UK Local Elections 2021

[09philj]

Honestly, the only way I see Labour getting anywhere now is supporting proportional representation, and I'm not sure they'll get my vote in a GE if they don't. At least if PR was an option it wouldn't be so bad if the left and right of the party split.

Getting electoral reform passed so the party can split up (and finally free the Co-operative party from their Faustian pact with Labour) is very much in Labour's best interests but that would require both sides conceding that the other side has legitimacy.

 

[Mister Mumbler]

You know what they say about rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.

Throw everything overboard and see what floats?

 

[Agema]

Getting electoral reform passed so the party can split up (and finally free the Co-operative party from their Faustian pact with Labour) is very much in Labour's best interests but that would require both sides conceding that the other side has legitimacy.

Pretty much.

Labour feels like it is borderline unelectable, and it's unelectable in a large part because it exists of broadly two camps full of mutual hate who think the other is unelectable. The funny thing is that both of them are right: neither is electable... except in compromise and unity with each other. And so the party will remain unelectable as these two camps set on a campaign of annihilation against each other, with the possible exception of whether the Tories manage to screw up so badly that Labour squeak through by accident.

 

[Silvanus]

Keir Starmer’s Labour shadow cabinet reshuffle: the winners and losers

Labour leader brings new blood into top roles after poor election results on Thursday

www.theguardian.com

OK, so we've had our reshuffle. As (some) expected, Rayner has been promoted, taking on the Duchy of Lancaster & shadow minister for "the future of work". Frontbench positions with greater visibility. I'm happy she's still around & will be more front-and-centre.

Anneliese Dodds has been removed from shadow chancellor, & given party chair & the role of running the policy review. Bit sad at her demotion... but I suppose I can see the logic: she's good on policy, but not a terribly effective communicator, so running the policy review makes sense.

Then we come to her replacement as shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves. A terrible move in my opinion; she's been dismissive and callous towards the unemployed and those on benefits, and I'd encourage anyone following along to look up her record. This is going to be a deeply divisive appointment.

But even putting the appointments aside, the management/ communications of Labour's response to the local elections has been abysmal. Where's that touted competence? Get it to-fucking-gether.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Keir Starmer’s Labour shadow cabinet reshuffle: the winners and losers

Labour leader brings new blood into top roles after poor election results on Thursday

www.theguardian.com

"Shadow cabinet"? What are they in charge of, stopping Harry Potter? Brits do government weird.

 

[09philj]

"Shadow cabinet"? What are they in charge of, stopping Harry Potter? Brits do government weird.

Yeah, right, so, the party with the most MPs in the House of Commons is officially designated Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition, who get an entitlement to so many days set aside for them to lead business in the Commons and ask a certain number of questions of the Prime Minister during the Wednesday Prime Minister's Questions session. They also traditionally appoint a Shadow Cabinet, which is composed of MPs who would be in their cabinet if they won an election, each with a remit to challenge the policy of their counterpart in the government and present alternative policy of their own.

 

[CM156]

UKIP
This is the end of UKIP as a meaningful force in British politics. Well, they were already dead but now they've stopped twitching. The right wing populist party has lost 43 48 seats so far and not retained a single one. The Conservatives are now the party of populism, and there is no space for competitors. Also their candidate for London Mayor finished behind Count Binface, a man wearing a dustbin on his head and cricket pads on his shins.

Reform UK
What was meant to be a successor to UKIP has only managed to gain two council seats. Like UKIP, there is no place for them in the current political landscape.

What does this mean for the future of the UK in relation to the EU?

 

[Thaluikhain]

"Shadow cabinet"? What are they in charge of, stopping Harry Potter? Brits do government weird.

Shadow cabinet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's a feature of quite a number of countries' politics.

 

[Silvanus]

What does this mean for the future of the UK in relation to the EU?

Not much in practical terms. They haven't had any MPs since 2017, and they never had more than 2.

They've exerted an outsize impact on political discussion in the past because they've been very loud, and the press would endlessly humour them. But the Conservative Party have long since absorbed their voteshare and their talking points. So the "EU bad rar" narrative lives on, housed in a different party and given a mainstream veneer.

