|
|
Post by moby on May 6, 2023 7:52:15 GMT
Not long ago people used to give Tories stick for not being the most truthful. But when some other parties do that, it’s just politics apparently. LAB folks seem split between those who like Starmer's 'U-turns' (breaking almost all of the 10 pledges made to become leader of LAB) and those who hope he'll do 'O' turns once in power. The 'O' being a 2nd 'U-turn' back to where he was in Jan'20. TBC but the Green's surprised in the LEs and with no party standing on the 'Left' then the assumption that Green voters will back LAB in a GE might be a risky one to make. Political pledges come and go depending on the landscape but Boris Johnson was always corrupt and a serial liar in his personal life and yet you still voted for him. |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on May 6, 2023 7:57:12 GMT
Had there been a Yes vote in 2014, would you now be arguing in favour of a 'Rejoin the Union vote'? If the Scottish Parliament had a majority for rejoining the UK I would argue they have every right to call a referendum on it. I don't know what the circumstances would be and I would cast my vote to stay independent or judge the union at that point. There may have to be a vote to rejoin the EU should we be independent and if in the meantime the EU had changed substantially I mightt want to reconsider my position on that too |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on May 6, 2023 8:01:22 GMT
The irony here is that people voted to stay in the ref in an arrangement in which the SNP didn’t necessarily have the final say as to whether there was another referendum. This may in turn have allowed people who didn’t want another referendum to feel able to vote SNP for other reasons. You can’t necessarily assume a vote for a party represents utter agreement with everything they put in their manifesto.* And if it was guaranteed that SNP would be able to enact referenda whenever, it’s possible they might not have got as many votes in the first place. * it can also be the other way around: people may agree with much in a manifesto, but reject it for some particular key reason. For example, some people may have liked a number of Corbyn’s economic policies, but perhaps for some of those, his stance on NATO etc. overshadowed all that. (Some seemed to have particular issue with him looking like a geography lecturer). I take your point though I would think it would be a very small number of people who voted SNP who didn't also want independence (Many of them probably didn't want another referendum, they probably wanted UDI if the SNP won). I think a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the issue would be expected to be delivered if there was a majority in parliament for it. I would have probably voted FOR Corbyn if I was in England at the time. I like the geography lecturer look |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:05:59 GMT
You've changed tack. You originally said that Thatcher's governments favoured the wealthy at the expense of the poor. You now seem to be largely agreeing with me e.g. "Although the first owners probably got a free gift of cash,..". You are now making a different argument that 40 years later some of the policies have had unexpected consequences in your opinion.gift at state expense. No. The policies have had the quite pedictable consequences of making the rich richer. Thatcher had to make the policy acceptable, which was done by giving the first owners a bug, but the real wealth has gone to the rich who have aquired the capital assets. And in the case of houses, also an ongoing policy of keeping prices high and steadily rising. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 8:07:00 GMT
LAB coalitions / C-S / etci-Scotland then once again Starmer should (IMO) call SNP's bluff at some point. EG IF he needs SNP to back a King's Speech in order to get the keys to #10 and assuming SNP demand IndyRef2 then say "OK - Final Say Ref in 2025*" SNP would have little choice but to accept the timing and as a BNAT then it is better for Starmer to deal with Scotland sooner rather than later. Assuming Scotland vote "no" (again) then bring in "Clarity Acts" as per Canada's solution to the Quebec problem - all covered before and there is of course a Scottish thread so all this doesn't have to be repeated every time it comes up. LDEM (although the real threat is perhaps Green) - much harder for Starmer given his recent comments. LDEM might well do anything for a few 'red briefcases' once they get PR but Greens might then take a large slice off LAB %s in GEs and Greens less likely (IMO) to be fobbed off with a few red briefcases. It is reasonable to assume that LAB would never win a majority if they agree to a PR voting system. No need for Starmer to comment any further for now. See what happens after GE'24 and see IF i/ he even needs LDEM and ii/ if LDEM will demand PR (via a ref?) to allow Starmer into #10. IF both those conditions are met then Starmer could risk a 'do-over' GE or do an 'O' turn and "remember" that he does actually like PR after all.  * Or maybe combine it with Holyrood'26
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 8:16:06 GMT
