Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 9:21:02 GMT
The Libdems I doubt will be planing to go into coalition with anyone ever again. They're not going to put themselves in the position of being cast as the fall guy again. The very word 'coalition' probably brings them out in cold sweats. No, it's got to be a Lab majority govt with a good amount of padding hopefully. Call it 'alliance' or any other acceptable term if you like domjg , it amounts to the same thing. Enough leverage to keep Labour honest. Why would Sir Keir want any 'agreement' (any form of alliance) with LDEM? LAB are likely to win a very comfortable majority in GE'24 under FPTP, probably go on to Blair style 3 terms. In the event that LAB need LDEM MP votes (maybe in their 3rd term?) then they can dare LDEM to bring down a LAB govt and risk a GE. Not a good look for LDEM in the eyes of the public as LDEM will be doing CON's work for them - which is what Clegg did 2010-15 and Swinson did into GE'19. Surely LDEM have finally realised they are the 'patsy' and gen.pub does not look favourably on them when they do CON's work for them. Of course if LDEM want to be LAB's 'patsy' (instead of CON's) then Sir Keir might use them for that but LDEM aren't going to get a look in on any red briefcases or an 'alliance' on policies (beyond perhaps crafting some that LAB can copy - for free). Polling and the desire to win a 2nd, 3rd, etc term will keep 'Labour honest' and since Sir Keir seems to be solving his own internal factional issues then I doubt we'll see the 'rats in a sack' from LAB now it is back under NewLAB management (with lessons learned from the Corbyn experience) For tactical voting then LAB are the biggest beneficiaries of the ABCON votes, but sure LDEM will have some more MPs in next HoC - but I very much doubt Sir Keir will need them and I doubt he will want them even if/when he does. LDEM MPs can vote for LAB policies for 'free' if they want to or vote with CON against any+every LAB policy (even the ones they would implement themselves). |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 28, 2022 9:21:16 GMT
Or are they just being ludicrously overcautious and risking themselves being way behind the curve of what's acceptable to the public? Or they are following the traditional labour line of preferring to be oustide the EU?? It is a fact the two political parties both found themselves on the wrong side of the brexit debate according to their traditional line. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 9:30:02 GMT
In fairness that is a very reasonable analysis. The only part I would quibble is "continuity Tory" at least as far as it extends to green policies. These look genuinely interesting and things that it is impossible to imagine the Conservatives being unified enough on this issue to do. LAB are certainly 'Greener' and will also be in a better position to do something about Housing - areas where CON MP's 'rats in the sack' and NIMBYism have prevented enough progress (although 'U-turn' is imminent on Onshore Windfarms I reckon). "Continuity" on many other areas (eg Making Brexit Work) but of course a few tweaks to taxes, etc to appear to be different.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 9:39:40 GMT
So, perhaps UKPR2a is not that representative I would have thought there is little doubt about that. The average voter doesn't spend this amount of time talking and thinking about party politics. What is of more interest to me is whether the heavily weighted UKPR2 LOC contribution is typical of Labour voters, in its seeming obsession with a sort of Totemic version of Free Movement , and Open Borders. Obsession to the point of indicating , in some cases, that even after 12 years of the Tories, Starmer will be denied their vote because of his stance on this issue. Obsession over a system which is actually in chaos and disarray , faced as it is by today's realities :- www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2022/dismantling-schengen/carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/88486I see in today's Times that the German LOC is trying to come to terms with the tide of illegal immigration :- "The German chancellor is facing criticism over a plan to make it easier for immigrants to gain citizenship at a time of surging illegal migration to Europe. Olaf Scholz’s coalition has legislation “as good as ready” to allow immigrants to apply for citizenship after three to five years instead of the present eight-year minimum. Scholz, 64, used his weekly video message this weekend to hail the benefits of immigration and to celebrate that “Germany has become a country of hope for many”. “The women and men and sometimes children who came to Germany have contributed greatly to making our economy as strong as it is today,” he said. “And that is why it is a good thing . . . to acquire German citizenship.” Immigrants could have dual nationality, overturning a previous principle of German nationality law. Children born in Germany would automatically become citizens if one of their immigrant parents had lived in the country legally for at least five years. The number of illegal migrants in the EU has grown by 73 per cent over the past year. Germany is the main country of destination for asylum seekers and irregular migrants entering the EU, and conservatives have accused Scholz of creating a new incentive for people to cross the Mediterranean or western Balkans land route illegally. “Selling off German citizenship cheap doesn’t encourage integration — it . . . will trigger additional ‘pull effects’ for illegal migration,” Alexander Dobrindt, 52, a Bavarian conservative and former minister told Bild. Figures from Frontex, the EU’s border agency, showed that 275,500 “irregular entries were detected at the external borders of the EU” in the first ten months of this year, the highest level since 2016." The Times today ....which also reports that "The policy is not popular according to an Insa poll for Bild which found that 65 per cent of voters were against the plan and only 23 per cent supported it." It seems to me that , at a deep level, the strongly held LOC beliefs about open borders and "refugees" is coming face to face with the reality of a modern world in which war, misgovernment, climate change and population increase is propelling huge numbers of economic migrants along with genuine refugees towards Europe's embattled borders. Like you, I think Starmer is on the right tracks on this -though I believe that the issue will become more and more significant and problematic for Europe and Union/Member State tensions within EU. It will have political consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by ladyvalerie on Nov 28, 2022 9:50:02 GMT
Sometimes this site reads like a therapy group for ex-Labour voters.