 

[laggyteabag]

UK politics makes me sad.

Im a big lefty liberal, and Jeremy Corbyn was my guy. I was more than happy to vote for Labour twice under his leadership, and I was devastated to see how poorly the 2019 general election went for him, and his subsequent resignation.

I completely understand why Labour lost, but it was still very sad to see a party who championed a lot of my values, get shot down so unceremoniously.

Labour under Keir Starmer was supposed to be Labour's shot back into public acceptance, but at this point, I don't see that happening. My current mindset is so long as Starmer is the leader of the Labour party, another Tory victory is assured. This was Starmer's first test, and so far, Im being proven right.

In Prime Minister's Questions, Stamer does an excellent job at making Boris look like a completely incompetent idiot - I will happily admit that - but he completely fails at every other aspect.

He is just a massive question mark of a person. He completely fails to inspire anyone, and his only aspiration, so far as I can tell, is that he wants to become the new Prime Minister. He is like a dog, chasing a car. He wants it, but if he catches it, im really not too sure that he will know what to do with it.

With Corbyn, I knew exactly what Labour wanted, exactly what they stood for, and exactly how they would achieve it. With Starmer, all I really know about the Labour party these days, is that they don't like the Tories.

That is a fair stance, and im sure a lot of people agree with them, but the people who already don't like the Tories, are already not voting for the Tories. What does that stance say, to tempt people who are undecided?

If one party is being very clear about what it wants, and the other is just playing the objection game - I don't really blame anyone for voting blue, here.

Labour deserved this defeat, but I don't really see where they can go from here, without a change in leadership. My Twitter is basically a lefty echo-chamber, and not a single person I know or follow shows any love for Starmer. When your own base doesn't like you - you are probably not the right person to be representing the party.

As someone who lives in a constituency where it is very much Labour vs Tories - I just feel politically homeless.

 

[Burnhardt]

As someone who lives in a constituency where it is very much Labour vs Tories - I just feel politically homeless.

I felt this way about the Mayoral election, as I live in a combined authority. As all the candidates only cared about the biggest city within it, where I do not live, I just cast a blank ballot.

 

[Agema]

As someone who lives in a constituency where it is very much Labour vs Tories - I just feel politically homeless.

I think a fundamental problem the Labour Party has is that it has no idea how to win an election. It tried a sort of gentle left in 2015 and lost, and it tried a much more radical leftism in 2017 and 2019 and lost. So what does it do?

Probably Labour's biggest strength is its support amongst the young. But the young perpetually vote at relatively low levels: 50% of under-35s vote compared to 80% of over-65s. Labour's other traditional strongest support area, the lower end of the working classes, also have modest turnout below the national average. They won't win an election. Never mind that I think there's plenty of evidence they - and a lot of the middle classes also required - are not impressed by the more youth-friendly Corbyn-Momentum angle.

The immediate problem Labour has is that outside the Momentum faithful, Corbyn absolutely wrecked Labour's reputation. I've heard all the excuses, and the bottom line is none of them are worth shit. The press need to be managed to mitigate the damage from their right-wing bias and the reputation of the leader needs to be properly curated. It beggars belief that the Labour leadership could sit there watching their leader's approval rating collapse and sit around idle as if it wasn't a problem. Because it's not just the leader: if you have someone whose reputation is completely trashed, people will also wonder what the hell is wrong with the party for putting him there.

In that sense, Starmer's immediate ambition is to steady the ship.

 

[Seanchaidh]

In that sense, Starmer's immediate ambition is to steady the ship.

Is he going to fling himself from the Cliffs of Dover?

 

[Silvanus]

Probably Labour's biggest strength is its support amongst the young. But the young perpetually vote at relatively low levels: 50% of under-35s vote compared to 80% of over-65s. Labour's other traditional strongest support area, the lower end of the working classes, also have modest turnout below the national average. They won't win an election. Never mind that I think there's plenty of evidence they - and a lot of the middle classes also required - are not impressed by the more youth-friendly Corbyn-Momentum angle.

Come an election, Labour would see more immediate returns by focusing on raising the turnout among its existing support bases, rather than attempting to position themselves to attract different (currently Tory-voting) sectors of society. The latter ends up alienating the base and depressing turnout, and only sees very modest returns anyway.

