Supporters of Labour who hope an Angela Rayner led party would 'return' to the party's Left roots, might pause & wonder if like Keir Starmer there will be a lot of promises of a Leftward shift (such as Starmer promised when campaigning for the party leadership) only to be subsequently abandoned as 'unrealistic' or 'impractical'.
As a real Left alternative now seems to exist with the Greens (GPEW/SGs) that might be a better bet?
Who'll trust Labour again?
I think Rayner stated the obvious when she said Starmer promised 'change' and is not delivering, and this is why he's so unpopular, and why the Greens are now sometimes polling ahead of Labour.
Nor do I think Starmer's perpetual excuse - be patient, change takes time - is credible, because it's not just a question of giving measures time to work, but of the timidity, and in some cases the direction, of the measures being taken - or not taken.
However, I think a Rayner leadership would merely tweak the Labour Leadership a little bit to the left, with little substantial change in either policy or popularity. It still wouldn't, for example, implement a programme taking the UK back to the social norms of it's neighbouring countries - public ownership of basic utilities, rent controls and other housing market reforms, acceptance of 'lived gender', employee participation, EU membership, etc, etc - and of course green transition (though Ed Miliband is the one light in the current Labour gloom).
I'm not talking radical politics here - just the old European Social Model that still exists (under attack) in the UK's neighbouring countries - but some more radical steps, such as establishment of a Commission on degrowth, would also of course be welcome.
yes, sadly a successful Rayner leadership bid, to me, would look more like the endemic practice of only letting a woman take over when crisis looks to be inevitable.... while, like you I think the return to the European Social Model would be an excellent move, the Overton Window has moved so far & the Labour Party so scared of criticism from the Right media, that screams of 'communism' would halt the party in its tracks if it even looked like moving in that direction....
But let's not talk about the overton window as if its movement is an autonomous fact - it is moved by presentation and policies - and propaganda. Had Labour not been captured by the 'focus group' mindset - following rather than leading public opinion - the window's movement right could easily have been halted, and reversed. The facts that Corbyn did reverse the decline in Labour votes, and almost won in 2017, and that the Greens just won their first byelection, shows that the triangulation of Labour spin-doctors is weaker than an honestly held and clearly stated political position.
I always considered New Labour's 'focus group' mindset to be more about finding ways of pitching a fixed set of Thatcherite policies in ways that didn't alienate traditional supporters, kinda like boiling a frog. Not sure there was much following going on.
Agreed. There are many politicians who would ideally like to limit general suffrage to landowners, but in the meantime the lobby group and focus group have to suffice.
You guys - @ReggieHere and @NicelyManifest - are more cynocal than I am (or, I think than @ChrisMayLA6 is). While I agree there's an element of using focus groups etc to research how best to present policies you want to implement anyway, I also think there's a strong careerist element on the Labour right-wing, that prioritises winning over what you want to win for.
Hmmm, having put it like that, it seems my view is the more cynical !
@GeofCox @ReggieHere @NicelyManifest
I think the privatisation of winning explains a lot - why the Labour Party seems to function better in campaign mode than in governing mode, which also underpins the oft-noted observation that they seem o have little idea what to do with their majority.
Emeritus Prof Christopher May
GeofCox
Reg
Neil Moffatt