Apr 15, 2021Liked by Strong Message Here - Substack
Great points. It feels like a groundswell of centrist support for Labour is definitely overdue, and was perhaps held back by Corbyn’s personality cult.
Corbin nearly won in 2017 despite the establishment onslaught against Marxist commies etc. He was hamstrung by the Blairites insistence on not honouring Brexit in 2019. Starmer will only offer Tory lite.
It really wasn't the Blairites insistence on a second referendum, it was pants-shitting terror through half the Labour Party at the Lib Dem and Green results in the Euro election. Loads of MPs who weren't particularly bothered about Brexit saw their seat go yellow or green in the Euros and started demanding that Labour make some noises to the Remain campaign.
Corbyn could have stuck to his pro-Brexit guns, sacrificed all the pro-Remain seats, held the red wall, and stopped the Tories. But then Jo Swinson's boast that she'd be Prime Minister wouldn't have been a joke.
It’s a joke to define seats held since 2010 as ‘blue wall’. The red wall Labour seats have been held since before the war and people vote Labour because their parents and grandparents did. The writer is delusional.
Unfortunately for progressives, there are far more Labour seats with small majorities that are likely to fall to the Conservatives than vice versa, as Matthew Goodwin points out in his recent article.
Thanks for this. I'll try and deal with some of the points Matthew made in his article in a brief follow up thing this week. The point you make could be right, but there's scenarios in which it isn't.
The first comment here is at the heart of the problem Labour face. Voters who lean left but felt they couldn't vote for Corbyn at the last election are the same who now blame those that did vote for Corbyn's Labour, as the reason the Tories won by so much. The reality is, it was those who were blinded by anti-corbynism who gave the super majority to Boris, not those who actually voted Labour.
A majority of voters in the UK are left leaning and vote for left leaning parties. All we need to do to win is realise we need to unite under one party, the way the right has. Or we can keep blaming Corbyn, who we could have all voted for, but instead decided to cut off our noses to spite our faces instead.
Nice analysis but deeply frustrating that you have failed to consider how the LDs can contribute to the defeat of the Conservatives. This is a Labour-only analysis and as such is badly flawed.
Your own numbers from the 2019 GE shows that the LDs are best placed to defeat the Tories in 12 of these Blue Wall seats, including mine own of Hitchin and Harpenden.
In these seats I submit that the LDs are the more credible challenger to the Tories and that a Progressive Alliance, with Labour and the LDs standing aside for the better-placed challenger, would have the best odds of success in defeating the Tories.
Very reasonable point, thanks - for simplicity I didn't model potential LD gains. It's hard to know how to do this simply in scenarios, such as the ones I mapped, where the LD vote is so much down on 2019 (especially because it will largely be at Labour's gain). Even their overperformance in those areas probably won't overcome the LD to Con swing since the election; the harsh reality is probably the Labour vote splits the LD vote in some of these marginals where the LDs are close (e.g. Esher). It's down to tactical voting and very localised campaigning which the LDs are very good at; and i've no idea how you project that without expensive MRP polling. Any ideas welcome. I perhaps should have been clearer that I was only looking at Labour gains, and spelt out more clearly why - i will do that next time. Thanks again for your comment.
Disclosure - I campaigned for the LDs in Hitchin and Harpenden in 2019, a supposedly safe Tory seat with a 12,000 Tory majority. The LDs mounted the most effective campaign against the Tories in H&H, which voted 60% Remain in 2016. We reduced the Tory majority down to less than 7,000 but failed to get across the line due to Labour splitting the majority Opposition vote and soft Tory fears about Corbyn.
This experience has turned me into a passionate believer in the Progressive Alliance. The Compass report I shared above is the best analysis I’ve seen as to why this makes sense and why Labour have practically no chance of defeating the Tories in 2024 without it.
From a simulation perspective, what would be interesting to look at would be to look at each seat contested by Labour and the LDs and assume that the leading challenger to the Tories from these two can pickup 40% / 60% / 80% of the other challenger’s votes.
I accept that with a progressive alliance, it is a big stretch to assume that 100% of the secondary challenger’s votes would transfer to the primary challenger.
For example in Hitchin and Harpenden, what would happen if the LDs picked up 40% / 60% / 80% of Labour votes. In this particular instance the LDs could win if they picked up 80% of the Labour vote.
I think such a simulation would give a directional indication of how effective such a progressive alliance would be.
Great points. It feels like a groundswell of centrist support for Labour is definitely overdue, and was perhaps held back by Corbyn’s personality cult.
