Why Labour lost

julieq

The only logical conclusion you can draw from the poll findings is that democracy is a dangerous game, because we're relying on people who don't understand that you can't extend a deficit year on year without they themselves having to pay for it one way or another to choose the Government. Most people in this country are more exercised by Jedward and Susan Boyle than they are in understanding the political process.

That wasn't helped by the shamelessly populist ideas freely promoted by the Labour Party that taxing big business and the rich and bankers bonuses would somehow mean those less well off would escape the consequences. Or indeed that the problem was "bankers" rather than overspending. That was fundamentally dishonest. But they do understand the gallery they're playing to, and they're pressing the right buttons now, when perhaps a little humility would be in order so we can get the whole mess sorted out without class war.

As far as immigration goes, it's really not as easy for non-EU citizens to come here. We're seeing a scaling back of the highly skilled workers programme which means that even for those people whose skills we lack and who are willing to run the gauntlet of populist abuse and silly tests (an English test for heaven's sake, many of these people qualified here at great expense and have better English than the nutjobs baying for immigration controls!) to come here, it's very difficult to do.

Most immigration is transitory and from the EU anyway, and those who moan about it might consider that it's a two way street and they're free to leave family and friends, learn another language and go to where the grass is greener themselves. Meanwhile, given we have an aging population, there is the thought that importing a young motivated workforce that makes our economy more competitive might just make us more prosperous.

StevieJ

I think the LibDems would command more respect in the coalition if they acknowledged they were ruling as part of a compromise. When we move from 'Tory tax bombshell, you'd pay £389 more' to full on support and justification a couple of weeks later it makes them look like a joke. Clegg should have simply conceded the VAT hikes were merely ground conceded in the negotiations.

StevieJ

flyingscotno1 wrote: »

If they get an AV or PR through Parliament it will, even given 2 poor election results actually be worth it for them IMV.

I think most will vote against just to spite the LibDems.

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

I still don't buy Brown as having been new Labour but I have been wrong before.

Neither do I, more like fly in the ointment

StevieJ

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

Labour lost because The Sun newspaper wanted them to lose. People are brainwashed into thinking what The Sun wants them to think.

Gordon Brown had a tough time. The global economic meltdown was a disaster not of his making but the country could have been better prepared for the problems. I don't think any party would have prepared us regardless of what they might say with the benfit of hindsight. I believe that Gordon Brown's leadership steered the World away from far more serious consequences of the credit crunch.

Others are welcome to disagree. I'm happy with any Government.

GG

The Sun newspaper were Labour's biggest friend, remember the letter/soldier story :eek:

Backlash against the Sun over its shameful coverage of Brown's letter


"Give Brown a break"... "Whilst I have every sympathy with Mrs Janes for the loss of her son, personally I would have been more touched that Mr Brown took the time to personally write to her to offer his condolences"... "I hate to say this, BUT, well done Mr Brown for at least writting a letter, right spelling or not"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/nov/11/sun-gordon-brown

Spartacus_Mills

StevieJ wrote: »

I think the LibDems would command more respect in the coalition if they acknowledged they were ruling as part of a compromise. When we move from 'Tory tax bombshell, you'd pay £389 more' to full on support and justification a couple of weeks later it makes them look like a joke. Clegg should have simply conceded the VAT hikes were merely ground conceded in the negotiations.

Whenever this is brought up the Lib Dems do acknowledge it as part of a compromise. The problem is one of getting the media to acknowledge this. Same with the immediate cuts. We went into negotiations with Labour demanding they accept the need for immediate cuts just after the election.

We also point out that we refused to rule out raising VAT when asked directly.

Spartacus_Mills

StevieJ wrote: »

The Sun newspaper were Labour's biggest friend, remember the letter/soldier story :eek:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/nov/11/sun-gordon-brown

The Sun's treatment of Brown, a parent who had lost a child himself and was concerned enough to write to Mrs Janes personally, over this was shameful and it cannot be a coincidence that around this time his ratings and that of labour started to improve.

StevieJ

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Whenever this is brought up the Lib Dems do acknowledge it as part of a compromise. The problem is one of getting the media to acknowledge this. Same with the immediate cuts. We went into negotiations with Labour demanding they accept the need for immediate cuts just after the election.

We also point out that we refused to rule out raising VAT when asked directly.

People can make their own minds up.

We can all be a bit forgetful but Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg seems to be taking amnesia to new extremes. Speaking on Radio 4's Today programme, Clegg told presenter John Humphries that the Lib Dems had never completely ruled out VAT increases in their pre-Election campaign.

Humphries rightly laughed out loud at this pathetic attempt to rewrite history. He reminded Clegg of the Lib Dem's 'Tory VAT bombshell poster' but the Lib Dem leader just ploughed on, talking about difficult choices and the mess that Labour had left behind.

It is a bit like a man who has proposed marriage on holiday after a few too many glasses of Ouzo and next day tries to explain there has been some sort of misinterpretation of the words 'will you marry me

http://www.dailyfinance.co.uk/2010/06/24/clegg-what-vat-bombshell/

We also point out that we refused to rule out raising VAT when asked directly.

True, but even that was embarrassing, watching him squirm in front of Paxman, having said that I am not sure how that squares up with the poster.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8616726.stm

Wookster

marklv wrote: »

Drunk and arrogant on power? And the Conservatives under Thatcher weren't? Hmmmmm. I don't think so. Politics is about power and being able to wield it.

You are wrong.

Politics is about serving. Don't see much of that in Labour.

A._Badger

Wookster wrote: »

You are wrong.

Politics is about serving. Don't see much of that in Labour.

They certainly served themselves pretty well. Bliar, alone, is setting some sort of record for services to the gravy train.