Saturday 11th and Sunday 12th March 2017

[AnatolyKasparov]

And it is hard not to see the cringeworthy "Irn Bru" stunts by Jim Murphy as somewhat symbolic of Scottish Labour's maladroitness that helped lead to their collapse.

(even I found them naff, the reaction of several Scots who felt patronised beyond belief was unprintable)

Seriously, who advised him that might be a good idea? Sounds like something the execrable McTernan might have come up with tbh

[PorFavor]

People - can we avoid the 20 mile-long posts that involve quotes within quotes within quotes.
Perhaps truncate a little.

Thanks.

Especially the ones that are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

[SpinningHugo]

Could it be that they were seen as too close to the Tories? '

That explanation is now being tested to destruction. Maybe the Corbyn project just hasn't had long enough to be effective? Or perhaps it is still the Evil Blairites to blame. Or something.

They have now moved away from Labour and it will take a lot to get them back...also the Labour Party is not wholly supportive of Corbyn is it....including the SLP

The battle was lost before Corbyn came to power....he was probably optimistic in saying he could get the voters back from the SNP. Not sure who could now really

McTernan is always ready to pop up and give his view which just reminds people of the past

Oh and stop with this pathetic 'evil Blairites' thing - makes you look even more of a dick than you are already

So what evidence would be required? 20 years of Corbyn failure? 50? Or will the Appalling Faction Who Cannot be Named just be to blame forever?

[SpinningHugo]

I know some disagree, ....

Like, you know, political historians.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Very few things in politics are "inevitable".

I know some disagree, but I have never seen the collapse of the Liberals as a major party of government as "inevitable" for example.

Developments in society did not help them, but ultimately their fall was down to bad decisions and bad politics. Given some things happening differently, it is far from impossible our politics in the past century could have been much more along the lines of Canada.

I think there was always a pressure there, with the Tories lacking legitimacy in Scotland, but it didn't have to come to a head so soon. Some of that was mistakes, some of it bad luck.

The SNP having their A team in Holyrood and Labour not was also a factor, I think. They were basically outslugged there. With a stronger team, the SNP's schtick that nothing they did wrong was down to them or their spending choices could have been found out.

[PorFavor]

Night night.

[howsillyofme1]

Talking about Murphy, I am sure this helped the Labour Party and their left-wing base

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -cuts.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[howsillyofme1]

That explanation is now being tested to destruction. Maybe the Corbyn project just hasn't had long enough to be effective? Or perhaps it is still the Evil Blairites to blame. Or something.

They have now moved away from Labour and it will take a lot to get them back...also the Labour Party is not wholly supportive of Corbyn is it....including the SLP

The battle was lost before Corbyn came to power....he was probably optimistic in saying he could get the voters back from the SNP. Not sure who could now really

McTernan is always ready to pop up and give his view which just reminds people of the past

Oh and stop with this pathetic 'evil Blairites' thing - makes you look even more of a dick than you are already

So what evidence would be required? 20 years of Corbyn failure? 50? Or will the Appalling Faction Who Cannot be Named just be to blame forever?

Grow up

[AnatolyKasparov]

I know some disagree, ....

Like, you know, political historians.

Far from universal agreement there, and they have an inbuilt tendency towards the "inevitability" school of history.

[citizenJA]

Night night.

Goodnight, PorFavor
Goodnight, everyone

[Tubby Isaacs]

And it is hard not to see the cringeworthy "Irn Bru" stunts by Jim Murphy as somewhat symbolic of Scottish Labour's maladroitness that helped lead to their collapse.

(even I found them naff, the reaction of several Scots who felt patronised beyond belief was unprintable)

Seriously, who advised him that might be a good idea? Sounds like something the execrable McTernan might have come up with tbh

He was a poor choice, but is even that worse than Salmond whoring Scotland to Trump? In other circumstances, that stuff gets tied in with other stuff- corporation tax cutting, bank regulation cutting- and he has a real problem.

Salmond's skilfully turned that experience round as "I know from bitter experience" (while never properly admitting responsibility). But it shows, I think, what you can get away with general winds in your favour.

[SpinningHugo]

I know some disagree, ....

Like, you know, political historians.

Far from universal agreement there, and they have an inbuilt tendency towards the "inevitability" school of history.

Nah. You're stuck in some 1930s Great Man of History view (ie it was all down to Asquith). I don't know any modern historian who doesn't consider the decline of the Liberals to have been historically determined by the franchise change and the rise of the working class.

