Three problems with Richard Burgon's contribution to the whole patriotism/flags debate - which was (1) voters who like flags and patriotism have their own party - the Conservative party (2) chasing them means taking young and BAME voters for granted
1. People who like flags and patriotism is "most people" (see Sunder Katwala's thread for evidence). So the argument amounts to "Labour should reject what most people think on this, and actively encourage them to vote Conservative if this is something that is important to them."
2. The "most people" who like flags in patriotism includes, actually, most young people and BAME voters. So if your concern is not to take such voters for granted - i.e. seeking to reflect their views not ignore them - then rejecting flags & patriotism is the wrong approach
3. Burgon is concerned this will cost more voters than it gains. That seems unlikely given (1) and (2) above, but it also ignores geography. The minority of voters who actively dislike tepid appeals to flags are concentrated in safe Labour seats.
Losing some votes in seats where Labour has towering majorities to improve Labour's appeal in the much larger set of seats which do not return Labour MPs would seem, on the face of it, a worthwhile gamble.
Just to underline that I am not misrepresenting Burgon's views on this, the quote I am responding to is at the end of this article. theguardian.com/politics/2021/…
The better point Burgon makes is that this kind of thing is no use as a substitute for more substantive policy and strategy. At best it is mood music. But given voters' views about Labour on this topic, a change of mood music is potentially worthwhile
For evidence that Labour has an image/brand problem to address here, see this polling. Voters consider themselves patriotic by a 61-16 margin (+45 net). They are more likely to think of Labour as not patriotic than patriotic - 35-40 margin (-5 net)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rob Ford

Rob Ford Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @robfordmancs

6 Feb
Nerd trivia: The inauguration of Joe Biden means the beginning of the fifth period of time with 6 living Presidents. Four of the five periods have come since 1993:
1993-4: Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton
2001-4: Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II
2017-18: Carter, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, Trump
2021-: Carter, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, Trump, Biden

The earlier one was 1861-62: Van Buren, Tyler, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Lincoln.

There have never been seven Presidents alive at the same time
Another trivia 6 - there have been 6 Presidents who at one point in their lives were the only President alive:
Washington
Adams
Grant
T Roosevelt
Hoover
Nixon

Nixon is the only President who has been the only President alive and one of a set of 6 living Presidents
Read 11 tweets
31 Jan
I've been very positive about the UK's vaccine rollout, which has been outstanding.
But the successes this month only serve to throw into sharper relief the failures of last month, when a spineless got delated (again) taking the steps needed to avert catastrophe
The rolling 7 day average of cases in the UK has been halving about every two weeks since the peaked a few days after we, finally and belatedly, locked down in full on 5th January.

How many cases could have been averted if we had instead have locked down on 15th December?
Cases then, per @ganeshran , were running at average of 20k per day. Assuming same 2 week halving, we would have had:
10k per day around 29th Dec
5k per day around 12th Jan
2.5k per day around 26th Jan
Read 11 tweets
29 Jan
Universe brain incompetence right here
So today in EU vaccine response:
President of the most vaccine sceptical large member state cast doubt on vaccine approved by EU authorities.

Then EU accidentally publishes confidential contract with the vaccine maker potentially voiding the contract
Read 4 tweets
18 Jan
Excellent analysis as per usual from Stephen. One idea he raises here which I think is really worth pondering is that welfare cuts for 2020s Cons could become like immigration for 2000s/2010s Labour: an issue they can neither dismiss, tackle or find a way to avoid"
And for symmetrical reasons. For Labour, immigration controls were a policy the voters they were targeting strongly favoured, but that their MPs, activists and media supporters loathed.
Big welfare increases are like that for Cons now - the voters they've targeted and successfully won over in the "red wall" etc favour a stronger safety net. But many MPs, traditional activists, and Con media hate the idea.
Read 6 tweets
16 Jan
Netscape Navigator and AOL chat rooms. And MiniDisc.
Also the NeoGeo - a console of the same era as the Megadrive and SNES but twice as powerful but ten times as expensive. The games looked as good as the arcade games of the time but cost the equivalent of like £200 each in today’s money
I used to go to the local video game store just to gawk at the NeoGeo demo cabinet
Read 5 tweets
16 Jan
Quite a few people seem to misunderstand my point here. Let me clarify:

If you're an elected politician, let alone a former leader of a party, you should not endorse and amplify sentiments which frame your defeat by other elected politician in the language of coup & conspiracy
I don't particularly care about what Margolyes herself has to say, she's a private citizen she's free to take nonsensical position. It is Leanne Wood's endorsement I find troubling. Language *matters*. Respect for democratic outcomes *matters*. 2/?
"Miriam Margoyles is right" to say "There has been a right wing coup in this country."
That involves either bankrupting the meaning of the term coup (leaving you unable to use it correctly in future) or genuinely believing successive Con election victories amount to a "coup"
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!