Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
26. The Sheffield thing certainly didn't help.
Wed Jul 13, 2016, 01:18 AM
Jul 2016

Who the hell had the idea to have a victory party BEFORE people voted?

It didn't occur to anyone that this might not be well-received?

And the other things you listed also played a significant role(and there was certainly no excuse for Blair welcoming back any former SDP types once he'd taken over as leader-people who formed a party for the sole purpose of preventing a Labour victory should never have had any role inside Labour after doing that).

Kinnock was right that the party had to reach out to people whose votes it hadn't been winning.

The problem was, he thought that the only way to do that was to attack people who WERE voting Labour.
It was one thing to attack Militant(who, with their flaws and their sectarian weirdnesses, still gave Liverpool the best local government it ever had...huge numbers of people in Liverpool still live in "Militant houses&quot , but the supporters of Tony Benn and the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, who were non-sectarian and committed democrats. It's not as though there were huge numbers of people who'd have voted Labour, but ONLY if Labour had a leader who demonized socialists, and ONLY if Labour renounced everything they stood for in the Eighties(a lot of which was heroically good, actually).

Kinnock should just have stood down the day after the 1987 defeat.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

First corollary question yes; second no... LeftishBrit Jul 2016 #1
Agreed Dworkin Jul 2016 #2
I pretty much agree with all of that muriel_volestrangler Jul 2016 #4
I don't think a coalition with the SNP has ever been on the cards. Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #5
The Labour establishment, in Scotland and Westminster, STILL don't get why the SNP broke through. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #11
I've done what I can on this group to offer some perspective on all that. Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #12
I will check out your journal n/t. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #14
Angela Eagle isn't the ideal choice.... T_i_B Jul 2016 #3
No sign of the former so far. non sociopath skin Jul 2016 #15
Owen Smith (since he's also in the running) Spider Jerusalem Jul 2016 #6
Kinnock only needed a handful of nominations, though-ten MPs, rather than 50. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #7
Owen Smith is to the left of Eagle (not as far left as Corbyn) Spider Jerusalem Jul 2016 #9
Easily avoidable? T_i_B Jul 2016 #13
In 1945, Churchill was defending an enormous majority and had just won a war. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #21
Yep, historical revisionism T_i_B Jul 2016 #23
During the 1945 campaign, nobody in the UK thought Labour had a chance. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #25
I remember 1987 and 1992 (even if I'd rather not); and the reasons were rather different LeftishBrit Jul 2016 #24
The Sheffield thing certainly didn't help. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #26
They changed the rules since the days of Kinnock. Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #8
Labour's NEC set to ensure Jeremy Corbyn is on leadership ballot Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #10
A few reminders about recent past Labour leadership challenges Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #16
Looks like the NEC will be voting by secret ballot RogueTrooper Jul 2016 #17
They are. Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #18
BTW, in case anyone's on tenterhooks, Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #19
Latest: Denzil_DC Jul 2016 #20
Thanks for the updates. Ken Burch Jul 2016 #22
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»United Kingdom»In a Corbyn-Eagle leaders...»Reply #26