“I can’t decide whether to vote Labour.. I hope that warmed-up Blairism does not force me to withdraw my support…I genuinely want a reason fo vote for them….it must be five years since I was last at a Labour meeting…..”
There is a simple answer.
If you don’t want to vote Labour; don’t vote Labour.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 9:50:29 GMT
So, perhaps UKPR2a is not that representative I would have thought there is little doubt about that. The average voter doesn't spend this amount of time talking and thinking about party politics. What is of more interest to me is whether the heavily weighted UKPR2 LOC contribution is typical of Labour voters, in its seeming obsession with a sort of Totemic version of Free Movement , and Open Borders. Obsession to the point of indicating , in some cases, that even after 12 years of the Tories, Starmer will be denied their vote because of his stance on this issue. Obsession over a system which is actually in chaos and disarray , faced as it is by today's realities :- www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2022/dismantling-schengen/carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/88486I see in today's Times that the German LOC is trying to come to terms with the tide of illegal immigration :- "The German chancellor is facing criticism over a plan to make it easier for immigrants to gain citizenship at a time of surging illegal migration to Europe. Olaf Scholz’s coalition has legislation “as good as ready” to allow immigrants to apply for citizenship after three to five years instead of the present eight-year minimum. Scholz, 64, used his weekly video message this weekend to hail the benefits of immigration and to celebrate that “Germany has become a country of hope for many”. “The women and men and sometimes children who came to Germany have contributed greatly to making our economy as strong as it is today,” he said. “And that is why it is a good thing . . . to acquire German citizenship.” Immigrants could have dual nationality, overturning a previous principle of German nationality law. Children born in Germany would automatically become citizens if one of their immigrant parents had lived in the country legally for at least five years. The number of illegal migrants in the EU has grown by 73 per cent over the past year. Germany is the main country of destination for asylum seekers and irregular migrants entering the EU, and conservatives have accused Scholz of creating a new incentive for people to cross the Mediterranean or western Balkans land route illegally. “Selling off German citizenship cheap doesn’t encourage integration — it . . . will trigger additional ‘pull effects’ for illegal migration,” Alexander Dobrindt, 52, a Bavarian conservative and former minister told Bild. Figures from Frontex, the EU’s border agency, showed that 275,500 “irregular entries were detected at the external borders of the EU” in the first ten months of this year, the highest level since 2016." The Times today ....which also reports that "The policy is not popular according to an Insa poll for Bild which found that 65 per cent of voters were against the plan and only 23 per cent supported it." It seems to me that , at a deep level, the strongly held LOC beliefs about open borders and "refugees" is coming face to face with the reality of a modern world in which war, misgovernment, climate change and population increase is propelling huge numbers of economic migrants along with genuine refugees towards Europe's embattled borders. Like you, I think Starmer is on the right tracks on this -though I believe that the issue will become more and more significant and problematic for Europe and Union/Member State tensions within EU. It will have political consequences. Good for Scholz. It's the future, let's deal with it properly. |
|
|
|
Post by ladyvalerie on Nov 28, 2022 9:58:29 GMT
As we get nearer to a UK GE, it will be interesting to see whether there is a specific public mood about VI. While it seems very likely to involve a determination to remove the Tory government, it may, or may not, include enthusiasm for having a Labour government with a massive majority (although that could still happen under FPTP). It reminds me of the early 70s when to my understanding then (and I was young and ignorant - no jokes about now being old and ignorant please! 😁) there was only a fag paper between Heath and Wilson, as indeed the public seemed to agree as there was a series of close elections. Therefore one voted for the one you thought would cause the least harm, or in my case sometimes spoiling my ballot paper with a rude message because I knew spoiled papers had to be checked by candidates' representatives and therefore my message would have more impact than an actual vote. Wow, you spoilt your ballot-paper. What an act of civil disobedience! |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Nov 28, 2022 10:11:56 GMT
