How long ago 2015 feels. So much has happened since the last general election, it would be easy to assume that the dynamics of that contest have little to teach us now. Though Ed Miliband had some trouble holding together the various Labour factions, the level of internal conflict was nothing like it is today. And he wasn’t forced to deal with the additional struggle of Brexit, which has sharply divided voters in a way that cuts across traditional party lines.

Tony Blair should zip it. Interventions from its right wing won’t help Labour | Sam Glover Read more

Despite these changes, I’m starting to get quite a strong sense of deja vu. The EU referendum result has altered the political landscape dramatically, yet the Conservatives’ tactics are remarkably similar to their 2015 campaign. Theresa May’s chosen slogan – “strong and stable leadership for a stable and strong nation” – echoes David Cameron’s statement that “Britain faces a simple and inescapable choice – stability and a strong government with me, or chaos with Ed Miliband”.

In hindsight, Cameron’s claim seems almost comically absurd – but opinion polls suggest the message remains effective. Voters have short memories (or perhaps are so convinced of the ineptitude of Labour that they see May as the only viable choice).

Under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour has found it difficult to propose even modest, carefully costed left-of-centre policies without being attacked across most of the media as loony and unrealistic. Under Miliband, the party faced exactly the same problem. He’s seen as more moderate than the current leader, but was still denounced as “Red Ed” – with the Daily Mail going as far as to attack his Marxist academic father as “the man who hated Britain”.

Labour has a real Brexit alternative. Now it must get the message to voters | Owen Jones Read more

In spite of all of this, voters in the UK – when polled on individual policies – seem to skew remarkably leftwing. We’re in favour of tax rises. Not only for people richer than ourselves, but also an extra penny on national insurance to help fund the NHS. We want a more equal society even if that lowers overall national prosperity. We back universal free school meals. The majority of us are even in favour of a maximum wage cap, which would limit the salaries of bosses to 20 times the amount their lowest paid employee earns.

What does seem to stick is the idea that Labour simply isn’t economically credible. Though the financial crash would have hit just as hard under a Conservative government (until recently, both parties were enthusiastic proponents of financial deregulation), the fact that it happened under Labour has damaged the party immensely. Many voters believe the myth that it was caused by “Labour overspending” – which makes any spending the party proposes easy to attack.

Frustratingly, even the most egregious hypocrisy from the Conservatives doesn’t seem to stop the “loony left” accusations from resonating. When Miliband proposed an energy price cap, the criticism was vicious. Most newspapers parroted the Conservative line – that such a policy was dangerous, anti-business leftist extremism. The Daily Mail carried the headline “back to the bad old days” and claimed “Red Ed revives 70s socialism”. A mere two years later, May has stolen the policy. The Mail’s coverage this time round is ludicrously contradictory. “Crackdown on energy rip-offs” the front page announced. “Mrs May is set to announce a cap on soaring bills”.

The Daily Mail's attack on Ralph and Ed Miliband is classic red-baiting | Martin Kettle Read more

It’s undeniable that the parties do not face an even playing field: 80% of our country’s printed media is owned and controlled by just five billionaires. These people have an active interest in preventing greater redistribution of wealth, greater regulation and other policies Labour is likely to propose for the benefit of ordinary people. The Tories can get away with poaching select policies without facing a similar backlash because they’re still the party that looks after the rich. To win the support of Rupert Murdoch back in 1997, Blair had to promise not to damage his business interests. And media barons don’t necessarily have to exercise direct editorial control over publications to influence the tone – journalists know they’re supposed to take a partisan stance.

Though it’s tempting to complain about unfairness, the situation is what it is. A party that represents the material interests of ordinary people is never going to have the super-wealthy on side. It needs to find a way to get its message out regardless. The mainstream media might be skewed against the left, but it’s not a homogeneous hostile block. Leftwing politicians are likely to be attacked twice as hard for every slip-up, so to counter claims of incompetence they need to be twice as prepared and capable. Beating the odds seems a daunting task – but we must remember it’s the only way the left has ever won.