Why Labour lost

marklv

I found this interesting analysis: http://today.yougov.co.uk/commentaries/guest/loss-and-leaders

Only 29% of the general public believed that excessive public spending was an issue causing Labour's defeat - a fair amount, but not remotely close to the huge number of arch-Tories on this board who are constantly obsessed with it. While the recession was mentioned by 43% and Gordon Brown himself by 43% as well, it was immigration, at 52%, that worried people the most about Labour. Interesting.

bendix

Don't understand what your point is. What people think caused the election result is hardly important, particularly given all major parties - including Labour - acknowledged the need for massive public sector spending cuts.

As for your comments about immigration - well, your position on that is well known. Whites ok. Blacks and Asians, not. Lest you try to wriggle out of it, let's remind people of your thoughts on immigation from another thread. And I quote:

"You miss the point completely. I'm not saying immigrants are all awful people etc. Far from it, very far from it. But I don't see how mass immigration can help a country; it pushes wages down by increasing availability of labour and causes serious cultural and racial divisions when there were none before. What is the good of all this? Don't we have enough problems as it is in our country? (By the way Poles and other EU immigrants are not included in my definition of immigrants. I refer to outside EU immigration, other than perhaps Gypsies)."

Lovely inclusion of gypsies at the end - that was a classic. Poles and other EU immigrants are not, in your view, immigrants. Presumably because they are white. 'Outside EU immigrants' and - wait for it - Gypsies, are.

You couldnt make it up.

new_home_owner_3

labour lost because they was sh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!t

Graham_Devon

5% of the labour party members thought high spending was an issue. 29% of the public did.

One of the reasons they lost is due to this inability to listen to the public. Well, without calling them biggots of course.

tomterm8

To be honest, I don't find it hard to understand why Labour lost. After all, they were a terrible failure in government.

I do find hard to understand was why they didn't lose badly enough that there was a Tory majority government with a large majority. After all, they (Labour) had an election result on a par with Michael Foot.

chucky

Labour lost because of Gordon Brown and because the people of the country felt that they needed a change of government.

having a change of government doesn't mean the new people in charge are going to better though...

StevieJ

bendix wrote: »

Lovely inclusion of gypsies at the end - that was a classic. Poles and other EU immigrants are not, in your view, immigrants. Presumably because they are white. 'Outside EU immigrants' and - wait for it - Gypsies, are.

You couldnt make it up.

I believe Gypsies originate from India, at least he is consistent :eek:

kabayiri

It's just as plausible that the government in power lost, whatever their political colour.

Just as a captain of a ship will often be blamed for incidents affecting his/her ship, the incumbent government will be blamed for events happening on their watch. And there were quite a few, let's be honest, from the banking crisis through to expenses through to peaking oil prices.

StevieJ

tomterm8 wrote: »

To be honest, I don't find it hard to understand why Labour lost. After all, they were a terrible failure in government.

I do find hard to understand was why they didn't lose badly enough that there was a Tory majority government with a large majority. After all, they (Labour) had an election result on a par with Michael Foot.

Easy! not many wanted the Tories

dunstonh

Labour did what Labour always do. Spend until the money has gone and then borrow it and borrow too much. You then need a Conservative Govt to sort out the mess. However, if the Conservatives stay in too long they will cut things too much and Labour will be voted back in to start spending again. And so the cycle begins again.

Thrugelmir

marklv wrote: »

Only 29% of the general public believed that excessive public spending was an issue causing Labour's defeat - a fair amount,

If you said to the general public that the budget deficit (£165 billion) is equivalent to around £5,689 per taxpayer in this country. Maybe their reaction would be different.

As £5,689 is £474 per month, or £109 per week or £15.58p per day.

Looks different doesn't in laymans terms. As I've said before politicians talk in billions as it mists the conversation.

How many households could cut their expenditure by these amounts?

I had a Labour guy on my doorstep a few weeks back. I made this same set of comments to him (very politely). Treating the public like mugs will backfire big time on Labour. As the dawn of realisation becomes fact.