Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted


by Sunny Hundal    
10:45 am - March 19th 2012

      Share on Tumblr

Over the weekend, the Labour group Progress held their ‘political weekend‘, which involved a range discussions and workshops. I didn’t attend but caught a number of tweets from the event.

One of the tweets was along the lines of: ‘It took the Conservatives five years to increase their vote by 5%; it took Labour five days after 2010′. This gives me an opportune moment to discuss a long-standing bugbear.

The tone of the tweet was triumphant, but it shouldn’t be. If anything, the jump in votes after the 2010 election illustrates how badly the Labour party had lost touch with voters.

The Labour party has a wide base of potential support it can relatively easily tap into. The problem is that many of those people cannot bring themselves to support the party at an elections.

I was one of those people. In the run-up to the 2010 election, this blog was constantly attacking the Tories and defending Labour. I even campaigned for a Labour candidate in London on election day.

But I could not bring myself to vote for the party because they did everything to push me away.

There is still too much of a tendency within the party to blame voters themselves. They are presumed stupid for not knowing what would happen if the Tories get in. They are presumed traitors for not voting Labour (even if they later become members).

Never, ever, blame voters for how they voted.

Labour has only itself to blame for not attracting more votes in 2010. Too many Labourites still believe that pointing at how bad Conservatives and Libdems are will attract people to them. That is simply not the case and 2010 illustrated that.

Those people came to Labour after the election for several reasons: 1) they didn’t see an alternative; 2) they saw the potential for a new direction under a new leader; 3) they wanted to fight the Coalition and thought Labour was the best way; 4) they had finally forgiven the party for its lies of the past (principally, Iraq). There may be more but I believe that covers a significant per cent.

In other words, the party has major trouble hanging on to people who could fairly easily be persuaded to vote Labour.

Instead the party pushed them away in the belief that they had no choice but to vote Labour. How wrong that turned out to be.

By the next election I hope this attitude changes or the party will end up in the same place again.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Labour party ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


A few too many Labour activists are assuming Labour will do well at the next election because.

a) Twitter is generally hating on the Tories (not a fully reliable indicator, as many of the core working class vote are not in the twitterati)

b) The Tories have clearly lied on several Key policies to get elected (the NHS is the biggest example). But people’s memories are short, and the media supports the government to the hilt in other areas.

c) The Government is a bit unpopular. This is another red herring, as the Tories have managed to direct a lot of the Ire onto the last government and the Lib Dems.

This Tories are good political operators, with closeness to the machinery to get the message they want out.

I thought the last Labour government got pretty bad, managerialistic, and too controlling, but they are nothing on this lot for sheer awfulness.

So I will probably vote Labour at the next election as a least worse option (not that my vote means much in my safe seat Labour stronghold).

Playing as a less worse party is not going to win outright though for many other voters.

For what it’s worth, I think Labour need to make noises about reversing some of the Coalition changes. Most people think that Labour would have done the same as the Coalition if they could have, and despair at the lack of alternatives being offered by the main parties.

The Tories and their stooges have declared class war. Now those of us who are not the privileged few need someone to rally behind.

Sunny,

Picking the low hanging fruit since the last GE has already probably happened, and often it will have been for the reasons you have outlined. However, your post kinda misses the point: WHERE’S THE BEEF?

It’s one thing pushing at an open door, and recapturing a section of former Labour supporters, or other disaffected left of centre voters….. but what about the rest?

Many, including myself just don’t buy the latest Miliband snake oil.

We still aren’t convinced Newer Labour are an attractive alternative, let alone the only alternative. We don’t believe the new leadership are capable of leading Labour to the sunny uplands of a progressive, radical alternative to the Coalition. We haven’t fogotten Iraq… and whilst we may be willing to forgive, we’ve seen precious little in the way of change to suggest that New Labour and the thinking behind it is actually dead….. if it is show us the corpse!

