition is all but inevitable, given that the same math which makes this a Labour win necessitates that the Tories get close to or over the majority threshold on their own to govern.

...

An 8% lead, even if it were necessary, is absolutely an outcome worth considering given the current polling numbers. Recent polls have had Labour about 6pts ahead of the Tories, which is about 5 MPs short of a majority if you factor in SDLP taking the Labour whip & SF's abstention (assuming NI voting intention hasn't changed & based on EC's model).

Also it's worth noting that while bringing up the potential for a Labour-Lib Dem government is better than for a Labour-Nat, if Labour is in need of support for a coalition, it's far more likely that the Lib Dems won't be enough and the Nationalists will be the only option (or Labour will need to rely on both blocs), just based on the sheer size of the SNP compared to the Lib Dems, and especially if you don't lend much credit to the polling average.

[JimJamUK]

Labour needs a landslide to govern with a majority these days, that's just math thanks to Scotland.

The problem for Labour is that accepting this reality will just reinforce it. There are a significant number of voters who can switch between Labour and the SNP which means the SNP majorities can be softer than they look (see the swings of every election since 2010). Labour need to go into the election with the clear message that Labour can beat the Tories nationally (and the SNP locally) and they need every vote to do so. Conversely, publicly accepting the likelihood of SNP support will both piss off tactical unionist voters but also tell SNP-Labour swing voters that they can still vote SNP and get rid of the Tories. Furthermore, it allows the SNP to market themselves as the only party that will stand up for Scotland's interest in confidence and supply negotiations and therefore people should vote for them if they want an independence referendum/general pork from a Labour government. Its very much in Labour's interest to campaign for a majority government, and if they have to acknowledge the possibility of SNP support then it should be that the latter will have the opportunity to vote for a Labour minority government to get the Tories out. If the SNP argue back they would need a 2nd referendum etc, then Labour can claim the SNP are not a reliable vote for getting the Tories out.

[Oryxslayer]

Labour needs a landslide to govern with a majority these days, that's just math thanks to Scotland.

The problem for Labour is that accepting this reality will just reinforce it. There are a significant number of voters who can switch between Labour and the SNP which means the SNP majorities can be softer than they look (see the swings of every election since 2010). Labour need to go into the election with the clear message that Labour can beat the Tories nationally (and the SNP locally) and they need every vote to do so. Conversely, publicly accepting the likelihood of SNP support will both piss off tactical unionist voters but also tell SNP-Labour swing voters that they can still vote SNP and get rid of the Tories. Furthermore, it allows the SNP to market themselves as the only party that will stand up for Scotland's interest in confidence and supply negotiations and therefore people should vote for them if they want an independence referendum/general pork from a Labour government. Its very much in Labour's interest to campaign for a majority government, and if they have to acknowledge the possibility of SNP support then it should be that the latter will have the opportunity to vote for a Labour minority government to get the Tories out. If the SNP argue back they would need a 2nd referendum etc, then Labour can claim the SNP are not a reliable vote for getting the Tories out.

Agreed completely, I'm just comparing to the last Labour governments majorities. Back then, Labour got upwards of 70% of the Scottish seats off usually 40% of the vote. Now Labour lacks that stronghold of seats, and has yet to find a replacement, so the math is just harder. Labour can and should absolutely campaign independently in Scotland - heck accepting that Labour needs a partner in government allows then to use the 'coalition of chaos' line to tell people why to vote Lab versus SNP - but that doesn't change the fact that a good night barring a SNP collapse will be approximately 10 to 15 Scottish seats for around 25% of the vote. Every one will be a hard fought and well deserved win, but it can't compare to the 41 seats Blair had in 2005, well before the sea change and generational realignment led to SNP dominance.

[EastAnglianLefty]

A very funny article below including the gem of advice from Douglas Alexander. I very much doubt that such a ‘killer’ line would make any remote difference.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/21/quash-talk-of-a-labour-deal-with-snp-now-veteran-election-team-urges-starmer

My own instinct is that Labour can deal with the issue early by saying clearly in Scotland and across Britain that the way to get a Labour government is straightforward … vote for a Labour MP.