LAB folks seem split between those who like Starmer's 'U-turns' (breaking almost all of the 10 pledges made to become leader of LAB) and those who hope he'll do 'O' turns once in power. The 'O' being a 2nd 'U-turn' back to where he was in Jan'20. TBC but the Green's surprised in the LEs and with no party standing on the 'Left' then the assumption that Green voters will back LAB in a GE might be a risky one to make. Political pledges come and go depending on the landscape but Boris Johnson was always corrupt and a serial liar in his personal life and yet you still voted for him. I would say personal life and "job" are two separate things. Boris had one and only one use ("Get Brexit Done") so was the better option than Hunt when I voted for Boris in CON leadership election (then my local CON MP in GE'19). Politicians only usually become 'pragmatic' (ie rip up pledges/promises) once in power and once Boris had served his purpose then I wanted to "Get Boris Gone" and was 'Ready for Rishi' (voting for him last Summer) Perhaps as soon as Starmer wins GE'24 then Mandelson can organise a coup and get his boy Streeting to replace 'serial liar in his professional life' Starmer. NB I'm a Tory. I expect politicians to lie. Welcome to the Real World - we're all Tories now PS Might I suggest a new line of attack next time? Pretty sure you/others have mentioned me voting for Boris many times and I've given pretty much the same explanation every time. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:20:11 GMT
IMHO, the sooner these boomers die off the better. And the sooner the Tory vote dies with them. Until their power is reduced nothing much will change in this country. But there is no party which stands for the rights of the poor(er). Labour accidentally got a left wing leader because thats what its activists wanted. But the MPs destroyed him because what they want is right wing policies. Corbyn had to go because he risked creating a left leaning government and destroying the right wing hegemony of british politics. Anyone thinking the right leaning current labour party is going to bring in proportionate representation is unlikely to be proved correct, because FPP is currently protecting right wing government by providing a choice of two right aligned parties. Libs are a bit wildcard, but fundamentally we saw how they sided with con when the chips were down. Its like brexit, labour refused to support remain despite there being enough remain voters to have won in 2019. They didnt want to win on those terms. Uk ruling class represented in nearly all the parties wants a right wing government. SNP are probably one of the few socialist parties in the Uk, and they are currently wobbling. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on May 6, 2023 8:25:00 GMT
Re another Scottish Independence referendum I think the answer would be for Labour to say they are against one, it would be a distraction at this time with the state the country is in
But of a majority in the Scottish Parliament vote for one after the Scottish 2026 elections they they would not stand in their way, but will campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK in any referendum campaign
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 8:27:27 GMT
Police join anti royal peaceful protest. I should wish. Actually another embarrassment for this retired copper as the Met yet again do the bidding of their political masters and arrest individuals causing absolutely no issue what so ever. The leader of the protest was arrested for the offence of breathing as far as I can see.  |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 8:33:03 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:38:57 GMT
Not true. Pension is proportionate to number of years paid in. If it's a small amount, it will be made up by other benefits Pension is paid out of current government receipts, not past accrued investments. All that is determined by the number of years contributions you made is the proportion of maximum pension you get. And I hope for your sake you already know this. Councils had powers to build homes taken away from them. Even when they were sitting on cash from sales they were not allowed to use it to build replacements. Thatcher set out utterly deliberately to destroy state provision of housing. At the time there was talk of the private sector stepping in and building instead, but private sector has NEVER provided mass housing in the UK because of demand from the poor. As a case in point lets consider hastings again. Big chunks of it (particularly St leonards) was constructed as posh holiday housing for the Victorian rich. And then in the 50-60s estates of decent homes were built as part of a centrally planned initiative to provide housing as overspill from london. I'm pleased to say I enjoy one of those overspill homes nowadays myself. The brickwork and windows were inferior in quality to the earlier Victorian examples, but hey we have plastic double glazing now and extra insulation. Hastings borough has favoured expansion since then too, but you only have to look at homes built even 20 years later to see how much closer together they are, with frankly smaller rooms. Thatcher caused smaller homes for everyone which would cost you a lifetime transferring your earnings to the rich to pay for. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 8:43:32 GMT
What a thumping !