“Newer” Labour isn’t even close to exorcising its demons, as the frankly lamentable performance of Scottish Labour vis a vis the SNP in Scotland amply demonstrates. It is on course to lose control of Glasgow in the local elections there in May, and will probably lose a slew seats to the SNP at the next GE (always assuming there is another GE involving Scotland of course!!). It has lined up WITH the Tories and Lib Dems there, and it’s ham fisted response to the SNP has undoubtedly made Scottish independence more rather than less likely.

Meanwhile in the UK, what do we see? No plausible alternative vision is being presented; partly an attack based on saying you’d do more or less the same as the Coalition, only slower, and less deeply, and partly a restatement of New Labour values that got you into this mess in the first place…. no clear water between you and the Coalition, no fundamental breach with the Blairite past and those still within the party who were responsible for the whole nauseating project.

the reason many of us don’t believe the party has changed, is because it simply isn’t true!

4. Christoclifford

So agree with this. The GPs have put a scare up Labour- I saw tweets saying that if GPs stand as NHS candidates they could hurt Labour where they are in second place. Why oh why does Labour assume pro NHS supporters and activists will vote Labour? Labour helped prepare for this Tory onslaught on our public services. Only Andy Burnham has said that he will repeal the NHS bill – if he is Health Minister after the next election! We haven’t seen Labour warning the private health companies that their contracts are worthless once Labour are in. Then of course there’s work unfair etc.
I cannot speak for others but I long to be able to vote for a party that truly has social and economic justice and fairness at its core. That moves us away from this mindless and unsustainable subservience to ‘The Market’. I do not want riots and bloody revolution.
Labour plus a Green Party that shed it’s poor scientific rep could forge a new future free of onerous crappy materialism without a sackcloth and ashes attitude. I wait without much anticipation.

When Labour were in power the last time, they did not reverse any of the previous Tory Government polices. They just tinkered about with them at the edges. Why should we believe that they would reverse any of the present Tory coalition polices, if they won the next election.

All three main Parties have clearly shown they are not to be trusted on anything.
With power comes influence and with influence comes wealth – the limit of their interest.
I have personally known two M.P.s – both lobby fodder and each despised their constituents.
There has been no effort to restore the public’s faith in Westminster and whatever the pollsters and the ‘trolls’ on here believe, politicians of all parties are viewed mostly with suspicion and disdain.
Unless the ‘sheeple’ are prepared to do something about it the governance of Corporate Britain will continue unchanged.

Good post. I agree with every word.

I can understand Cherub’s point but pledging to reverse stuff just comes across as backward looking and fighting former battles.

Just look at the self inflicted difficulties the Republicans are having with their irrational pledges to repeal Obama’s healthcare legislation.

It is much better to frame campaign to improve the NHS by, say, pledging to “abolish” the Lansley bureaucratic stuff up.

Similar result but more forward looking.

Here in Scotland we have viable alternatives to voting Labour. The Tories have been wiped out for at least a generation and are restricted to grubbing about on the sidelines. The fact of the matter is that looking from the outside of English politics it looks like Labour are the only game in town with regard to progressive politics. Now, in Scotland I would never consider voting Labour, but I cannot see what real alternative there is for decent people in England to vote.

The glaringly obvious alternative at the previous election was to vote Lib Dem, however, we have to be honest, and there are tens of thousands of people who are suffering severe hardships because of those Left leaning people who saw the Libs as a ‘safe’ vote; Someone who you could vote for without hurting the Left. Sunny, you say that we should not critize people for voting Lib Dems, or the Tories, but for many of us, we saw through the shinny masks and the smiley faces. The Tories had managed to de toxify their brand by making appealing noises. Elsewhere on this blog, you have said that the ‘Left’ hold grudges for a long time; that might be true of those people we regard as part of our own, but the Left were too easily fooled by Cameron’s charm offensive and look where it got them.

I agree that the Labour Party in England need to toughen up their act, but progressive voters need to be pragmatic as well. Shouting ‘Iraq’ at the top of your voice every week is not going to bring back anyone from the dead, nor is voting against a Party because of they happen to have a dour (Scottish) leader.

I think Labour would have done much better if they had dumped Brown a before the election. He just was not up to it, and never connected with many voters. Labour did better than expected in some areas, which denied the tories an out right majority. This leads me to think that without Brown they could have done a lot better.

