"we'll change the things that need changing and that's all we'll change": the paSUKification of post-brexit politics 2021

The BBC and other irritants rolling out local voters who are (sometimes inarticulately) expressing this dissatisfaction so smug FBPEs on Twitter can say "look it is the electorate who is bad" are part of the problem and a failure of journalism

Endlessly oscillating between contempt for people who have started voting Tory over the last decade and contempt for people who have stuck with Labour over the last decade.

Your reminder that Rayner is no tribune of the Left. https://t.co/T6Tx8n2PdA

— Et tu Keith? (@paulewart23) May 10, 2021

Reminiscent of the state of Scottish labour councils just before they all collapsed seemingly forever

Very interesting line from Starmer at shadow cab - he says he will devote his summer "not having rallies of the faithful but speaking to people who don't vote for us."

Pretty obvious shift there from the previous leadership.

— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) May 10, 2021

Focus group are back, awouuu

Interesting strategy. Like when MTV decided not to play music.

as though rallies of the faithful were an option

lol

that is a good point

bad news for Starmer's legions of admirers lol

even with the party being skint and short of legs on the ground I get a feeling there will such a supernatural effort to flood Batley & Spen with doorstep campaigners, from the tories as well, that the area might become (more) uninhabitable.

People have been saying "BJ doesn't want to be PM / will step down / will be forced out" for some time now.

There has never been any evidence for this from the disgusting BJ himself. He just goes on being PM, and seemingly, on the whole, strengthening his position.

It's true that it can be hard to sustain things long-term, and specifics like Scotland might count against him. But so far the "BJ won't last long" line looks like a tradition of wishful thinking.

It really is amusing, as poster Conrad says -- there are no faithful!

I will record here for posterity my formulation of new theories of KS, which I am considering the Ockham's Razor theory:

Why does KS do the strange things he does?

There is a mysterious idea that we often hear: roughly, "KS is a prisoner of the Labour Right".

But why would he be? They don't have anything on him. Even eg Mandelson has no mechanism to get special access to KS. We talk as if KS is powerless before these people.

So, as a couple of twitter commentators have been saying today: there's actually a simpler explanation: KS *is* the Labour Right. This is what he wants.

Does that square with KS's past? I'm not sure. Plainly it doesn't square with his leadership campaign.

It does remind me of some kind of fictional narrative -- maybe it was eg: an episode of LoD where corrupt "Dot Cottan" hit himself and was acclaimed for fighting a criminal. KS would be Dot. He benefits from the pretence that he's struggling with someone else, when really he's not struggling at all.

Or: THE USUAL SUSPECTS - where KS is Kevin Spacey (I'm afraid so!), who is viewed as a hapless pawn of others - but is really the criminal mastermind.

In short, maybe we should look at what KS does and think: this is simply what KS wants, rather than, as some of us have done, trying to work out a complicated reason why he has felt forced to do it.

Quite separately: I'm coming to think that William Davies had a point recently in observing how it is now very standard on the political Left to disdain "Remainers", when the majority of the people involved are / were themselves "Remainers".

I understand how, in a tortuous process, the discussion got here, and I realise that there is a distinction, if you like, between "Remain voter" and "Remainiac" ("Remainer" technically seems to cover both!).

But Davies' point is still sound -- many people who did not want to leave the EU now routinely talk as though that position was reactionary.

You can square the circle if you basically agree with Perry Anderson that the EU is bad.

In short, maybe we should look at what KS does and think: this is simply what KS wants, rather than, as some of us have done, trying to work out a complicated reason why he has felt forced to do it.

This goes so far but how far can we really go with "This is actually part of his plan"? Becoming a joke figure? Putting his current position at risk? I can buy the idea he (subconsciously at least) doesn't want to be PM, sure. But I don't see that he wants to risk his current position, or to do quite so badly

@AngelaRayner now addressing shadow cabinet: in Hartlepool, the people who had anti-immigrant sentiments went to the Tories. "We need to deal with that."

Hartlepool 97.9% white, 97.4% born in the UK, 95.6% born in England.