It drags both Sunak AND Starmer into the real world i think.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:45:46 GMT
We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think there should be any time barriers put on voting again on such matter should people vote for parties with a manifesto commitment to do so. If Labour had made a manifesto commitment to rejoin the EU and got more than 50% of the mps then IMO it would be their democratic right under out FPP system to call another EU referendum. If people thought it was too soon they could always vote to stay out, as they could vote NO to Scottish independence if it was voted on again. Had there been a Yes vote in 2014, would you now be arguing in favour of a 'Rejoin the Union vote'? I wonder if had Scotland voted to leave the Uk and therefore remained in the EU, whether it would have changed the mood in England and persuaded a majority to vote remain to the EU too. So as to prevent the de-facto breakup of the UK? |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on May 6, 2023 8:45:55 GMT
Re another Scottish Independence referendum I think the answer would be for Labour to say they are against one, it would be a distraction at this time with the state the country is in But of a majority in the Scottish Parliament vote for one after the Scottish 2026 elections they they would not stand in their way, but will campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK in any referendum campaign A perfectly reasonable stance, but unfortunately they won't do it (as it would give some legitimacy to another referendum and that's not the 'Unionist' response and the current Labour Party is trying ever so hard to say nothing that could be used against them in the media) |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:48:25 GMT
Politics without being at the very least economical with the truth is not politics. Having wishlists of policies is one thing. Fighting to actually obtain power to be in a position to implement any change at all is very different. It's brutal and necessarily so, especially when you have enemies like the tories and the right wing press. I dont really agree. if we lived in russia where opposition politicians simply disappear, I might. But it is not that bad here yet. If you cannot make a case to voters to support you without lying, then you do not deserve to win. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 8:51:19 GMT
Tory chair has identified the culprit behind yesterday's tory meltdown. Sorry jib it wasn't the junior partner in the coalition government of more than a decade ago it's the other equally obvious suspect. Vladimir Putin So nothing to do with three inept leaders in twelve months, industrial levels of corruption and cronyism and the best part of a decade of abject policy failures and entirely avoidable diminishment of our standards of living and rights. That's a relief! youtu.be/NyZszidkUig |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 8:55:16 GMT
Fine sentiments, but inappropriate, I think, for a UK with such twisted, defective constitution that enables perhaps 40% of voters in the largest polity to have total authority over everyone else. See my recent posts, a lot less. 1/4 to 1/3. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 8:58:00 GMT
Politics without being at the very least economical with the truth is not politics. Having wishlists of policies is one thing. Fighting to actually obtain power to be in a position to implement any change at all is very different. It's brutal and necessarily so, especially when you have enemies like the tories and the right wing press. I dont really agree. if we lived in russia where opposition politicians simply disappear, I might. But it is not that bad here yet. If you cannot make a case to voters to support you without lying, then you do not deserve to win. Absolutely. Indeed "necessary" lying to the electorate destroys confidence in and credibility of the system itself. The voters then turn to a populist anti-establishment plague on all their houses politician who then persuades the electorate that democracy doesn't work and needs to be replaced. With him/her forever. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on May 6, 2023 9:01:36 GMT
Politics without being at the very least economical with the truth is not politics. Having wishlists of policies is one thing. Fighting to actually obtain power to be in a position to implement any change at all is very different. It's brutal and necessarily so, especially when you have enemies like the tories and the right wing press. So Josef Goebbels had a good point ! 'The Big Lie.' That's politics. I honestly don't listen to a great deal of what Labour are saying at the moment as it's of no great practical relevance until manifesto time. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 9:03:33 GMT
I noticed someone on R4 picked up the point that theresa may resigned after having a bad local election defeat. Sunak just had a worse one, but all he said is they are winning in their targets.