The tories failure to even reach 40% shows there was no great appetite for them. A lot of labour voters switched to lib dem. Boy how they are regretting that choice.

10. Chaise Guevara

@ 8 Jim

“Here in Scotland we have viable alternatives to voting Labour.”

You do indeed, you lucky sods!

I think Labour need to make noises about reversing some of the Coalition changes.

They have – on the NHs bill. Repeatedly.

Can they pledge to reverse all the cuts? No – of course they can’t, until they know how much money they would have and what the priorities will be in 2015 / 2020.

They have – on the NHs bill. Repeatedly.

So they’ll be going into the election pledging a massively expensive top-down reorganisation of the NHS? Sounds like a winner…

Unlike the liar Cameron who promised no top down changes to the NHS. And paraded his disabled son around to con people into thinking he supported the NHS. And then once he got in started to privatise t he same NHs he claimed he supported.

To end the NHS the elites had to get 2 parties to lie about their support for the NHS and then ram through a bill that engineer it’s end. Shameful. And these scum dare to lecture about right and wrong. Pure evil.

14. Man on Clapham Omnibus

This issue ties up with a recent report from Patrick Diamond who concentrated more on the policy issues facing Labour if it is to win the next election.
Worth a read in my view.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/12/labour-vapid-leftism-warning.

15. paul fisher

It’s difficult not to be cross, at working class people who don’t seem to understand that that the tories are anti minimum wage, anti-union, anti-worker rights, anti-nhs and generally anti progress. They don’t want to be hemmed in to tribal red/blue politics of years gone by, but the reality is still very similar. It may now be a choice between tory, and low fat tory if you like, but the choices are still stark.

Wishing we had a better choice won’t make it a reality.

@11. Sunny Hundal

Sunny, are you sure about that? I’d be surprised if Labour are really saying they’ll bring back PCTs and RSHAs and abolish the consortiums (or whatever they’re called nowadays).

I also kind of doubt it would be a vote winner to do so, even if this Government’s changes have been unpopular, as people aren’t going to want yet another round of messing around with the NHS. Can you provide a link to Labour saying that?

17. paul fisher

@11

unfortunately i share in the scepticism. relying on “noises” is setting yourself up for disappointment.

@Sunny

I’m not arguing that parties did great, but voters are as fallible as politicians.

They’re humans. Among other things.

If that’s true, I don’t see what’s wrong with stating the truth, save for tactical advantage. They can be wrong about the fact presented and possible outcomes, and unless everyone votes the same way, millions are mistaken, dissonant, incompetent, silly or abstract at any given time.

Dishonesty about this may be a successful ruse, but it remains a ruse.If lying for tactical advantage is an example of something that is meant to make parties like Labour *more* inspiring, we’re in some bind!

You voted. You knew the facts, and the variables. You chose.

The dinner you end up with can’t wholly be blamed on the menu?

Alot of whats mentioned here makes sense, but i can’t see what It’s got to do with Progress, regarding reverse the tory policies view, Back in 1979, it was Case of labour spent the next 4 years saying they’d reverse what the tories had done those last4 years.

Seems as appropriate a place to post this as any:

My own experience is quite limited, but I get the impression that there’s a very powerful ‘Labour right’ which actively rejects and ridicules any attempt to change the direction of the party. Progress and Dan Hodges spring immediately to mind, but there are probably more significant individuals and groups involved that I don’t know about.

They will resist Tory attempts to privatise the NHS on the one hand, but accept Workfare and public sector pay freezes on the other. The only consistency I can see is that they are more or less always in favour of the status quo, which in a way makes them the most conservative bunch around. Even if their estimation of what the public wants is accurate, I personally find their ideology and motivations completely impossible to understand. As others have said, if that’s your view of what representative democracy should be, why not just elect a computer?

If I were to say this to someone from Progress in person, many could say with some justification that they’ve put in the hours and shown a level of dedication to the Labour Party that I haven’t, and that that gives them far more right to determine the direction of the party than someone like me has. But I would guess that there are probably quite a lot of left-wing young people like myself, who have no desire to go and join the SWP, and whose views would have been considered well within the mainstream of the party thirty years ago. A big part of the reason why we aren’t giving up our time to go canvassing is because we don’t want to go out of our way to help an organisation which doesn’t appear to have any clear values, and which seems perfectly happy to mock many of our beliefs as mad and unrealistic.

