Thread by @syrpis

Watching as the Labour party, once again, descends into uncivil war. It cannot coalesce around any policy position or agree on who is best placed to deliver it. 1/6

We've been hearing a lot from ghosts of the past - Mandelson, McCluskey, McDonnell, Pidcock, Flint, Adonis and more. Much of 'the analysis' harks back to either Blair or Corbyn. It makes for grim reading and grim viewing. 2/6

We've been hearing a lot about the need to 'learn lessons' and 'listen to the people' and 'engage with voters' real concerns'. But what if (outlandish thought this) 'the people' disagree, and are sending a range of different messages? 3/6

Searching (desperately) for crumbs of comfort, I wonder whether Labour's woes tell us something about the prospects of a 'progressive alliance', focused on standing up against the Tory government, and finding ways to win against them? 4/6

It is difficult to imagine that the opposition could become any less coherent than it is now. And it would prompt discussion (which, who knows, might be productive...) between, rather than simply within, parties. 5/6

I know the objections... based on individual parties with coherent positions finding it impossible to compromise. But given how far away we are from that, maybe it would be good to try something new? 6/6

I reckon there’s a still a long way to go, however ‘relentless’ the focus on ‘the priorities of the British people’.

https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1391499340993241097