moby It's been five years since I was Last at a Labour party meeting. But at a guess if your party leader has a policy that 80%+ of party members oppose it's probably human nature to want to talk about something else. I'm aware of the shit choices that fptp provides which is why I will probably vote Labour at the next general election locally as the best opportunity to get rid of our Tory mp, a few weeks ago that would have been definitely. But much more of this nationalist brexitainan twoddle and focus on the illusory traditional a bit racist white working class Labour voter ( who last voted Labour in 1975) while ignoring the real and potential Labour voters isn't just frustrating it's bad politics and there's a limit to realpolitiks. It's possible that Starmer can clutch failure out of the jaws of an obvious overwhelming victory by sufficiently irritating the support base who look at the local situation and think well the lib dems have beaten Tories before and at least their not a bunch of brexitanian luddites. As a liberal democrat member of course I would love to see a Labour party dependent on lib dems in parliament , we'd have adults in the room when it came to our relationship with the European union and get PR, secretly I suspect Starmer might be a bit relieved as well. Polls may be changing regarding the EU but I'd like to see your numbers regarding how big and deeply felt this change is. I think Starmer knows this. After all it's him whose been going round the country listening to the red wall etc over the last couple of years. If Starmer genuinely thought the policy of re-joining the Single Market was a vote winner at the next election he would adopt it. His political and voting record confirms he is a remainer at heart. As much as I'd like to believe otherwise, not enough of the public in England are there however and Starmer realises this. It will take years for the economic consequences of Brexit to sink in and even then any Labour leader will still have to contend with huge swathes of the public who see free movement as a problem and would rather be poorer than accept it. You can describe socially conservative people however you like, the fact is though Starmer needs their votes to win. He will have been told again and again by such people that they will support him if he 'makes brexit work' and they see his job as prioritising what they want and do it better than the tories i.e levelling up, cost of living, NHS etc. A policy to get closer to the EU, anytime before the next election would be seen as self indulgent, Labour not listening etc etc and would be pounced on with relish by the right wing media. As you say under the current FPTP Starmer has to appeal to both Islington South and Hartlepool. Also he must be doing something right because both steve and jib could end up voting for him. Imagine the triangulation he must have to do to achieve that!  |
|
|
|
Post by ladyvalerie on Nov 28, 2022 10:15:37 GMT
Here’s something to beat any Monday-morning Blues.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Nov 28, 2022 10:18:16 GMT
Realpolitiks in the UK is a fact of life if you are to win elections, (especially given we are still possibly two years out from one). steve thinks the Labour Party should already be campaigning on returning to closer links with the EU again. From what I've seen in membership meetings though people don't really want to talk about our relationship with the EU; the cost of living crisis, NHS, housing, energy is front and centre of the agenda. I'm sure the SNP will continue to make hay with this UK tension to achieve their own objectives. You don't always have to follow the script though oldnat , you could change the record sometimes? After all many of us want the same ultimate outcomes, it's just that the paths ahead are easier for some. Obviously membership meetings are in no way representative of voters who are what matters but I don't understand why Starmer is quite so determined at this point to paint himself as as brexity as Johnson? He could be more vague and dogmatically ruling out a return to free movement (I think about our lost free movement when I hear that phrase) really annoyed me. Why go out of your way to make that point now? Do they have intelligence that the Tories have drawn up brexit attack lines and are just trying to neuter them before they see the light of day? Do they have private polling that shows that brexit and free movement may remain a vote defining issue for an important subset of voters, ie ex Tory voting redwallers? Or are they just being ludicrously overcautious and risking themselves being way behind the curve of what's acceptable to the public? All of the above. Internal polling shows the EU issue is still toxic amongst huge swathes of the voting public from what I've been told, (Stephen Kinnock aside in a meeting). I said what about the poll shifts..... he said although there is a shift towards the EU its salience is low compared to everything else. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Nov 28, 2022 10:21:56 GMT