21. The Great White Elephant in the Room

YouGov-Cambridge report on the future of Europe

http://www.yougov.polis.cam.ac.uk/?p=1935

“Public opinion in the UK calls for a major revision of Britain’s relationship with the EU, with significant majorities who want a looser relationship with the EU, where almost all areas of policy are controlled by London, not Brussels.

These attitudes span the political divide, and challenge the current narrative advanced by the Liberal Democrat side of the coalition government, seeking to maintain current levels of integration with the EU or to expand them.”

These are the core findings of an in-depth crisis-report on European attitudes released by YouGov-Cambridge for it’s major London conference this week on the future of Europe. (more here)

? Brits call for a major revision of the UK’s relationship with Europe

? Eurozone and Britain heading in 2 starkly different directions, with a majority of people in France, Germany and Italy wanting more integration – and even in some cases a fully federalised “United States of Europe”

? The dynamics of German public opinion threaten a break-up of the Eurozone, with significant opposition to a greater crisis-fighting role for Germany and the ECB

Brits call for a major revision of the UK’s relationship with Europe:

? 60% of Brits want a national referendum to decide on Britain’s relationship with the EU (v. 19% who don’t).

? 60% want a looser relationship with the EU or to leave altogether, and to opt out EU-wide policies enforced from Brussels (v. 27% who want continued full membership or closer union).

?Only 14% want more integration with Europe and a further 13% want to keep things as they are with Britain as a full EU member.

A majority of Brits want national control of almost all policy-areas:

? Including, among others, immigration (79%),agriculture (74%), trade links with other countries (60%), financial regulation (68%), rights for workers (66%), deciding laws on trade unions/strikes (80%) and crime and justice (85%).

Nick Clegg is out of step with a significant majority of his own party:

? Half of Lib Dem voters want a looser relationship with the EU or outright withdrawal.

? National versus European control shares similar support for most major policy areas among Lib Dem voters (including immigration (70% of Lib Dems), trade links with other countries (51% of Lib Dems), rights for workers, (50% of Lib Dems), tax rates and national budgets (91% of Lib Dems), crime and justice (81% of Lib Dems), agriculture (77% of Lib Dems) and deciding laws on trade unions and strikes (74% of Lib Dems).

Labour can only begin to move on when it finally renounces neo-liberalism and renounces many of the worst aspects of the Blair/Brown years, in the same way Blair disowned “old Labour” and Clause 4 in the 90s.

Including (among other things) the bizarre obsession with privatisation and its bastard offshoots of outsourcing, PFI and marketisation, the excessive authoritarianism and contempt for civil liberties that took hold on the latter years of the last Lab government, the desire to run public services robotically by centralised targets, the adoption of US style ideas about welfare, which have had an appalling track record both here and in the US (think workfare and ATOS) that no progressive party should have any truck with, the god-awful abominations like “triangulation” and the (self-defeating) attempts to endlessly pacify the right-wing press by “being tough” on whatever nonsense is in the news that week.

The problem Labour has got, is that many of the appalling things this government are doing were started by them, and so they are hamstrung by their own record. They can only move on when those aspects of the past are renounced.

23. Charlieman

@20. Mikey: “But I would guess that there are probably quite a lot of left-wing young people like myself, who have no desire to go and join the SWP, and whose views would have been considered well within the mainstream of the party thirty years ago. A big part of the reason why we aren’t giving up our time to go canvassing is because we don’t want to go out of our way to help an organisation which doesn’t appear to have any clear values…”

I am not a Labour Party supporter but as a democrat, I’d encourage you to find candidates who you feel that you can back. There must be somebody who you like and trust who lives close to you.

“…to mock many of our beliefs as mad and unrealistic.”

I might have been amongst the non-Labour Party mockers. If an idea is ridiculous to me, I have the right to challenge it and you have the right to defend it. Just get on with it, Mikey.