This also lets Corbyn (and Miliband) off the hook to an extent. The problems hitting Labour are that the divides in politics have become

1) Nationalism v Unionism (in Scotland)

2) Brexit v Remain

3. Metropolitan City Dwellers v Working Class in Towns

Labour's problem is that it is on neither one side nor the other in these (modern) conflicts, and so has been squeezed. It takes a very long time for parties with very long political history and deep wells of personal commitment from people like you (and me) to die. Someone like Corbyn can rapidly accelerate the process, but he isn't really to blame for the bigger forces. If it weren't him, it would be someone like him.

[AnatolyKasparov]

The point is, Murphy was probably the least bad choice available at the time (and I say that who somebody who thinks his previous behaviour in the shadow cabinet - re howsilly's link above - was pretty appalling) but that itself is an eloquent comment on the state Scottish Labour was in.

But, again, with better judgement and better tactics maybe a dozen (certainly half a dozen) seats might have been held against the tide. It doesn't help things that the lightweight and disloyal Murray is now the party's only Westminster MP.

(one thing JM might have done is resigned his HoC seat immediately on becoming leader and sought a Holyrood seat at the GE - that might have convinced some he meant business?)

[howsillyofme1]

I know some disagree, ....

Like, you know, political historians.

Far from universal agreement there, and they have an inbuilt tendency towards the "inevitability" school of history.

Hindsight is always a wonderful thing........historians look for patterns and causes. It may be apparent with hindsight that WWI was likely to happen but to call it inevitable is pushing it a bit

The Labour Party collapse in Scotland was inevitable in the sense that they made so many tactical errors at key points due to inept leadership. Also the corrupt nature of the local party machines was an issue - but it could have been avoided pretty easily

This needed a catalyst though and the referendum campaign provided that (plus again the naivety in trusting the Tories)

However, you would think it is inevitable that the Tories collapse into a blackhole of ineptitude and corruption or that the Trump administration would implode spectacularly due to general incompetence

Neither of these is inevitable, however, nor even probably not matter how much we would like it to be

I come back also to my point that there was nothing inevitable that the SNP would take over from the SLP as the main Westminster power from Scotland until post 2010....Labour dropped 10 points in polling immediately post the referendum and 5-10% more in the months after

Was that 'inevitable' or a consequence of the tactical decisions taken by the party

[Tubby Isaacs]

The point is, Murphy was probably the least bad choice available at the time (and I say that who somebody who thinks his previous behaviour in the shadow cabinet - re howsilly's link above - was pretty appalling) but that itself is an eloquent comment on the state Scottish Labour was in.

But, again, with better judgement and better tactics maybe a dozen (certainly half a dozen) seats might have been held against the tide. It doesn't help things that the lightweight and disloyal Murray is now the party's only Westminster MP.

Yeah, he was a bad choice, but he's got a decent alibi being in Westminster. Johan Lamont wasn't an obvious Murphy type and she was overwhelmed by the Nationalists.

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -paul-ryan" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Republicans scramble to defend healthcare reform despite party divide
Tom Price joins Republicans in touting plan on talkshows, with Paul Ryan praising ‘freedom’ as analysts foresee sharp cuts to tax credits and Medicaid

[Tubby Isaacs]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -paul-ryan



Republicans scramble to defend healthcare reform despite party divide
Tom Price joins Republicans in touting plan on talkshows, with Paul Ryan praising ‘freedom’ as analysts foresee sharp cuts to tax credits and Medicaid

Ryan is an absolute chancer. If he's pushing "freedom", he's on a sticky wicket. That's certainly one faction in the Republicans, but the base who identify with Trump particularly strongly might not be so happy.

[Eric_WLothian]

And it is hard not to see the cringeworthy "Irn Bru" stunts by Jim Murphy as somewhat symbolic of Scottish Labour's maladroitness that helped lead to their collapse.

(even I found them naff, the reaction of several Scots who felt patronised beyond belief was unprintable)

Seriously, who advised him that might be a good idea? Sounds like something the execrable McTernan might have come up with tbh

The Labour decline started long before Murphy.

There was a strong Tory contingent of Scottish MPs pre-Thatcher. One could say that as a largely agricultural country, with a strong financial sector in Edinburgh, parts of Scotland should be Tory strongholds. The Tories are now, of course, the second-largest party in Holyrood.

That aside (from memory, without checking the figures) in the SE immediately after the LDs got into bed with the Tories, the Labour vote held up but the SNP appeared to be the ones to benefit from the LD collapse.