Obviously membership meetings are in no way representative of voters who are what matters but I don't understand why Starmer is quite so determined at this point to paint himself as as brexity as Johnson? He could be more vague and dogmatically ruling out a return to free movement (I think about our lost free movement when I hear that phrase) really annoyed me. Why go out of your way to make that point now? Do they have intelligence that the Tories have drawn up brexit attack lines and are just trying to neuter them before they see the light of day? Do they have private polling that shows that brexit and free movement may remain a vote defining issue for an important subset of voters, ie ex Tory voting redwallers? Or are they just being ludicrously overcautious and risking themselves being way behind the curve of what's acceptable to the public? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 10:27:56 GMT
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 10:32:00 GMT
Maybe. Although we are also opening some spaceports etc. Perhaps we would be better off opening some bus stations? And railway lines. The Oxford to Milton Keynes line was meant to re-open to passengers years ago. Still crawling along.. I enjoyed a delayed infrastructure story in the German press the other day though (it's far from just us). A new S-bahn (overground and underground) line to cross Munich began construction in the early 2000s and was originally slated to be ready by about 2010. They're now saying it will be 2028 at best and possibly even 2035-37! That's a delay! Also the new Berlin airport was due to open in 2011 originally but finally saw the light of day in Oct 2020, in the middle of the pandemic.. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 10:35:29 GMT
Integration normally just happens, human cultures will naturally merge. Cultures merge, change, evolve and always have. If you want to retain some idea of village green Britain in aspic we'll end up like Japan with a plummeting population and no young workforce to help pay the costs that an increasing top heavy older generation will rely on. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 10:40:47 GMT
moby It's been five years since I was Last at a Labour party meeting. But at a guess if your party leader has a policy that 80%+ of party members oppose it's probably human nature to want to talk about something else. I'm aware of the shit choices that fptp provides which is why I will probably vote Labour at the next general election locally as the best opportunity to get rid of our Tory mp, a few weeks ago that would have been definitely. But much more of this nationalist brexitainan twoddle and focus on the illusory traditional a bit racist white working class Labour voter ( who last voted Labour in 1975) while ignoring the real and potential Labour voters isn't just frustrating it's bad politics and there's a limit to realpolitiks. It's possible that Starmer can clutch failure out of the jaws of an obvious overwhelming victory by sufficiently irritating the support base who look at the local situation and think well the lib dems have beaten Tories before and at least their not a bunch of brexitanian luddites. As a liberal democrat member of course I would love to see a Labour party dependent on lib dems in parliament , we'd have adults in the room when it came to our relationship with the European union and get PR, secretly I suspect Starmer might be a bit relieved as well. Polls may be changing regarding the EU but I'd like to see your numbers regarding how big and deeply felt this change is. I think Starmer knows this. After all it's him whose been going round the country listening to the red wall etc over the last couple of years. If Starmer genuinely thought the policy of re-joining the Single Market was a vote winner at the next election he would adopt it. His political and voting record confirms he is a remainer at heart. As much as I'd like to believe otherwise, not enough of the public in England are there however and Starmer realises this. It will take years for the economic consequences of Brexit to sink in and even then any Labour leader will still have to contend with huge swathes of the public who see free movement as a problem and would rather be poorer than accept it. You can describe socially conservative people however you like, the fact is though Starmer needs their votes to win. He will have been told again and again by such people that they will support him if he 'makes brexit work' and they see his job as prioritising what they want and do it better than the tories i.e levelling up, cost of living, NHS etc. A policy to get closer to the EU, anytime before the next election would be seen as self indulgent, Labour not listening etc etc and would be pounced on with relish by the right wing media. As you say under the current FPTP Starmer has to appeal to both Islington South and Hartlepool. Also he must be doing something right because both steve and jib could end up voting for him. Imagine the triangulation he must have to do to achieve that! "If Starmer genuinely thought the policy of re-joining the Single Market was a vote winner at the next election he would adopt it" - It wouldn't need to be a vote winner but if vote neutral then it's a no brainer as a lever the Tories don't (currently) have access to to help a struggling economy and win further support that way. But I guess from what you've said elsewhere it's not yet considered vote neutral alas.. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Nov 28, 2022 10:42:23 GMT