“My endorsement of the Libdems further clarified”

I missed this at the time of the election. Good job I’ve never rated Sunny Hundal as a perspicacious political analyst or commentator and never trusted any of his forecasts and predictions. The man’s just guesses like the rest of the electorate, except dresses it up as insightful commentary.

I will never vote Conservative; the Lib Dems have sacrificed any claim they might have had to be my second choice vote; but why would I vote Labour?

This is the party who introduced ESA and the WCA, who started the process of actively demonising disabled people in the press, which makes me a target any time I dare to go out on the streets.

This is the party whose leader claims that those like me, who are too disabled to work, are just as responsible for the financial crisis as the worst of the bankers.

This is the party whose leader says that anger at me from people whose believe that my benefits are unjustified is perfectly legitimate

Miliband has been challenged on those views by disability activists, but I see nothing to indicate he has changed them.

Labour continues to chase the Daily Mail demographic, a demographic seemingly defined by its hate for anyone they deem to be different. Selling your soul to become Tory-Lite doesn’t seem like a price worth paying when you’re of those trampled over in the pursuit of power.

Labour, Tory, Lib Dem, same difference.

The latest polls still put the Tories 3 or 4% ahead of labour. I do t associate myself as a Tory or a lib dem voter, but I have voted for both in general elections, and I live in a swing seat which tends to have an mp from the party that is in government. I have never voted Labour and never will, I fail to understand why anyone who works outside the public sector would. High taxes and waste is the labour manifesto, couple that with the totalitarian view of people like Brown, Hain and Harmen and the last government were particulally unpleasant for your average british joe.

Cameron and Osborne may well be posh boys out of touch with mr and mrs average, but they are a breath of fresh air compared to the last lot.

And one other thing Ed Milliband makes IDS look like Obama. He has no chance of ever been elected as PM.

27. Charlieman

@25. David G: “Labour, Tory, Lib Dem, same difference.”

You are bloody right. If you disregard policy statements and theoretical ambitions, there is nothing to between them unless you think. Is thinking a problem?

@4: So agree with this. The GPs have put a scare up Labour- I saw tweets saying that if GPs stand as NHS candidates they could hurt Labour where they are in second place. Why oh why does Labour assume pro NHS supporters and activists will vote Labour?

At the very least, the GPs could split the anti-Coalition vote. (Of course, if the AV referendum had passed, this wouldn’t been an issue — and if Labour had had any sense, they wouldn’t supported AV, like they did in their manifesto).

What Labour should do is seriously consider standing aside in some or all the seats where the GPs are standing — in many seats, they would have a better chance of unseating Tories and Lib Dems than Labour, because the NHS is more popular than thew Labour Party, and doctors are more popular than politicians.

Labour won’t do this of course, it’s far too radical an idea for a prat like Miliband to consider.

20 mikey you have a FAIR POINT ,THAT I HAVE TO BOW DOWN TOO, REGARDING WHY WOULD Someone from the left campaign for labour if the Progress wing consider what you say as ‘mad’ I can’t fault your hostility to labour, but i would say that it was the case of we stood by the left in the mid 80′s and htat we had An up hills truggle to get loabur to the centre ground tio make us electable again,and sayign the only reason you should campaign for us is that we’re better than the tories. or that it was dificult convincing tony benn that laobur did’nt lose the 83 election as in his words “It wasn’t left wing enough”,but even though there’s a world apart form progress and those who would consider themselves old labour, there are similarities ,it’s just the reasoning behind some of them,result in the left appearing not to understand things from all angles.

30. Christoclifford

@johnreid is right about the perceived need to move Labour to the centre ground, sadly they moved right of centre out Torying the Tories.

People especially in the centre and centre right fear the left although its a very old fashioned sense of left. As a child I asked my Dad is he was a communist, this was the fifties. He thought and said, ‘ No, I’m a Markist Leninist’. We never considered ourselves odd in any way. I cannot imagine a child hearing that today apart from in a tiny minority of homes.

