Registered On: September 7, 2015
Received this from Team Momentum:
“In 2019, Corbyn’s Labour won the seat with 42.7% of the vote. Today we won with 35%. That is a worrying trend. We can’t pretend that this was a general election winning performance. If our vote share declined by the amount it did last night in a GE we would be reduced to a rump party”.
It wasn’t a general election and Corbyn has already lost two. In my opinion, Starmer needs to reach an agreement with the Libs, the greens and the SNP to fight the next election on a not Tory platform.
Might be centrist, but there is still room for a shift in policies. Anything but more of this corrupt and lying Government.
It’s more centrist, but still containing a lot of left wing pledges. Too early to say whether these will be abandoned. They are more moderate than before in approach, but that is to be welcomed. The public don’t want Labour to be a party of activist politics and don’t trust those who want that. It’s seen as too extreme and some of the views of the more activist types are stubborn and undesirable. Nor would they work in the real world where compromise is needed.
This doesn’t mean more moderate Labour is a winner. Ed Miliband failed and Starmer has struggled. However, it is more of what’s needed. Labour’s winners have all been more grounded and willing to compromise. Attlee allied with the Tories, for instance in WWII. Those who didn’t want to sell their principles, like George Lansbury, would never have done that. Sort of how Corbyn refused to work with others in the pro-EU camp of the referendum. There’s more merit in a more reasonable approach where compromise with other parties is possible.
I would prefer centrist Labour in, because they have shown they can win elections. Blair may not be ideologically pure enough for some, but his policies were a shift for the good and something Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott, Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner and others couldn’t achieve, because they wouldn’t win the public’s trust to form a government.