Sometimes this site reads like a therapy group for ex-Labour voters. “I can’t decide whether to vote Labour.. I hope that warmed-up Blairism does not force me to withdraw my support…I genuinely want a reason fo vote for them….it must be five years since I was last at a Labour meeting…..” There is a simple answer. If you don’t want to vote Labour; don’t vote Labour. Oh, but the agonising, the internal torment and the martyrdom of it all is where the real enjoyment lies. Feel my purity. See how it bleeds for the cause. Understand my thought processes. Lionise my abstention. See the principles I die in the ditch for. For I am pure and unsullied and never compromise. And I want you of cynical ideology-free nothingness to know and appreciate my agony and higher principle. A vote for any party in our electoral system is a stab in the dark in many ways. More often a device to get rid of the incumbents than anything much else. To put in their place something that might be a bit better. UK political parties are such vast conglomerations of interests, members, policies, personalities and voters that it's often a miracle anything coherent ever emerges. The idea that such unwieldy conglomerations will ever truly cohere is risible But it is what it is. Some conglomerations are more benign than others. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Nov 28, 2022 10:45:07 GMT
Call it 'alliance' or any other acceptable term if you like domjg , it amounts to the same thing. Enough leverage to keep Labour honest. Why would Sir Keir want any 'agreement' (any form of alliance) with LDEM? LAB are likely to win a very comfortable majority in GE'24 under FPTP, probably go on to Blair style 3 terms. My view on the Lib Dems are well known. Toxic to anyone but a few die hards, and politics extremely toxic in their wake. Had they not chosen coalition in 2010 - and instead confidence and supply in exchange for PR - the UK would be a very different place. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 10:45:54 GMT
Just curious, why do you capitalise virtue signal, meaningless, dismissive phrase that it is? Are you making up your own grammar rules? |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 10:48:04 GMT
JET recently set a record for fusion energy produced, I seem to remember that Culham lab was placed where it was because it is close to large electricity generating plants...because it is a massive consumer of electrical energy and always has been. just to add some perspective to that comment. Fortunately they dont run it constantly or the electricity bill would have been unaffordable over the years. Maybe they have arrangements now only to run it when its windy. Yes, well as you no doubt know, the Holy Grail of fusion is to get rather more energy out than you put in - known as “gain” - and as you appreciate, that is some way off. But if they keep increasing the energy outputted, that day comes closer. Some of the projects in the pipeline are shooting for that, for achieving a net energy gain. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 10:50:07 GMT
Moby: "If Starmer genuinely thought the policy of re-joining the Single Market was a vote winner at the next election he would adopt it."
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Starmer's thinking is that he has anti-brexit voters in the bag, but pro-brexit voters could jump ship at any sign of backsliding.
That is probably sound strategic thinking, but I think there are two problems with it:
1. If brexit is the main obstacle to economic recovery and growth, then accepting brexit means accepting continued economic decline and not having the resources to solve the major problems facing the country and most important to voters. In other words, Labour will be promising the ends but denying itself the means; knowingly putting party and power before people and prosperity.
2. Certainly it currently looks as if anti-brexit voters in E&W have nowhere else to go. But as many posters here have articulated, the result is a lukewarm level of support for Labour amongst such people, and a degree of resentment shading in some cases into anger. That situation, I think, lends itself to a potential LD recovery. Though LDs are easy to dismiss now, with poor VI, lacklustre leadership and near-zero media coverage, in my opinion it would be dangerous for Labour to entirely discount the possibility of a LD bandwagon in the run-up to an election.
There are counter arguments to that. Labour will mitigate the economic effects of brexit by deals with the EU; people may think brexit was a mistake but that doesn't mean they want to reverse it; there is no chance of a LD revival because their credibility is bust for good. All of those look persuasive at the moment, but who knows where another two years of increasing brexit-induced hardship will lead?