Our democracy is broken, our politics are broken, most people are disaffected from party politics although a new generation threw their hopes into the LibDems and were mightily betrayed.
Labour have a large enough rump to come back from but not if they continue to follow a left versus middle route. It will be Tories in coalition. LibDems will be wiped out. It’s there for the taking for a party or coalition with a credible vision for a future.

31. Albert Spangler

What I always wonder is, if left ideals are dead with the public, why are the SNP and, to a lesser extent, Plaid wiping the floor with Labour? Nationalism take second place to a government which is committed to looking after its people, and I think voters in those areas realise that.

I always feel like Labour is trying too hard to suck up to the press and the narrative they have created, especially with regards to the unemployed and the unwell. Did anyone honestly vote Labour because they thought they’d be “tough on benefits”? Labour should always be fighting for the majority, better schools, better hospitals, more accessible public transport, better housing, more jobs and a slow but steady commitment to renewable energy to secure UK energy security. All of these seem to be obvious areas of appeal, but Labour seems to only barely touch on them or avoid them all together. It’s like they’re terrified of the wrath of the neoliberals.

Labour’s main commitment seems to be existing for the sake of it and I think Sunny has hit a good point with this article. I’ve been to a number of Labour meetings where people I’ve spoken to don’t seem to know what Labour stands for any more. If your own supporters don’t know why you exist then you’re pretty deep in the shit.

If Labour could start outlining a comprehensive vision for the future (comprehensive being the word, since Ed’s occasional ideas don’t seem to really add up to much) and stick to the damn thing, they might get somewhere, and start to be viewed as the party of the many, not the few.

In their undignified rush to mirror and outdo Tories, Labour have left those of us who do not wish to head for the centre behind. They assume we want the jobless punished. It was witless and gutless Milliband’s ‘party of grafters’ statement that had me weeping. Capitalism means people will be out of work through no fault of their own. If there was job for everyone in the UK, then there might be case for penalising people. But not now, in the middle of a massive depression from which the Uk might never recover.

The Labour Party appears rather obsessed with trying to get everyone to like them. They seem to think that it only counts if the entire Country votes for you. Okay, Labour hit a perfect storm in 1997, but realistically, how many times in a generation does that occur? Labour does not need a one hundred and fifty-seat majority, that is crazy. What Labour need is a working majority, between 5% and say 10% of the Parliamentary seats to get a good, solid programme moving. That would keep Labour honest and away from the worst disasters.

What those of us on the Left need to do is wake up and smell the coffee. If you want to promote Left/Centre Left or just plain Centrist politics, the harsh brutal reality is that the Labour Party is the only game in town. Posturing around fringe Parties and self indulgent protest groups like the GPs who plan to stand in elections is all well and good, but really none of that will change the actual political landscape. Don’t get me wrong, places like Brighton show us we can change the landscape with good, solid campaigning, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

The next couple of elections are going to be fought on a single front, ‘those that believe the State can (and should) improve the position of the most disadvantaged in society and those who believe that the richer you are the more power you should have.’ , that’s it in a nutshell.

I am not saying that the Labour should be complacent, but sometimes you have to blame the electorate for the State of the political debate in this Country.

The next couple of elections are going to be fought on a single front, ‘those that believe the State can (and should) improve the position of the most disadvantaged in society and those who believe that the richer you are the more power you should have.’ , that’s it in a nutshell.

Fair enough Jim. As I want to help the disadvantaged, I suppose I should therefore vote against the party that makes the rich powerful. Hmm, that won’t be the centralising party of high state spending then – centralisation and state spending make power easier to control as it is one place, and therefore allow the rich to control it (see the influence a certain Mr Murdoch had over the last Labour government…). So any suggestions who we should vote for?

Watchman ‘@ 34

It is not the Party that is the issue, it is type of policies that you follow.

Take privatisation of the roads. Traditionally, roads have been built from the public purse, via taxation. We all pay a given percentage of our wealth into the tax pot and the government then provides services. Roads are free at the point of use, for example. If you happen to be poor then a ‘free’ (at the point of use) liberates you.

Once you stop paying for roads via progressive taxation then only open roads to those with the money (power) to access them. The poor become disenfranchised and disconnected from power.