“It is perfectly possible to say, ‘The only coalition we are seeking is one with the voters. Labour will seek to deliver its manifesto and other parties will need to make their choice about whether to support us.’ Getting that clarity on the record works both as a campaign message and as a strategy for governing.”

This is all well and good, but it's generally best to ask people about their area of expertise. Has he got any advice on carrying Bono's bags?

[Alcibiades]

Also worth remembering that when the Tories tried the COALITION OF CHAOS messaging in 2017, it wasn’t exactly particularly successful…

Keir Starmer will undoubtedly be asked a fair bit about potential coalition partners during the next general election campaign, but I see no reason as to why he needs to give any answer other than, “I want to lead a Labour majority government, and that is my only focus at the moment.”

[CumbrianLefty]

A very funny article below including the gem of advice from Douglas Alexander. I very much doubt that such a ‘killer’ line would make any remote difference.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/21/quash-talk-of-a-labour-deal-with-snp-now-veteran-election-team-urges-starmer

My own instinct is that Labour can deal with the issue early by saying clearly in Scotland and across Britain that the way to get a Labour government is straightforward … vote for a Labour MP.

“It is perfectly possible to say, ‘The only coalition we are seeking is one with the voters. Labour will seek to deliver its manifesto and other parties will need to make their choice about whether to support us.’ Getting that clarity on the record works both as a campaign message and as a strategy for governing.”

This is all well and good, but it's generally best to ask people about their area of expertise. Has he got any advice on carrying Bono's bags?

Heh, wasn't Dougal just phenomenally useless.

[Blair]

An interesting article- although it didn’t mention how the influence of the Sikh community has influenced Labour politics and pushed Labour to take a critical stance on human rights abuses in India- almost as much (if not more) as the Pakistani Kashmir community.

Also not sure how much of this is just general long term changes mentioned (e.g voters being wealthier) or the short term BJP influence. Is it an anti Labour thing or more so a pro Conservative mood?

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/labour/2022/05/how-labour-lost-indian-vote-2022-local-elections

[CumbrianLefty]

Its a combination of things, and nor is it uniform throughout the country.

[Blair]

Peoples Alliance of Liberty, or whatever it is called has kicked out TUSC due to TUSC letting GBWP join.

[CumbrianLefty]

Tory defector Christian Wakeford has been made a PPS in the Labour front bench team.

This has invoked predictable apoplexy in the usual quarters.

[Torrain]

Putting a literal representative of the Red Wall on the frontbench seems like a nice way to signal intent for 2024. But it’s definitely fuel for a round of THIGMOO infighting.

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

[JimJamUK]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

[Blair]

Putting a literal representative of the Red Wall on the frontbench seems like a nice way to signal intent for 2024. But it’s definitely fuel for a round of THIGMOO infighting.

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Tbf I don’t event think it will cause that- it’s just the same 30 people who were angry when he defected getting angry again.

Even the latest stitch up in Wakefield didn’t lead to any actual infighting.

[Blair]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

There is certainly a point that Labour needs all these groups to turnout in large numbers to maximise its chances but it did confirm that point Stephen Bush made that the risk many Labour people make is thinking we can follow the democrats in the US (e.g rely on the non-white vote) when the risk is we become like the Italian Democrats.

[CumbrianLefty]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

Zarah Sultana

[Continential]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

Zarah Sultana said this iirc.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It's especially weird because Corbyn didn't even do that well with the ethnic minority vote, .

[CumbrianLefty]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

Zarah Sultana

That's rather a shame if true, I genuinely thought she had a bit more about her than that.

[Blair]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

Zarah Sultana

That's a bit of a shame if true, I genuinely thought she had a bit more about her than that.

Especially considering how marginal her seat is- usually politicians in Labour who have won marginals tend to have a better sense

[Cassius]

You’d hope that the purity tests would go away once you get knocked down to 200 MPs. Alas…

Well according to the British AOC, all Labour needs to win is young people, ethnic minorities and progressives, a coalition of voters that even Jeremy Corbyn has some reach outside of.

Sorry, but who is this?

Zarah Sultana

That's rather a shame if true, I genuinely thought she had a bit more about her than that.

If anything she has a bit less about her.

[Blair]

Hahahahah

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1530971006051012610

[Blair]

Bishop Auckland is basically Ohio right?