Could another political party evolve?

triathlon

I will elaborate just a little more.
I am not totally unaware of many of the problems there are in the UK, and more so the poor working class areas Labour once run. So why have these communities turned their back on Labour and run to the hated Tories, why has Brexit and immigration got to them so much that they are willing to join the enemy.

I think Boris was wise to admit that he had been "loaned" their vote, he knew full well that those voters hated that over PC lefty liberal communist Labour party more than they hated the Tories, and to me that leaves the door open for manipulation, a party to come along and give those people what they really want, and it's not Boris or a Tony Bliar clone

kinger101

triathlon wrote: »

PC lefty liberal communist Labour party

The Labour Party is certainly not PC or liberal. It's not particularly communist either.

With FPTP the most direct way into government is by being one of the main two political parties. It's about fighting for control of one of those political parties, as Momentum/Unite did with Labour and ERG did to an extent with the Tories.

Zero_Sum

I think what Labour have seem to have forgotten is that most of the working class are socially conservative. The Labour party have been hijacked by the sneering London middle classes that is momentum. It will be interesting to see if lessons really have been learned from who they pick as their next leader. I suspect they'll end up with another Corbynite & then get hammered in the up coming locals. The fact that Thornberry is even putting her self forward shows the sheer lack of self awareness.

Maybe be best if Labour split in 2 with London Labour then merging with the Greens or something.

triathlon

Zero_Sum wrote: »

I think what Labour have seem to have forgotten is that most of the working class are socially conservative. The Labour party have been hijacked by the sneering London middle classes that is momentum. It will be interesting to see if lessons really have been learned from who they pick as their next leader. I suspect they'll end up with another Corbynite & then get hammered in the up coming locals. The fact that Thornberry is even putting her self forward shows the sheer lack of self awareness.

Maybe be best if Labour split in 2 with London Labour then merging with the Greens or something.

There is no easy way of saying this so I am just going to say it and accept the repercussions .. I know the old Labour Yorkshire mining communities really well from way back to the 1980's and can tell you that many of them if not racists are massively anti immigration, most do not come anywhere near the ideals of the London model of what the present Labour party represents.

Those Yorkshire and North East communities are more Geoff Boycott than Eddie Izzard and nothing in their DNA closely resembled Corbyn, Jess philips or Abbott. Watch one of the old David Bleasdale classics and you won;t go far wrong in their outlook, people often forget that many of them had/have a very right wing side to them

Moe_The_Bartender

Arklight wrote: »

For the time being, England has the government it voted for, and deserves.

For once, I agree with you - but not in the way you think.

kinger101

triathlon wrote: »

I know the old Labour Yorkshire mining communities really well from way back to the 1980's and can tell you that many of them if not racists are massively anti immigration

Why judge a community by their attitudes and beliefs over three decades ago? Particularly when the attitudes and demographics have changed?

Would it have been reasonable to assume Germans were pro-Nazi in 1975?

kinger101

MaxiRobriguez wrote: »

I think the bigger story over the next few years will be what comes of the Liberal Democrats. They essentially had one policy this election which was soundly defeated, and many of their supporters would fit in with a Labour party that moves to a more centrist economic approach whilst retaining some of the more liberal social policies.

Oddly, the converse of this has been historically true.

The Lib Dems did best in the 2005 and 2010 general elections. In 2005, Labour were in the centre, and 2010 both Labour and Conservative.

I'm not so convinced Lib Dems will take Labour votes anymore. While it was pretty obvious to loyal Lib Dem voters that their only form of government is coalition, it seemed there were many ex-Labour voters in 2010 who were too stupid to realize that this would include a coalition with the Tories.

At the same time, Labour is not necessarily a good home for Lib Dem voters. I ruled Labour out in 2010 simply on the grounds of ID cards - the antithesis of libererism.

The Lib Dems problem IMO stems from the fact they've not had a good leader since Kennedy, and they need to stop campaigning as if they can win a general election. Historically, they've done in small regions of the UK - Scotland and the South West.

Crashy_Time

Arklight wrote: »

It has nothing to do with availability of credit. I know thats the HPC scapegoat for everything but in real life most people don't live like kings on credit cards dancing between scores of gullible lenders who somehow never require paying.

Working class means people who work, usually in unskilled or semi skilled professions, for average or lowish wages. This applies to as many people as ever, but Brits appear to not want to identify with the reality of their situations and prefer to vote for privileged Eton billionaires in the hope some of it might rub off. To give them something to do while they wait years for a routine medical procedure, presumably.

So credit availability to the masses is the same as it ever was, and the availability of credit hasn`t changed how the masses live spend and travel at all in your world view?

Crashy_Time

Arklight wrote: »

It has nothing to do with availability of credit. I know thats the HPC scapegoat for everything but in real life most people don't live like kings on credit cards dancing between scores of gullible lenders who somehow never require paying.

Working class means people who work, usually in unskilled or semi skilled professions, for average or lowish wages. This applies to as many people as ever, but Brits appear to not want to identify with the reality of their situations and prefer to vote for privileged Eton billionaires in the hope some of it might rub off. To give them something to do while they wait years for a routine medical procedure, presumably.

So the turn of the 20th Century guys just needed the right financial advice (where to borrow) to get out of those rags?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6085521

AnotherJoe

triathlon wrote: »

What is it with you people, just try reading a little harder before going into a rant please

What is it with posters that can't answer simple questions ? Such as (to reiterate)
Why do you want a party that is only for men ?
What would you define as hard working" ? Is that physical work only ?
How would a political party support people who are hard working? How would they know who is hard working and who is a slacker? You don't wanta party that supports slackers I presume?
If you find those questions challenging perhaps that exposes the flaw in your position?