That's why 2017 was an effective campaign for them; that's why the result confounded the polls in the months leading up to it. Polls rely on making assumptions about turnout trends continuing, but they didn't: they rose and Labour outperformed expectations.

Combine 2017's ground game with competent media management, and victory in 2017 was feasible.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Come an election, Labour would see more immediate returns by focusing on raising the turnout among its existing support bases, rather than attempting to position themselves to attract different (currently Tory-voting) sectors of society. The latter ends up alienating the base and depressing turnout, and only sees very modest returns anyway.

Change the names and that applies to any number of elections.

 

[Silvanus]

Change the names and that applies to any number of elections.

Sure. But there are a few differences;

1) If a party focuses on raising turnout among those who already have relatively high turnout (such as the Tories do with over-60s) then they get diminishing returns for their efforts.

2) Labour has a case study in 2017 to show this is enough to drastically outperform expectations (though not enough to win an election on its own).

 

[Hades]

I see Labour's defeat as a sign that culture wars are incredibly rewarding for the right and that the working class are easily duped into voting against their interest when presented with nonsense about rotten fish being happy because at least now they're British fish. The Torries employed Brexit as a weapon in the culture war and many regions that used to vote Labour gladly traded in policies that might have helped them to partake in this culture war.

 

[Baffle]

In that sense, Starmer's immediate ambition is to steady the ship.

I don't think Starmer will even reach the next GE. The left don't like or trust him, the press are already turning on him, and he appears to hate his job. And he's from London, so it's easy for the rest of us to believe he's part of the liberal elite everyone hates so much.

 

[Agema]

Come an election, Labour would see more immediate returns by focusing on raising the turnout among its existing support bases, rather than attempting to position themselves to attract different (currently Tory-voting) sectors of society. The latter ends up alienating the base and depressing turnout, and only sees very modest returns anyway.

That's why 2017 was an effective campaign for them; that's why the result confounded the polls in the months leading up to it. Polls rely on making assumptions about turnout trends continuing, but they didn't: they rose and Labour outperformed expectations.

2017 was an unexpectedly good peformance for three reasons. Firstly, the fact that Jeremy Corbyn had been hiding under a rock as leader as he was thoroughly traduced, and this finally allowed him to get some camera time and turn out to be not as bad as he'd been portrayed. Secondly, the worst Conservative general election campaign since 1945. Thirdly, that the election was in part a continuation of the Brexit disagreement, where Remainers heavily threw their lot in with Labour (as Brexiters jumped ship to the Tories).

In the excitement of Corbynmania, the turnout for under-35s went from around 48-52%. Given the proportion of the population they represent, that equates to about an extra 1% to Labour's vote share. Labour needs turnout in this age range to be vastly higher, and there is no guarantee it ever will be: youth turnout has pretty much always been substantially lower than the national average.

The Labour base will not win an election. Never has, never will. This is not the USA, where two monolithic parties split the country pretty much 50:50. Labour and Tories alike rely on bases which are a much smaller percentage of the electorate with a much higher percentage of voters willing to switch party allegiance.

I don't think Starmer will even reach the next GE. The left don't like or trust him, the press are already turning on him, and he appears to hate his job. And he's from London, so it's easy for the rest of us to believe he's part of the liberal elite everyone hates so much.

Yep. Which just goes to show that even when the working class make it to the top, we instantly shit all over them.

Corbyn though, grew up in a country pile and independent school educated, faffed around for years as a dilettante without needing to get a proper job, he's totally not the liberal elite for some reason.

 

[Baffle]

Yep. Which just goes to show that even when the working class make it to the top, we instantly shit all over them.

Corbyn though, grew up in a country pile and independent school educated, faffed around for years as a dilettante without needing to get a proper job, he's totally not the liberal elite for some reason.

I mean, Corbyn absolutely was made out to be part of the liberal elite ('Have you seen how much his house is worth?!'), but there's no denying the difference in their roots.

The liberal elite charge is going to be chucked at anyone from London, just the way us vs them works now. Maybe some people in the red wall would like to see people who sound like them getting somewhere in politics. I recall people liking Prescott.