Corbin nearly won in 2017 despite the establishment onslaught against Marxist commies etc. He was hamstrung by the Blairites insistence on not honouring Brexit in 2019. Starmer will only offer Tory lite.
It really wasn't the Blairites insistence on a second referendum, it was pants-shitting terror through half the Labour Party at the Lib Dem and Green results in the Euro election. Loads of MPs who weren't particularly bothered about Brexit saw their seat go yellow or green in the Euros and started demanding that Labour make some noises to the Remain campaign.
Corbyn could have stuck to his pro-Brexit guns, sacrificed all the pro-Remain seats, held the red wall, and stopped the Tories. But then Jo Swinson's boast that she'd be Prime Minister wouldn't have been a joke.
It’s a joke to define seats held since 2010 as ‘blue wall’. The red wall Labour seats have been held since before the war and people vote Labour because their parents and grandparents did. The writer is delusional.
Unfortunately for progressives, there are far more Labour seats with small majorities that are likely to fall to the Conservatives than vice versa, as Matthew Goodwin points out in his recent article.
Thanks for this. I'll try and deal with some of the points Matthew made in his article in a brief follow up thing this week. The point you make could be right, but there's scenarios in which it isn't.
The first comment here is at the heart of the problem Labour face. Voters who lean left but felt they couldn't vote for Corbyn at the last election are the same who now blame those that did vote for Corbyn's Labour, as the reason the Tories won by so much. The reality is, it was those who were blinded by anti-corbynism who gave the super majority to Boris, not those who actually voted Labour.
A majority of voters in the UK are left leaning and vote for left leaning parties. All we need to do to win is realise we need to unite under one party, the way the right has. Or we can keep blaming Corbyn, who we could have all voted for, but instead decided to cut off our noses to spite our faces instead.
2019 was a one issue election. Corbin would have been a lot closer if he had respected Brexit.
Nice analysis but deeply frustrating that you have failed to consider how the LDs can contribute to the defeat of the Conservatives. This is a Labour-only analysis and as such is badly flawed.
Your own numbers from the 2019 GE shows that the LDs are best placed to defeat the Tories in 12 of these Blue Wall seats, including mine own of Hitchin and Harpenden.
In these seats I submit that the LDs are the more credible challenger to the Tories and that a Progressive Alliance, with Labour and the LDs standing aside for the better-placed challenger, would have the best odds of success in defeating the Tories.
Take a look at this analysis by Compass.
https://www.compassonline.org.uk/publications/we-divide-they-conquer-if-labour-struggles-to-win-alone-what-is-to-be-done/
I’ve like to see your updated analysis once you have re-run it to consider a Progressive Alliance scenario.
Regards
Richard
Very reasonable point, thanks - for simplicity I didn't model potential LD gains. It's hard to know how to do this simply in scenarios, such as the ones I mapped, where the LD vote is so much down on 2019 (especially because it will largely be at Labour's gain). Even their overperformance in those areas probably won't overcome the LD to Con swing since the election; the harsh reality is probably the Labour vote splits the LD vote in some of these marginals where the LDs are close (e.g. Esher). It's down to tactical voting and very localised campaigning which the LDs are very good at; and i've no idea how you project that without expensive MRP polling. Any ideas welcome. I perhaps should have been clearer that I was only looking at Labour gains, and spelt out more clearly why - i will do that next time. Thanks again for your comment.
Hi. Thanks for replying so quickly.
Disclosure - I campaigned for the LDs in Hitchin and Harpenden in 2019, a supposedly safe Tory seat with a 12,000 Tory majority. The LDs mounted the most effective campaign against the Tories in H&H, which voted 60% Remain in 2016. We reduced the Tory majority down to less than 7,000 but failed to get across the line due to Labour splitting the majority Opposition vote and soft Tory fears about Corbyn.
This experience has turned me into a passionate believer in the Progressive Alliance. The Compass report I shared above is the best analysis I’ve seen as to why this makes sense and why Labour have practically no chance of defeating the Tories in 2024 without it.
From a simulation perspective, what would be interesting to look at would be to look at each seat contested by Labour and the LDs and assume that the leading challenger to the Tories from these two can pickup 40% / 60% / 80% of the other challenger’s votes.
I accept that with a progressive alliance, it is a big stretch to assume that 100% of the secondary challenger’s votes would transfer to the primary challenger.
For example in Hitchin and Harpenden, what would happen if the LDs picked up 40% / 60% / 80% of Labour votes. In this particular instance the LDs could win if they picked up 80% of the Labour vote.
I think such a simulation would give a directional indication of how effective such a progressive alliance would be.
Hope these thoughts make sense.
Richard.