317 forever
Established Member
In a way the rot started soon after 1997. Tony Blair talked about never been complacent but still took the heartlands for granted for having "nowhere else to go". Sure, while such voters did not defect to other parties initially they simply abstained. This led to considerably reduced turnouts, and even by 2001 to Labour getting more votes in unexpected marginals like Enfield Southgate than safe Labour areas like Sunderland.True, he united the party because, for the first time in years it could see a glimpse of power, the Tories were divided thanks to 'The B@$t@rd$'. I also think he would have won in '97 (almost leader would) but with a (much) smaller majority. Power seemed to go to some of Blair's ministers' heads and, crucially, they lost sight of who'd got them where they were. True, they put through some excellent legislation, but too much time was spent playing to middle England - wasn't it Worcester Woman? A 30-40 seat majority is fine, it keeps some of the potential rebels loyal but also keeps the government more focused.
The Hartlepool by-election? What has Labour ever done for Hartlepool - besides the gift of Peter Mandelson? Revenge is a dish best served cold!
These Labour areas supporting Brexit and now the Conservatives could even be the legacy of "New Labour" in these areas.