No thread about Labour promising to cut the benefits of young people, arista? I'm surprised.

Its so complex
I can not see it working



but fair point

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...liband-011.jpg
No Ed he is bad luck

No he isn't..There's no such thing as luck in politics is there?
You either get backed or you don't.

I started one..... To be fair.

To be fair, when Neil Kinnock took over he had a massive mountain to climb, Labour were not only just battling to do anything as to what was ssen as a 'competent' govt but they also had to regain massive lost ground due to the SDP/Liberal alliance in the election of 1987.

Neil Kinnock made some good reforms and did in fact secure Labour's position as the main opposition clearly again and saw off the SDP/Liberal alliance threat.
By the time we got to the 1992 election,it seemed Neil Kinnock had lost his way and with the media then able to character assassinate people,the Sun and Daily Mail particularly it seems went to town on him and even more nastily his wife Glenys too.

However Neil Kinnock lay down much of the foundation that helped John Smith get well ahead of the Conservatives and then after his time was cruelly cut short,for Tony Blair too.
So I would say from all I have studied and read of that time that Neil Kinnock actually saved the Labour party from slipping even further into the mire.

Attack Ed Miliband all people may like to, he does have Labour ahead and in very different circumstances.
I think Ed likely respects the reforms Neil Kinnock started when he was leader and at least he is not afraid to be seen with those who didn't achieve the success hoped for by them.

The late 80s and early 90s were very different from where we are now and unpopular leaders can and do win elections against govts, Margaret Thatcher in 1979 and Edward Heath against all odds in 1970.

Also,interestingly, there hasn't been a leader of any party since the war who'didn't' have an 'English' seat who went on to win an election.
Alec Douglas-Home lost in 1964,Michael Foot lost in 1983, Neil Kinnock lost in 1987 and 1992, then Gordon Brown lost in 2010.
Therein may lie, in part, another factor as to getting elected.

great synopsis joey, it's important to notice that from the 80s the conservatives have relied more and more heavily on media bias to sway the electorate rather than policy.

yes well done Kizzy

Thankfully,the media,in particular the newspapers now seem to have little influence over voters.

I disagree here, I think the influence people massively...not always with what they report but what they don't.
There were 50'000 people stood outside the BBC yesterday, the media blackout of anti government rallies such as this key to how public perception and confidence can and is being manipulated.
It is their duty to remain impartial, by cherry picking which news stories are broadcast or reported especially one of this scale and importance could be very dangerous... imagine if boris had got his cannon out, who would be there to prove extreme measures were warranted ..or not?

Yes We Pay for their Corrupt Reporting

I don't ;)

''They talk about the education of their children, they talk about whether they are going to get jobs, they talk to me about some of the continuing tragic serious youth violence we see in my constituency. That is why I say we mustn't belittle politics. This is about people's lives. It is not about soap opera."

Umunna dismissed criticism that Miliband lacks the ability to connect with Britain's celebrity culture. He said: "That belittles our politics. We are not playing some game of Celebrity Big Brother. We are talking about big issues that affect all of our different communities."

Bang on right! :hehe:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...-umunna-labour