Starmer's vision quest

[Deleted member 49]

Adam, you are doing that sqawking headless chicken thing, again.

It's clear he is talking about AI in medicine driving down waits for GP appointments, and speeding up responses to things like scans and X-rays which can already be read much more effectively by AI. We aren't very far from having GP consultations with an avatar, either.

You're doing that 3D sh1te again Tool...I only do simple.How about...Paying the staff the NHS have properly,More staff, Retrain staff.
It's been starved of funding since the Tories have been in power,move away from the private parasites and fund it properly.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Re-nationalisation... Everybody,well most want it surely ? Electricity and gas cost a fortune, the NHS is falling apart, and there's shoot
flowing everywhere.
Why is this not a vote winner for Labour.

 

[multitool]

You're doing that 3D sh1te again Tool...I only do simple.How about...Paying the staff the NHS have properly,More staff, Retrain staff.
It's been starved of funding since the Tories have been in power,move away from the private parasites and fund it properly.

Simple solution to complex problems, is it?

 

[newfhouse]

Why is this not a vote winner for Labour.

He thinks he doesn’t need those votes and that positioning Labour as much like the Cons - but with a little more competence and a little less sleaze - is the way to gain power. @multitool will doubtless be along soon to tell us all why that’s a good thing, but as I see it, if Starmer doesn’t deal with the fundamental issue of our national wealth being handed over to the already rich, what’s the point?

 

[Deleted member 49]

Simple solution to complex problems, is it?

What about ending privatisation?

View: https://twitter.com/EveryDoctorUK/status/1660361016398553093?t=B-nkm5wmQJQ3bykD0K3jpw&s=19

 

[Wobblers]

This is all supposition.

As for evidence in this thread, you seriously aren't suggesting that a self-selecting sample is evidence of anything but itself are you???

"Traditional Labour voters" abandoned Labour in their droves in 2019. Did you not notice?

There is a myth among Corbynites that Corbyn was popular, because he was popular with them (see Adam's posts fforclassic examples of extrapolating own opinion to everybody) But for people in general...

View attachment 3901

So this isn't supposition then:

You say he's only winning by default, and whilst that is partly true those votes could have gone to LD or Greens instead.

The observation that Labour is the natural recipient of disaffected voters is based on 100+ years of polling history.

Your, ahem, disagreements with the more left leaning members here are noted. Though I can't help but note that every Lbour supporter has at some point or other expressed doubts as to the direction Starmer is going. But it's not just a few disaffected Labour supporters here: there's also the 100,000 who've left the Labour Party since Starmer's election as leader. Plus of course, if Starmer's right of centre leaniings chime so well with the electorate, why isn't Labour improving in Scotland? Why, in fact does the SNP enjoy a commanding lead whilst enacting exactly those left-leaning policies you say are a vote loser?

This is the thing: you've got a very simplified view of what is actually are rather more nuanced situation. While Labour looks like they're odds on to win, it's a dangerous and ultimately hollow strategy to simply ape the Tories. That won't work in the long term: the Tories are better at it. And a large fraction of the electorate - the majority, in fact - are repelled by it. (Which, incidentally is why Blair only managed to get 35% of the vote in 2005. Had the Tories been organised, he'd have lost. Well, all right, that and Iraq.)

Worse, Starmer isn't offering hope, unlike Blair. He lacks Blairs dynamism. Blair offered change. Starmer isn't (not that Blair actually delivered on that one, but never mind). Starmer isn't offering anything different to the Tories - and any victory will be short lived. With sucjh a congenital lack of charisma, he's vulnerable to having the centre right support he's plying for defect to any Conservative leader who's mor eanimated than a fresh coat of paint He, ultimately, is a dead end.

 

[multitool]

So this isn't supposition then:

The word "could" does indicate that is, yes.

Though I can't help but note that every Lbour supporter has at some point or other expressed doubts as to the direction Starmer is going.

Errr...no. The only Labour supporters who have expressed it, are those who have expressed it. You've no way of knowing what those who haven't commented think.

But it's not just a few disaffected Labour supporters here: there's also the 100,000 who've left the Labour Party since Starmer's election as leader.

The Corbynites? Yes, and good riddance. There'll be a few Tories amongst them. After all, it only cost £1 to help shatter the Labour party for an electoral term.

Plus of course, if Starmer's right of centre leaniings chime so well with the electorate, why isn't Labour improving in Scotland?

What, like this you mean?

That is the constituency polling. The regional polling is near identical.

This is the thing: you've got a very simplified view of what is actually are rather more nuanced situation....snip

What we do know is that Jeremy Corbyn's student politics was catastrophically unpopular with the electorate. So, I'll ask you the same question that Adam refused to answer.

If wholesale nationalisation, bottomless funding for the NHS, and everything else on Adam's shopping list, would be vote winning why isn't Starmer proposing it?

Surely, if what you and Adam are saying is true it would be easy.

 

[newfhouse]

What we do know is that Jeremy Corbyn's student politics was catastrophically unpopular with the electorate

Are you sure? Was it the politics or the person that was rejected? If the latter, was that based on truth, lies, or somewhere in between?

If wholesale nationalisation, [… snip hyperbole… ] would be vote winning why isn't Starmer proposing it?

Two possibilities. First, he doesn’t believe in it; and second, he knows that those with the power to shape public opinion won’t stand for it. Both options make me sad.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Odd that were told it's the Tory voters Labour lost last time he's trying to attract,move away from the left.
Or is it the donors and not the voters ?