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 10:53:08 GMT
Sometimes this site reads like a therapy group for ex-Labour voters. “I can’t decide whether to vote Labour.. I hope that warmed-up Blairism does not force me to withdraw my support…I genuinely want a reason fo vote for them….it must be five years since I was last at a Labour meeting…..” There is a simple answer. If you don’t want to vote Labour; don’t vote Labour. Oh, but the agonising, the internal torment and the martyrdom of it all is where the real enjoyment lies. Feel my purity. See how it bleeds for the cause. Understand my thought processes. Lionise my abstention. See the principles I die in the ditch for. For I am pure and unsullied and never compromise. And I want you of cynical ideology-free nothingness to know and appreciate my agony and higher principle. A vote for any party in our electoral system is a stab in the dark in many ways. More often a device to get rid of the incumbents than anything much else. To put in their place something that might be a bit better. UK political parties are such vast conglomerations of interests, members, policies, personalities and voters that it's often a miracle anything coherent ever emerges. The idea that such unwieldy conglomerations will ever truly cohere is risible But it is what it is. Some conglomerations are more benign than others. Starmer ruling out freedom of movement is the first thing he's done that's annoyed me and even then I get (to an extent) why he needs to do that. I will always support a Lab govt, even if that means voting LD tactically, though it looks like voting Lab might actually be best now where I am. I will be f*d off though if they don't make efforts to align more closely to the EU once in office. I never previously doubted they would and I'm sure that remains the case. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Nov 28, 2022 10:53:36 GMT
Sometimes this site reads like a therapy group for ex-Labour voters. “I can’t decide whether to vote Labour.. I hope that warmed-up Blairism does not force me to withdraw my support…I genuinely want a reason fo vote for them….it must be five years since I was last at a Labour meeting…..” There is a simple answer. If you don’t want to vote Labour; don’t vote Labour. Oh, but the agonising, the internal torment and the martyrdom of it all is where the real enjoyment lies. Feel my purity. See how it bleeds for the cause. Understand my thought processes. Lionise my abstention. See the principles I die in the ditch for. For I am pure and unsullied and never compromise. And I want you of cynical ideology-free nothingness to know and appreciate my agony and higher principle. A vote for any party in our electoral system is a stab in the dark in many ways. More often a device to get rid of the incumbents than anything much else. To put in their place something that might be a bit better. UK political parties are such vast conglomerations of interests, members, policies, personalities and voters that it's often a miracle anything coherent ever emerges. The idea that such unwieldy conglomerations will ever truly cohere is risible But it is what it is. Some conglomerations are more benign than others. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 10:56:09 GMT
Maybe. Although we are also opening some spaceports etc. Perhaps we would be better off opening some bus stations? Well it doesn’t have to be an either/or Danny. (Besides you could 3D-print a lot of bus stations with cheap extra energy from fusion). Or maybe a solar array. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 10:58:55 GMT
So, perhaps UKPR2a is not that representative 1. I would have thought there is little doubt about that. The average voter doesn't spend this amount of time talking and thinking about party politics. 2. (Purple Passports issue): Obsession over a system which is actually in chaos and disarray , faced as it is by today's realities :- www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2022/dismantling-schengen/carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/88486I see in today's Times that the German LOC is trying to come to terms with the tide of illegal immigration :- "The German chancellor is facing criticism over a plan to make it easier for immigrants to gain citizenship at a time of surging illegal migration to Europe... 1. I was being a bit 'tongue in cheek' with that comment. As well as voters not being so hyper focussed as we nerds then gen.pub are nowhere near as 'Purple Passport' fanatic as many of the folks on UKPR2 (see 'most important issues' polling) 2. I'm not that familiar with Germany's current policy or the changes Scholz wants to make but he's certainly lacking political awareness on immigration issue. I'd support legal immigrants having the right to become citizens but only after a reasonable period of time and passing a 'Citizenship' test. Most countries require such things as being able to speak the language and understanding the cultural issues in order to help with integration. Link for UK one being www.gov.uk/life-in-the-uk-testI have noted the rise of AfD in German VI recently. With so many parties then hopefully someone who follows German politics can comment but using a Right-Left scale then since their last election: AfD: 15 (+4.7) anti-immigration FDP: 7 (-4.5) lose of some of their credibility for fiscal responsibility by being SPD's 'patsy'?? Union: 27 (+2.9) SPD: 21 (-4.7) Grune: 18 (+3.2) seen as being very pragmatic?? Linke: 5 (uc) Hard to make much sense of that but I added my 2c comments as someone outwith their polity. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 11:11:50 GMT
