The Political Thread

[Professor Bear]

I get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.  If they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."
As for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.

[Theblazeuk]

Yep, alas.

[CalHab]

Labour's attitude towards the SNP has played a large part in their catastrophic showing in recent Scottish elections. In the first minority SNP Scottish government there was the bizarre sight of Labour blocking minimum pricing for alchohol, which was supported by the leadership of the UK Labour party, simply because it was an SNP motion. It was no surprise that the electorate thought they were a bunch of dullards who put party over country and gave them a severe kicking at the ballot box.

And now the UK Labour party is refusing to make pragmatic deals with smaller parties. They haven't learned any lessons over the past few years.

[Theblazeuk]

It's all a bit infantile. Yes there'd be bad PR and press. But you get that anyway unless your Tony Blair, and even then you only got 1 small portion of the press to change it's slander for a scant moment or two. So a strange hill to insist on iceskating up forever.

It's the sheer hostility within the party to even acknowledge the shared ground they have with other parties that really fucks things over. And its not just Labour, the Lib Dems do it too. Just... work together. In some kind of say, parliament. Where different viewpoints might be represented and decisions made by reasoned consensus rather than simple volume.

[CalHab]

I get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.  If they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."
As for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.

The Tory press will crucify Labour no matter what. They are currently lauding policies that they screamed about when they came from "Red Ed".

If Labour really wanted to work with others then they could make a reasonable case that a centre-left coalition is actually the "strong and stable" choice. They don't, because they're too used to the winner-takes-all of Westminster.

[IndigoPrime]

I get that you like the Greens, but you'd have to have an astronomical faith in the number of protest votes they'll be creaming off the main parties to think that Labour would benefit more from a formal alliance than it would cost them in PR.

Through standing down in one seat?

If they did do such a thing, the Tory press would crucify them through the "Coalition Of Chaos" narrative alone, never mind the mileage they'd get from "loony Greens are the only party that will give desperate Labour the time of day" and/or "so much for the great coalition."

Already happening, so why make matters worse? And why isn't Labour fighting back every single second with the Tories effectively now being a coalition of bastards with UKIP (who are standing down in hundreds of seats to assist the Tories, which is apparently OK)?

As for Lib/Lab, that will simply never happen - Tim Farron has seen to that several times over.

Absolutely won't now, but it could have done had Labour's stance on Brexit not been maddeningly stupid.

And now the UK Labour party is refusing to make pragmatic deals with smaller parties. They haven't learned any lessons over the past few years.

That's it exactly. This all goes back to Blair, really. He wins and immediately reneges on the deals promised to the Lib Dems, because they're no longer needed. Two elections later and Labour's on shakier ground, yet refuses to implement the recommendations of the Jenkins report (which would have led to AV+), nor consider some kind of pact with the Lib Dems. The reasoning? Labour can win alone. Only it couldn't. Then the numbers simply weren't there for Lab/Lib in 2010, but more tellingly according to those there at the time (from both sides), neither was the interest. In 2015, we see the same mistake again, with arrogance leading to SNP dominance in Scotland. And in 2017, Labour will be lucky to get anywhere near 200 seats, even though people are already chalking that up as some kind of win. (It isn't: over half the MPs for Labour alone or possibly as a Labour-led coalition is the only victory. But then Corbyn seems very at home as a half-arsed protestor. How I wish Cooper was leading the fight now.)

Also, as Theblazeuk said, the Lib Dems are doing this too. In 2015, they threw their toys out of the pram whenever the SNP entered the equation, perhaps due to their manifestos being almost the same, which Farrron almost admitted to recently. Yet they can't get over the SNP wanting independence for Scotland, despite the SNP having stated it would accept federalism, which has long been Lib Dem policy. It's insane. There are compromise positions acceptable to all these parties just begging for the taking, but tribalism and pride stops them doing so. The end result: another five years, minimum, of harsh Tory rule, which will reshape this country possibly irrevocably.

[IndigoPrime]

If Labour really wanted to work with others then they could make a reasonable case that a centre-left coalition is actually the "strong and stable" choice. They don't, because they're too used to the winner-takes-all of Westminster.

Quite. Compromise, coalition, consensus. These are all somehow dirty words in British politics. Instead, we have a PM intent on reshaping Britain in her own image, and woe betide anyone who dares think differently. Still, I'm sure we'll all have fun with our British firewall, ruined economy, and fox hunts.

[Old Tankie]

With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.

[CalHab]

Minority governments and coalitions are great things for fending off extreme and ill-thought policies. I really don't understand Labour's position here.

[Professor Bear]

Well if nothing else we can agree tribalism is a problem.

[IndigoPrime]

With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.

On what basis? Perhaps if we had a representative electoral system, I'd be happier. But we may have two parties totally wiped out, one hit hard, and one getting a colossal majority despite not getting the majority of the votes. More to the point, the Conservative manifesto is regressive in almost every possible sense, such as the way in which they want to clamp down on internet freedoms, refusing to rule out VAT shooting up, and even removing references to ivory trade. Apparently, Conservatives hate elephants as much as foxes, for some reason. (Or, more likely: the few dozen insanely rich white men who control the Conservatives like going abroad and shooting elephants in the face because it makes them feel big about themselves.) 

[TordelBack]

With all the Brexit remorse around, I thought you would be well up for the election.

This being an election specifically timed to forestall the election that would have taken place after/during the Brexit negotiations, when the real horror of what has been done should be apparent to even the cosiest xenophobe, and deliberately to trade on the fear and uncertainty that the prospect of Brexit has created. 'Strong and stable; strong and stable; awk! awk!'. 

I don't think anyone would welcome it, except those who had calculatedly put it in motion.

Anyway, I'm not in a position to talk: our ruling party's leadership contest is starting to look like a Hitler Youth talent show, albeit the branch that didn't get the memo about gays.

[Professor Bear]

Why would Remoaners welcome a General Election when it won't affect Brexit either way?
We are fucked and that is unavoidable no matter who's in charge on June 9.

[Goaty]

I am, as my birthday on 9th June.

[Theblazeuk]

You can only have remorse for things you had responsibility for...