You suggest parallels between this year's US presidential election and Labour's 1992 defeat (Leader, 8 November). But the Democrats have been here before, in 1984 and 1988. For whatever reason, they chose to abandon the proven strategy of triangulation and occupying the political centre ground which Bill Clinton and Tony Blair - the only election winners the Democrats or Labour have produced since the 1970s - both perfected.
In this year's election, the Democrats relied on a single tactic: firing up their core vote in order to increase its turnout. They picked a candidate who epitomised the values and geography of that core and who, rather than reach out to Middle America, chose to confront it on the very ground - defence and security - where Bush was strongest. Unfortunately, the Democrats' core, like Labour's, has been eroded by social change and de-industrialisation. Population shifts (southwards and westwards in the US, southwards and eastwards in the UK) make it mathematically impossible to win election victories with the left's heartland regions alone.
Against the Democrats' kamikaze campaign, the Republicans just motivated their larger core vote to come out, while also peeling off moderate Democrats offended by John Kerry's stance on Iraq. I'm not surprised you didn't mention this, because the New Statesman appears hell-bent on persuading Labour to adopt the same strategy of retreating into ideological comfort-blanket territory.
Luke Akehurst
London N16