Why would Sir Keir want any 'agreement' (any form of alliance) with LDEM? LAB are likely to win a very comfortable majority in GE'24 under FPTP, probably go on to Blair style 3 terms. My view on the Lib Dems are well known. Toxic to anyone but a few die hards, and politics extremely toxic in their wake. Had they not chosen coalition in 2010 - and instead confidence and supply in exchange for PR - the UK would be a very different place. I'll be curious to see how willing Sir Keir is to revisit the way MPs are elected after LAB win a whopping majority under FPTP in GE'24. IIRC he wants to hold a 'convention' or something and a lot of LAB folks like a more PR based system when CON are in power. That might change when LAB are in power Quickly but quietly reverse the pure FPTP changes CON are proposing for Mayors* (if that even goes ahead) and push further devolution to regions but suddenly 'realise' that constituents should be served by a locally elected MP and not be from some centralised list. Maybe make each constituency a STV vote (which will 'stack the deck' to more LAB, less CON - for now at least) Anyway, absolutely no need for Sir Keir have anything to do with LDEM (other than getting their MP votes for 'free' if he needs to and copying some of their policy ideas for 'free' if he wants to)
Having won the Game of Thrones, you 'stack the deck' to ensure you keep the Iron Throne (PM in #10)
* www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/our-views-and-research/elections-act/changes-voting-system-mayoral-and-pcc-elections |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 11:12:02 GMT
Here’s something to beat any Monday-morning Blues. Well quite. Neighbouring North Somerset, (Liam Fox) and nearby Weston super Mare, (Mr Dido Harding), are also projected LAB gains. Whilst Somerset NE has, under different boundaries, been LAB previously, the others have not, and would have been pretty much unthinkable, even under Blair. So, quite possibly, three LAB MPs in the heraldic county of Somerset next time. That would be remarkable. They have been as rare as rocking horse droppings for most of my lifetime. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Nov 28, 2022 11:15:20 GMT
lululemonmustdobetter
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
I actually think you're right; this is usually the case with successful Leaders of the Opposition who manage to get into Downing Street. Was Wilson wildly different to MacMillan (I'm bypassing Home's brief interregnum). Was Heath to Wilson? Thatcher to Callaghan, maybe. But Blair from Major, Cameron from Blair/Brown?
The point I'm making is that most voters herd around the political centre and don't often like lurches when governments change. Some turning of the tiller but not a yank. This feeds in to the type of person they want in Downing Street. When great big changes are offered in terms of policy and personality, they often cling to nurse.
Foot, Duncan-Smith, Howard, Milliband and Corbyn etc lost for a wide variety of reasons but you've inadvertently mentioned one. They looked too different to the boss currently in the Manager's office.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 11:19:08 GMT
Oh, but the agonising, the internal torment and the martyrdom of it all is where the real enjoyment lies. Feel my purity. See how it bleeds for the cause. Understand my thought processes. Lionise my abstention. See the principles I die in the ditch for. For I am pure and unsullied and never compromise. And I want you of cynical ideology-free nothingness to know and appreciate my agony and higher principle. A vote for any party in our electoral system is a stab in the dark in many ways. More often a device to get rid of the incumbents than anything much else. To put in their place something that might be a bit better. UK political parties are such vast conglomerations of interests, members, policies, personalities and voters that it's often a miracle anything coherent ever emerges. The idea that such unwieldy conglomerations will ever truly cohere is risible But it is what it is. Some conglomerations are more benign than others. Indeed. And one can recall the purity of the Blairites who railed against Corbyn with his infernal centrist economics! |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 28, 2022 11:20:43 GMT
Danny - "Growing unrest in China because of its policy of zero covid. Governments everywhere else in the world, and even posters here such as alec should pay attention at what happens if you really try to eradicate covid." Even posters like Danny should pay attention to the meaning of eradication. I've never once called for eradication of covid. Something else you don't understand.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 11:24:13 GMT
Accruing the current poll lead to Starmer who was nowhere till the Tories massively self-immolated is quite the stretch.
It’s like accruing the victory to Blair in ‘97 when Tory polling had already collapsed following Black Weds.
|
|
