Not at all. The point is to ask whether or not it matters if there’s little enthusiasm for Labour and to make a historical comparison suggesting that it doesn’t. Nothing about policy at all!
The point is to ask whether or not it matters if there’s little enthusiasm for Labour and to make a historical comparison suggesting that it doesn’t.
Again, what conclusion are we suppose to draw from this? Because the one I draw to is that the political platform doesn’t matter, that the reason Miliband and Corbyn failed to unseat the Conservatives is not because of any policy or political failings, but because they weren’t against a sufficiently unpopular government.
Miliband or Corbyn would have won if they’d made their party more popular than the unpopular governments they faced, as Blair did and Starmer seems to have done, but they didn’t. Had they made themselves relatively popular (less unpopular), they wouldn’t have needed a great deal of enthusiasm to also win.
Not at all. The point is to ask whether or not it matters if there’s little enthusiasm for Labour and to make a historical comparison suggesting that it doesn’t. Nothing about policy at all!
Again, what conclusion are we suppose to draw from this? Because the one I draw to is that the political platform doesn’t matter, that the reason Miliband and Corbyn failed to unseat the Conservatives is not because of any policy or political failings, but because they weren’t against a sufficiently unpopular government.
Miliband or Corbyn would have won if they’d made their party more popular than the unpopular governments they faced, as Blair did and Starmer seems to have done, but they didn’t. Had they made themselves relatively popular (less unpopular), they wouldn’t have needed a great deal of enthusiasm to also win.