What now for Labour Party ?

Use your energy more positively GracesGran. It's in their DNA and it's best to ignore them. It will certainly be one of my New Year's Resolutions.

I lost any respect for several people on here when I saw the post on Friday morning Chewbacca.

Quite why I annoy GGMK3 so much I have no idea.

You don't "annoy" me when you write a well thought out post like that Monica. It's the personal stuff that annoys me and, as I said, I will reply insult for insult until either GNHQ stops it or we all realise it's not helpful.

My theory is the missing left wing voters are busy campaigning for a second general election !

After all folks, we didn't know what we were voting for with this last one, did we?

paragraph, 4th from the end should be the last paragraph. Not sure how it got out of sequence.

GGMK, I've not always agreed with your political stance on these threads, but I've always respected your ability to argue your political points and opinions in an informative and balanced way. I've considered you to be one of the more well informed posters. But your posts this morning have let you down. You've accused others of not being open minded; whilst demonstrating your own rigidity of opinion. You've accused others of not having the capacity to argue their points effectively, without recourse to insults, a statement that makes you look like a sophomaniac and is, in itself, a transference of insult.

I've lost a lot of respect for you this morning.

Jaxie, I totally agree but God help Rebecca LB, her eyebrows have already provoked comment on GN. She will be ripped to shreds.

Thank you to those who recognise that, as I am not committed to either major party, I can stand to one side and observe both dispassionately. I try very hard not to attack individuals on a personal basis, and I do not think I do, although what anyone writes in a post is, surely up for analysis, otherwise why post?

Quite why I annoy GGMK3 so much I have no idea.

GagaJo I am absolutely agree with you, a political party should be built on a core philosophy and it should be true to its principles, but if the application of those principles makes it unelectable, why be a Parliamentary party?

I am not suggesting a change in those principles, but a change in their application . I felt the big problem with the Labour manifesto was it promised too much too soon and that its costings and sources of funds were uncertain and the potential economic cost of those proposals frightened people.

The constant addition of extra uncosted policies on an almost daily basis, did not give an impression of a party sure of itself or its future course. Someone compared the constant aditional policies with the Generation Game and its moving belt of goodies - all that was missing was the ubiquitous cuddly toy.

We desperately need a united confident Labour party that can provide an effective opposition. That we do not have it is entirely the Labour Parties fault, it was the author of its own defeat.

I also doubted how so many policies could be implemented in a carefully planned way in 5 years. I felt the danger was too many policies brought in too quickly without time for adequate and careful planning would result in in chaos and in many cases of unforeseen consequence that would work against their effective implementation.

If we live in a one party state, then that is entirely the responsibility of the Labour party, which, regrettably, ceased to listen to the aspirations and hopes of its core voters.

Some pages back, when I commented positively on the need to rebuild the Labour Party.GGMK3 asked what it had got to do with me. I made the argument Gagajo that you make here, that we are now living in a one party state

I think your "work to live" is much the same as my "workers without wealth" and probably less contentious. Those who can live on the income from wealth are getting to be a much older cohort. As I described, many the young, even with good education and good jobs are not able to "store up treasures upon earth" even if they wanted to.

Don't say "never" GagaJo, the sheer weight of numbers not sharing in the wealth might change things just as the sheer weight of numbers in the older generations has this time.

I have no doubt that a few left wing posters who are usually very active on the political pages are too stunned to quickly return to the fray.....understandable after what happened

Nice of you to be so concerned.

Yes, I definitely think the Labour party needs new YOUNG blood. I was a real JC fan, but he's totally right to step down. Frankly, despite my fandom, he was too old.

I think the working class NOW (as someone on another thread, said) are those that have to work to live. That will be me until I get (if I EVER do) state pension.

We don't have a democracy anymore, because with the strangle hold of the Murdoch / biased BBC media, no left-wing party is electable. Too much propaganda and lies.

I'll continue to support the vulnerable in society because those are my core principals. But I don't expect to ever see another left-wing government.

Gagajo, I suggest you google the meaning of 'one party state'. It does not mean the same as a government with a large majority which you don't happen to have voted for.

Ditto the meanings of 'principal' and 'principle'.

Apologies for pedantry, but I am roused to it by such a ridiculous statement.

You are one of the crassest people I have come across in life LG. Yes they may be stunned - so you make fun of them and set up and post on totally spiteful threads.

I do not resort to insults when I cannot make my point - I ask. I am just determined to exchange insult for insult until GNHQ find they are no longer paying their bills on the backs of the baying and braying and stop it happening.

Diane Abbott is yesterday's woman and lacks credibility after she mangled a TV interview over figures. Keir Starmer has gravitas. I liked Yvette Cooper but I wrote to her well before the election and she didn't even bother to answer my letter. What about Andy Burnham ( even if he does look like a Thunderbirds puppet) he is a very principled man. Ooh, I shouldn't have commented on physical appearance, but let's be honest, it's important in a leader. We certainly don't want another grey- bearded sit-on-the-fence, fade-into-the-background type.

I'm on and off the forum at the moment growstuff can you give me an idea how far back it is?

Sorry GagaJo, I am picking your brains this morning. Does the working-class still exist? We have many workers but working-class seemed, at one time, to be very income (or lack of) based. This does not seem to be the only people I would like to see protected now.

I have got this phrase "workers without wealth" stuck in my mind. I do not mean to exclude homeowners, for instance, but those who do not have anything to fall back on in the bad times. That, to me, is the "worker" I want to see protected. It doesn't feel as if the phrase working class fits this.

If we look, say, at a young person living and working, earning a good wage from a good education in somewhere like London they may still be unable to build that "wealth" that cushions those who do have it. Most of what they have will go on commuting and housing.

I'm not sure what you will make of this but I would be interested to know.

I'm confused about "one party state" we have an opposition party and other smaller parties who the electorate were free to cast their votes for. One party state Zimbabwe, Russia? where opponents take their life in their hands, critics of the government end up dead or China maybe I imagine that's a one party state!

Read the link I posted to Paul Mason's article for some positive suggestions.

To be honest, I think that's a huge problem. The left of centre needs to find a positive agenda, rather than constant sniping and sneering. Yes, I know that's what some of the right-wingers on GN excel at doing, but those who care about others need to rise above it and be more strategic.

Although MOnica and I hold 'some' different political views and we voted differently in the referendum I've always found her to see both sides of any argument.

It doesn't stop her insulting people's religious beliefs though.

Most people in the UK of working age are members of the working class.

I agree with your premise GagaJo. I would add only one thing. It is not just what a party stands for that gives you their values, it is what a party stands against. I wonder how you would describe that for Labour?

It is because of the Tories moving towards the more liberal (small 'l') stance on rules around work, workplace and capitalism in general and the tightening and moving to the far-right where individual rights are concerned that worries me into an "anyone but the Tories" stance.

Briefly, it is the negative of one party which affects my voting more than the positives of another. I find that worrying and dispiriting. I do think it comes from parties pretending to be all things for all men, which is easy to sell but impossible to do.

We now exist in a one party state. Doesn't mean we should lay down and accept it, but that is the case now.

I am a member of the working class. I support a party who supports the vulnerable in society. I will not support a party that does not share those principals.

I expect Labour will change. It won't get them elected, but I think they'll change. At which point I will leave Labour.

If the Tories had lost, they would not have abandoned their core principals.

Although MOnica and I hold 'some' different political views and we voted differently in the referendum I've always found her to see both sides of any argument.