Like anyone would want to move to Hartlepool!

It's true that it can be hard to sustain things long-term, and specifics like Scotland might count against him. But so far the "BJ won't last long" line looks like a tradition of wishful thinking.

Also: Scotland is going to be more than a mere specific very shortly, it's going to be a Problem. To the extent the Tories give a fuck about the union – which I think they do, even if just for selfish reasons – they can't wear Boris. You'd be as well trying to win indyref with Thatcher.

"In short, maybe we should look at what KS does and think: this is simply what KS wants, rather than, as some of us have done, trying to work out a complicated reason why he has felt forced to do it."

Most of what I've seen is laughter at how it has come apart so quickly. The decisions have been so bad that anyone is looking at this as incompetence, nothing else.

Hartlepool couldn't be more demographically different than Batley & Spen, there was a much bigger UKIP/Brexit Party vote in the former. If Angela thinks pandering to racists is a winning strategy in other constituencies then they will maintain this losing run.

Hadn't looked at the final results.

FINAL LOCAL RESULTS:

Starmer has lost 326 seats (-7%), the worst local election results for a new opposition leader in over 40 years.

CON: 2,345 (+235)
LAB: 1,345 (-326)
LD: 586 (+7)
GRN: 151 (+88)

➡️ Corbyn lost 18 seats (-1%) in 2016

➡️ Starmer has lost 326 (-7) seats pic.twitter.com/Bdm03Ju6h5

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) May 9, 2021

lol even worse than IDS

the red faced man is turning up the racism

would love it if Kieth wrote some Jack Reacher style spy fiction novel like IDS did. Never got round to reading Tom Watson's political thriller The House.

This goes so far but how far can we really go with "This is actually part of his plan"? Becoming a joke figure? Putting his current position at risk?

Yes. This makes sense.

But: there is an increasingly pervasive view on the left that "the Labour Right doesn't care about winning power in the UK, only about crushing the Left and maintaining its own position".

I don't know whether that's true, but supposing it were true, it could make sense that KS cares more about attacking socialists than succeeding as Labour leader.

While some of his actions do look self-destructive, some - like appointing a more right-wing Shadow Chancellor / cabinet - might be examples of my theory of simply "take him at his word".

I would think for some of them their desire to maintain their own position at all costs facilitates the delusion that this is all a necessary, painful process which must be endured at all costs to secure an electable, sensible Labour party to one day rule over the rubble

I think the pinefox is correct - that Starmer does these things because they align with what he actually wants. However it seems pretty clear that he has no political or moral weathervane of his own. Right or left or anything else. He reminds me a lot of Laura Kuenssberg in this respect. People like to say she's a Tory, but her real tribe is insiderdom. Which skews Tory! So a whole lot of what Starmer does and says must be the consequence of conversations with advisors, people pushing him in certain directions, presenting him with a menu of options from which he chooses. What's harder to imagine is Starmer questioning the menu itself.

i think you're right except that i think with kuennsberg its that insiderishness is a tory trait that is there is a more conceptually tight correlation btweeen these things

like insiderishness is about a certain attachment to existing power and hierarchy

I think Kieth and his ilk do want power, they are just astonishingly shit at getting it, they have learned nothing since 1997 but they still think they are the smart set. Not even electoral disaster can shake their faith in the middle way

Starmer is understood to have been intensely frustrated that the row over the reshuffle meant that he could not visit places where Labour had exceeded expectations after a set of election results that were disappointing overall.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/10/starmer-moves-to-calm-labour-tensions-with-shadow-cabinet-address

Garbage Guardian narration. But a specific problem: KS hasn't made a public speech since Friday, but the paper quotes him verbatim talking internally to Labour staff.

I don't like these conventions - like unnamed sources who make up most of every politics news story now. People should come out and talk on the record or not be quoted at all.

But: there is an increasingly pervasive view on the left that "the Labour Right doesn't care about winning power in the UK, only about crushing the Left and maintaining its own position".

I don't know whether that's true, but supposing it were true, it could make sense that KS cares more about attacking socialists than succeeding as Labour leader.