A succession of mediocre Scottish Labour leaders hasn't helped (particularly the Iain Gray sandwich shop incident) but, while Murphy didn't help either, he wasn't the cause of the decline.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the current makeup of the Scottish MPs is a quirk of the FPTP system - the SNP only polled around 50% of votes.

[howsillyofme1]

And it is hard not to see the cringeworthy "Irn Bru" stunts by Jim Murphy as somewhat symbolic of Scottish Labour's maladroitness that helped lead to their collapse.

(even I found them naff, the reaction of several Scots who felt patronised beyond belief was unprintable)

Seriously, who advised him that might be a good idea? Sounds like something the execrable McTernan might have come up with tbh

The Labour decline started long before Murphy.

There was a strong Tory contingent of Scottish MPs pre-Thatcher. One could say that as a largely agricultural country, with a strong financial sector in Edinburgh, parts of Scotland should be Tory strongholds. The Tories are now, of course, the second-largest party in Holyrood.

That aside (from memory, without checking the figures) in the SE immediately after the LDs got into bed with the Tories, the Labour vote held up but the SNP appeared to be the ones to benefit from the LD collapse.

A succession of mediocre Scottish Labour leaders hasn't helped (particularly the Iain Gray sandwich shop incident) but, while Murphy didn't help either, he wasn't the cause of the decline.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the current makeup of the Scottish MPs is a quirk of the FPTP system - the SNP only polled around 50% of votes.

Only 50% - pathetic!

Murphy was not solely responsible but he wasn't what was needed at the time.

The facts are though that the SNP started making inroads into the Scottish elections from 2007 onwards but Labour still held a large lead in the Westminster elections, in eluding 2010 which was not far behind 1997 and 2001

This seems to indicate that people voted SNP for other reasons and the polling in support of Independence suggested that it was more than 'identity' politics

Why is it that some people on here blame Corbyn for every single thing to do with the Labour Party, even things that happened before he came to the leadership, but anything happened before is 'inevitable'

Was it inevitable that Labour lost 5 million voters after 1997?
Was it inevitable that the Tories succeeded in blaming the Labour Party for the Global Financial Crisis?

[Eric_WLothian]

And it is hard not to see the cringeworthy "Irn Bru" stunts by Jim Murphy as somewhat symbolic of Scottish Labour's maladroitness that helped lead to their collapse.

(even I found them naff, the reaction of several Scots who felt patronised beyond belief was unprintable)

Seriously, who advised him that might be a good idea? Sounds like something the execrable McTernan might have come up with tbh

The Labour decline started long before Murphy.

There was a strong Tory contingent of Scottish MPs pre-Thatcher. One could say that as a largely agricultural country, with a strong financial sector in Edinburgh, parts of Scotland should be Tory strongholds. The Tories are now, of course, the second-largest party in Holyrood.

That aside (from memory, without checking the figures) in the SE immediately after the LDs got into bed with the Tories, the Labour vote held up but the SNP appeared to be the ones to benefit from the LD collapse.

A succession of mediocre Scottish Labour leaders hasn't helped (particularly the Iain Gray sandwich shop incident) but, while Murphy didn't help either, he wasn't the cause of the decline.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the current makeup of the Scottish MPs is a quirk of the FPTP system - the SNP only polled around 50% of votes.

Only 50% - pathetic!

Murphy was not solely responsible but he wasn't what was needed at the time.

The facts are though that the SNP started making inroads into the Scottish elections from 2007 onwards but Labour still held a large lead in the Westminster elections, in eluding 2010 which was not far behind 1997 and 2001

This seems to indicate that people voted SNP for other reasons and the polling in support of Independence suggested that it was more than 'identity' politics

Yes "only 50%" -but in a representative system that shouldn't deliver 56 out of 59 seats!
During the referendum campaign Murphy was, imo, probably the best available to confront the 'yes' thugs who were attempting to shout down any public meetings.

The SNP have what Labour lacks - a way of getting their point of view splashed around the Scottish MSM, with little or no criticism. (Much the same as the Tories).

There's a joke going around that there should be a second referendum - but with the question "should Scotland remain in the UK?" ...all those SNP supporters with their 'yes' stickers wouldn't know what to do.

[HindleA]

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news ... se-studies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Independent Living Strategy Group looking for local authority assessment case studies

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -the-claim" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



John McCain tells Trump: present wiretapping evidence or retract the claim