A center-left group in the U.S. sees a valuable lesson in the landslide victory of Britain’s Labour Party after nearly 15 years in the political wilderness.

The centrist Democrat think tank Third Way argues in a memo obtained Friday by POLITICO that Labour’s sweeping win shows that “centrism wins elections” and can undercut right-wing populism by appealing to the broadest segment of the population with a credible platform.

28 points

This is ridiculous. Nothing changed on Labor’s end; the right just split the vote. The lesson is to have incompetent competition.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

The article is just wrong. Terrible writing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Splitting the right = left landslide. Splitting the left = right landslide.

Third way: “Hey, if we split the left, the left will win!”

permalink
report
reply
22 points

How is this a broader lesson and not just UK specific? “Center” here I take to mean right, they are saying left parties should move right to become centrist. Where elese has this worked? Swedens socdem has moved right for a long time, and they are barely scraping by. In France, Macron is a center right guy and he is absolutely failing to the far-right.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

It’s politico, they have a centre-right slant, so of course they think the left should move in their direction

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I honestly don’t think it’ll work in the UK either. This election was a win against an undefended goal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

The sun came up this morning and centrists took it as an omen that they should move to the right.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Now I understand this article is largely ragebait for this community, but I just wanted to point out that the incredible strength of this centrist approach resulted in one of the lowest turnout elections in 20 years with labour receiving about 34% of the popular vote.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a consistently winning strategy.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Turnout was low because people don’t vote when they already know the outcome. The last landslide in the UK also had low turnout.

And while 34% is a few percentage points lower than other recent winners, the more centrist party, lib dems, got more votes than the previous election.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

And while 34% is a few percentage points lower than other recent winners, the more centrist party, lib dems, got more votes than the previous election.

Sure, but Corbyn’s labour got 32.2 and 40.0 compared to this 33.7 “landslide.” And Corbyn won his seat even though he’s an independent. I don’t particularly find the centrist strategy to be a very compelling result compared to that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The tories lost, Stamer won because tory voters split between Lib Dem’s, Reform and other.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Shy tories voted for the Lib Dem’s. The Lib Dem’s aren’t some compromise between left and right. That’s doesn’t really work, it just means everyone dislikes you. The Lib Dem’s get votes when the tories are too socially unacceptable to vote for.

A Tory walks down the street, he encounters a homeless person. He chooses to kick the them, laughing as he walks away. The Lib Dem disgusted by this kicks the homeless person, then walks away quietly.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 331K

    Comments