I have a lot of sympathy with this perspective, I think its true - up to an extent. But it goes beyond that. If this were just the Corbyn years this would be a fuller explanation but this long predates the Corbyn years, it feels more ingrained than a reaction to a real or perceived internal threat

Prioritizing attacking socialists, regardless of whether there are even any socialists to attack. This suggests something much deeper, existential. The desire not to win power almost seems unconscious, internalised. Labour are in their rightful place, this is how it is supposed to be.

too many of the current lot joined the party in the 90's as slimeball career pols and saw New Labour as a project that would endure throughout their rise up the party ranks and into ministerial positions, until this unstoppable career trajectory was rudely interrupted by events in 2007-08. And they've not been right in the fucking head since!

like insiderishness is about a certain attachment to existing power and hierarchy

Exactly this

Fucking hell these sickos

‘Labour needs to be as ruthless as the Tories at listening, responding and changing. It must ditch the rigid dogmas of ideology, but instead reshape its traditional values of fairness, decency, and opportunity for today’s demands and for tomorrow’s world’https://t.co/CtO36yrWTl

— Anna Turley 💙 (@annaturley) May 10, 2021

Now we’re talking. Listening to the electorate and meeting the needs of the country is not unprincipled. “Revisionism” is precisely the way to serve the people. We will know Labour is taking the voters seriously when @annaturley is in the mix. And the voters will know it too. https://t.co/T1mtyppG2g

— David Miliband (@DMiliband) May 10, 2021

David have you cupped your ear and really listened to the electorate lately? If you listen really closely you can hear it... "We........ haaaaate....... yooooou"

Christ. You don't know where to begin with that.

Except to say -- they are commenting on Labour results, not amid the Corbyn era, but *after a year of KS, "under new leadership", and systematically purging socialists*.

Doesn't DM live in the US? Can't he give his sage advice to Bernie Sanders and AOC instead?

it also ignores that aside from some dubious claims about what Labour run councils have the power to do and some bland platitudes, there wasn't anything discernible on offer from Labour. As McD noted - the doorstep campaigners were sent out naked.

I've realised what D Miliband needs: a debate with AOC at a community centre in the Bronx. It must be only a couple of subway rides away for him!

legit lol tracer hand

Good to see Starmer works for some:

"Ryder has admitted to his failures as a father in the past; he was “just a kid having kids” back in the day, more interested in partying than parenthood. But now that he’s clean and settled with Joanne, whom he wed in 2010, he lovesbeing a hands-on dad. Thinking about his daughters’ future has even got him interested in politics for the first time: “This lot in charge are totally out of touch,” he says. “So I’m Labour, although I couldn’t vote for Corbyn – he’d have taken too much money off me!”"

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/may/10/shaun-ryder-i-was-a-heroin-addict-for-20-odd-years-but-theres-been-no-damage-off-that

he'll never vote

it's great when you're melt...yeah

^^^did i do this right

i'm still wondering how the fuck Shaun Ryder's got any money

ahahahaha off he fucks
https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/former-cambridgeshire-and-peterborough-mayor-james-palmer-qu-9198631/

I always knew Shaun Ryder was a Gaitskagite

EXC: Angela Rayner was urged to challenge Sir Keir Starmer for the Labour leadership at the height of their row this weekend

Starmer was warned that Rayner had the backing to beat him in a contest, her allies say https://t.co/eaCNjNrZkp

— Patrick Maguire (@patrickkmaguire) May 10, 2021

he's not quite as sexy to the wider PLP as he is to Jenny Chapman when he's in bed with her!

his authority in the party has almost completely gone. I can't bear to see him limping on in so much pain ;P Latest Redfield Wilton records the lowest approval rating yet and Labour 11 pts behind. But unfortunately these things can take longer and there isn't anything good to follow his demise.

The new shadow chancellor with her friends at the Spectator garden party pic.twitter.com/06uMBhM8Ap

— Mr Demos of Pnyx (@gem_ste) May 10, 2021