A lurch? It’s a tectonic shift!

They’ve not been a left wing party since Kinnock, except for the brief Corbyn years. This just seems like a return to Blairite business as usual.

Clearly not a popular opinion on the internet but… Blairite business as usual is actually winning elections and getting a chance to enact reforms as opposed to preaching to the choir with no influence.

I really do hope we get over this idea that if you’re not a direct descendant of Arthur Scargill himself then you’re some sort of right wing pariah. Starmer (or Blair / Brown) might not be to people’s liking but they’re far from the right wing nutters we have had in power for the last fourteen years.

I hope people are realistic and understand that we need at least a parliament to put into place plans to undo the damage the Conservatives have done. Nothing is instant, nothing is cheap.

Edit: Freudian typo.

It amazing that this “you might not like him, but suck it up to get rid of the Tories” attitude wasn’t present when Corbyn was leader. No, it was an endless tide of infighting, coups and splinting. How are we suppose to take these pleas to get rid of the Tories seriously after watching the Labour Right do everything in its power to hand the Tories the last two elections?

A Labour leader needs to appeal to more than simply the hard line left crowd in the Labour party. Corbyn was never electable outside of North London and a handful of university campuses. Not in any serious way at least. That’s why he got battered in both elections he contested.

Labour need someone that appeals to their party (or most of it) plus they need someone that appeals to voters outside their party. Corbyn night have done the first, but he failed miserably at the latter. Blair did both crushingly well. I hope Starmer does both (but he’s trying his hardest to fuck up both parts).

I will agree with you that the public infighting within Labour didn’t help. But I don’t pretend that Corbyn was the right candidate for a Labour government.