 

[C R]

FWIW

In Worcester Labour won one extra seat, the Tories lost seven and LD and Greens won six extra. It appears to me that Labour lost to the LD and Greens as much as they won from the cons. Make of that what you will.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Odd that were told it's the Tory voters Labour lost last time he's trying to attract,move away from the left.
Or is it the donors and not the voters ?
View attachment 3921

Can't find it now but there was an article that said the public basically want quite left wing policies*, they just don't want someone very overtly left wing implementing them. In the last election it was (rightly or wrongly) the idea of Corbyn implementing his policies that didn't go down well. Plus Brexit debacle. If the Tories offered to nationalise everything in that graph and stop any further privatisation of the NHS they wouldn't lose many votes.

* not really left wing, just regarded as it nowadays.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Can't find it now but there was an article that said the public basically want quite left wing policies*, they just don't want someone very overtly left wing implementing them. In the last election it was (rightly or wrongly) the idea of Corbyn implementing his policies that didn't go down well. Plus Brexit debacle. If the Tories offered to nationalise everything in that graph and stop any further privatisation of the NHS they wouldn't lose many votes.

* not really left wing, just regarded as it nowadays.

Nobody could accuse Starmer of being left wing so you'd have thought it would be popular ?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Can't find it now but there was an article that said the public basically want quite left wing policies*, they just don't want someone very overtly left wing implementing them. In the last election it was (rightly or wrongly) the idea of Corbyn implementing his policies that didn't go down well. Plus Brexit debacle. If the Tories offered to nationalise everything in that graph and stop any further privatisation of the NHS they wouldn't lose many votes.

* not really left wing, just regarded as it nowadays.

The local Labour Party in early 2019 were biting lumps out of each other as to whether the election defeat was down to (a) Socialist policies frightening the horses, (b) Corbyn or (c) Brexit. Loads of people just didn't seem to grasp it was a bit of each.

 

[Wobblers]

The word "could" does indicate that is, yes.



Errr...no. The only Labour supporters who have expressed it, are those who have expressed it. You've no way of knowing what those who haven't commented think.



The Corbynites? Yes, and good riddance. There'll be a few Tories amongst them. After all, it only cost £1 to help shatter the Labour party for an electoral term.



What, like this you mean?

View attachment 3920

That is the constituency polling. The regional polling is near identical.



What we do know is that Jeremy Corbyn's student politics was catastrophically unpopular with the electorate. So, I'll ask you the same question that Adam refused to answer.

If wholesale nationalisation, bottomless funding for the NHS, and everything else on Adam's shopping list, would be vote winning why isn't Starmer proposing it?

Surely, if what you and Adam are saying is true it would be easy.

It's Boldon Lad level disingenuity to complain about supposition (execpt I backed it up with evidence) whilst serving up your own suppositions.. Incidentally, the suggestion that people who'd nturally vote for the very much left leaning Greens would vote for Starmer on the strength of his right of centre policies is just daft.

Support for the SNP has actually been quite consistent, allowing for noise - right up to spring this year. That coincides rather well with their funding scandal breaking out. The rise in Labour support closely mirrors the fall in Conservative support. Remember what I said about the historical precedent of Labour being the natural beneficiary of disaffectted Tories?

And why are you still banging on about Corbyn? I've not mentioned Corbyn, because he just isn't relevant any more. Dismissing those 100,000 ex Labour members are Corbynites is shallow. The usual rule of thumb is that the number of diaffected voters in the electorate is ten times greater - and that's an awful large number to dismiss. Losing all those votes sis a high risk strategy: especially when you consider that there's a good chance they'll be gone for good.

Fundamentally, it's not enough for Starmer to style himself as a more competent version of the Tories. He hasn't the charisma to pull that off. Support from jaded Conservative supporters won't last long with that strategy. He needs to be different, with distinct policies to the Tories, and appealing. Blair, for all his faults, understood that. Oh... and because I just know that some tediously tendentious comparison between my saying distinct policies and Corbyn is rushing to your keyboard this very instant, well no, it really isn't. There are plenty of policies, all it takes is some imagination. I just wish that Starmer had some.

 

[multitool]

It's Boldon Lad level disingenuity to complain about supposition (execpt I backed it up with evidence) whilst serving up your own suppositions.. Incidentally, the suggestion that people who'd nturally vote for the very much left leaning Greens would vote for Starmer on the strength of his right of centre policies is just daft.

Support for the SNP has actually been quite consistent, allowing for noise - right up to spring this year. That coincides rather well with their funding scandal breaking out. The rise in Labour support closely mirrors the fall in Conservative support. Remember what I said about the historical precedent of Labour being the natural beneficiary of disaffectted Tories?

And why are you still banging on about Corbyn? I've not mentioned Corbyn, because he just isn't relevant any more. Dismissing those 100,000 ex Labour members are Corbynites is shallow. The usual rule of thumb is that the number of diaffected voters in the electorate is ten times greater - and that's an awful large number to dismiss. Losing all those votes sis a high risk strategy: especially when you consider that there's a good chance they'll be gone for good.

Fundamentally, it's not enough for Starmer to style himself as a more competent version of the Tories. He hasn't the charisma to pull that off. Support from jaded Conservative supporters won't last long with that strategy. He needs to be different, with distinct policies to the Tories, and appealing. Blair, for all his faults, understood that. Oh... and because I just know that some tediously tendentious comparison between my saying distinct policies and Corbyn is rushing to your keyboard this very instant, well no, it really isn't. There are plenty of policies, all it takes is some imagination. I just wish that Starmer had some.