The gap between rich and poor has been getting wider to the point that the poor are losing power over their own lives. They are losing choices that a generation ago we took for granted.

33. the 150 majority of 97 was due to labourb getting 13.6 m votes ,which was 500,000 less than what major got in 92, no one votes now and labour not appealing to the middle ground may result in a working majority if the tories also didn’t appeal to the middle ground, remember that Cameron only got 1million more votes in 2010 than major got in ’97.

@33 Jim: If you want to promote Left/Centre Left or just plain Centrist politics, the harsh brutal reality is that the Labour Party is the only game in town. Posturing around fringe Parties and self indulgent protest groups like the GPs who plan to stand in elections is all well and good, but really none of that will change the actual political landscape.

Scumbag Labour: refuses to reform FPTP for Westminster, then tells minor parties they’re irrelevant. On the right, the Tories do exactly the same thing with UKIP. Meanwhile, and probably not coincidentally, 61% of the voters say they dislike both main parties.

This country will neither be a democracy, nor well-governed, until the Labservatives’ cosy little duopoly on power is destroyed and FPTP is smashed in favour of a proportional system.

One reason I support Scottish independence is that Scotland, unlike the UK, has a sensible political culture and uses sane election systems.

32.
the Fact that Lord Glasman’s Blue labour, A critic of New labour’s mixing of Private industry to fund state idea thought PPP faith school and foundation hsopitals,goes for the Idea that charities and community self organising through voluntary work and groups of people using bonds to fund govenremnt srvices which borrows form the German model of the NHS ,where it’s bonds thathelp fund communtiy projects, actaully owes somthing to the early Idea of the 1930′s beveridge report, while Yes accepting one notion of Immigration is out of control as ecenomic migrants are really there to the country hasn’t enough work for more people to come in, yet without being called a fascist ,the fact taht blue laobur was the only policy the tories were scare dof as it could win laobur millions of votes,and it’s biggest critics were helen GOODMAN Luke AKEHURST and james Purnall


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/Xp3TpjBS

  2. Jason Brickley

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/80ACRxO5

  3. Tristram Wyatt

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/Xp3TpjBS

  4. leftlinks

    Liberal Conspiracy – Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/PVO6RbHe

  5. Martin Robbins

    Spot on about the idiocy of Labour supporters who attack floating voters as 'traitors' – http://t.co/uHaJShjU by @sunny_hundal

  6. Matt F

    RT @libcon: Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/rUFzgl9e <couldn't have said it better.

  7. Patron Press - #P2

    #UK : Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/AW8DviJh

  8. christine clifford

    Liberal Conspiracy – Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/PVO6RbHe

  9. BevR

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/xkmt9aqt via @libcon

  10. House of Lords Votes Against Transparency in Government « beyondclicktivism

    [...] sense that many in Labour have just assumed that the pro-NHS vote will go their way which reflects their tendency to take voters for granted and is why they’re feeling threatened by the possibility of an election campaign from [...]

  11. sunny hundal

    Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for their choices http://t.co/3tXCzevS

  12. Daniel Pitt

    RT @sunny_hundal #Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for choices http://t.co/O52XYxIw

  13. Ian

    Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for their choices http://t.co/3tXCzevS

  14. Michael Bater

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/Akh3iA5U via @libcon

  15. Sarah MacFadyen

    Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for their choices http://t.co/3tXCzevS

  16. BevR

    Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for their choices http://t.co/3tXCzevS

  17. Liza Harding

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted http://t.co/Xp3TpjBS

  18. holmwoodd0

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/Km60QJZm via @libcon

  19. Robert CP

    Labour won't win back support unless it stops taking people for granted and blaming them for their choices http://t.co/3tXCzevS

  20. Zoroaster

    Why many within the Labour party still take voters for granted | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/GzNnAtYl via @libcon

  21. A night for trying to find a few positives « Representing the Mambo

    [...] the party of the working class was created to do. As Sunny Hundal pointed out at Liberal Conspiracy pointed out the other day, there does seem a tendency amongst Labour politicians to think that pendulum-like things will [...]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.