Sunak should follow his predecessors example and resign.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on May 6, 2023 9:04:51 GMT
I dont really agree. if we lived in russia where opposition politicians simply disappear, I might. But it is not that bad here yet. If you cannot make a case to voters to support you without lying, then you do not deserve to win. Absolutely. Indeed "necessary" lying to the electorate destroys confidence in and credibility of the system itself. The voters then turn to a populist anti-establishment plague on all their houses politician who then persuades the electorate that democracy doesn't work and needs to be replaced. With him/her forever. I'm not saying they should lie outright but subtlety and tailoring messages for different audiences is needed as well as not saying anything too easily jumped on by the tabloid press. I have a great deal of respect for what Alastair Campbell faced. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 9:05:05 GMT
Peter Kellner's analysis of the locals - somewhat more upbeat for Labour that Curtice or Thrasher. (Mind you I noticed that Curtice has somewhat shifted his position in his latest for the BBC. He is now so firmly on the fence as to be saying almost nothing). "If they are wise, party number-crunchers will be wary of the nationwide numbers of seats gained and lost. Council election battles come in all shapes and sizes. In Plymouth’s Dunstone ward, John Stephens gained the seat with 2,210 votes. By contrast, in Cotswold district, Ian Watson needed just 336 votes to unseat the Tories and gain Tetbury Town for the Lib Dems. In general, Labour’s gains are tilted more towards large wards in big towns and cities, while the Lib Dems and Greens enjoy most of their greatest success in the smaller wards of less urban areas. This means they are consequently flattered by the figures for their gains. That said, the Conservatives suffered in all kinds of areas, so cannot disguise the scale of their defeat. More useful are the estimates of what the Britain-wide shares for each party would have been, based on the votes cast in areas that held elections. The BBC’s estimate puts Labour on 35%, nine points ahead of the Conservatives, on 26%, and the Lib Dems on 20%. Compared with last year’s equivalent local elections, Labour’s share is unchanged. This must disappoint Starmer. However, the blow is softened by the four-point drop in Tory support. This allows Labour to point to a nine-point lead, its biggest in such elections for more than 20 years. Moreover, that understates Labour’s real lead. In recent years Labour has tended to do worse, and the Lib Dems better, in local than national elections. As a broad-brush estimate, we can add 5-10 points to Labour’s local election lead to obtain a rough sense of the outcome of a snap general election held on Thursday. This puts Labour 14-19 points ahead – which broadly covers the range of recent opinion polls.These figures would give Labour a clear overall majority. How big would depend on how many seats it can gain from the SNP in Scotland, and the extent of tactical voting in England. These local elections confirm the message from recent parliamentary byelections: tactical voting is back. Looking at seats at local level – more useful than their national totals – we see a clear picture of a tactical pincer movement to defeat the Conservatives, with Labour defeating the Tories in some areas and the Lib Dems (and sometimes Greens) in other areas. The numbers are stark. In the first 15 councils that Labour captured, it gained 129 seats, while the Lib Dems gained five and the Conservatives lost 113. In the first seven councils gained by the Lib Dems, the figures were: Lib Dems up 96, Labour up two, Conservatives down 92. All in all, this pattern of gains and losses explains why the Lib Dems are smiling this weekend, even though their national vote share is virtually unchanged." www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/05/local-elections-keir-starmer-national-tactical-tories-labourEdit: I have put the part about the relationship to poll leads in bold as I know a few people on here see it as Labour propaganda - not so, it is a recognised phenomena. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 9:06:53 GMT
And since today there is to be a coronation, the news this morning interviewed a friend of Camilla Shand. Said how she is a bit nervous, but is an absolutely perfect person to become queen.
Its funny how 40 years ago the royal family connived to ensure she would not because she was considered definitely unsitable.
In passing someone mentioned that this coronation is another record breaker - for the number of police on duty at a public event!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 9:17:06 GMT
pjw1961 Interesting comments regarding vote numbers. It's also impacted of course by turnout. Noticeable locally where participation rates in Berkhamsted are always higher for some reason. Consequently while Hemel wards were being won with 450 ish voted the seats in Berkhamsted , all won by lib dems were being won with 1000+ votes, also of course impacted by the popularity of the candidate. I'm not entire sure about the less urban aspect as while Dacorum does have rural areas around 140,000 of the 170,000 residents live either in Hemel or Berkhamsted
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 9:21:20 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 9:24:17 GMT
What a thumping ! It drags both Sunak AND Starmer into the real world i think. Starmer-LAB is not my party but the discussion on 'hung parliament' scenarios shows some folks are aware that LAB didn't do as well as hoped - or claimed by Starmer. For CON then whilst I appreciate it is a biased sourced then the below covers some of the NIMBY issues that were a huge 'thump' to CON in the South of England - although the beneficiary of that varied from LAB (eg Medway) to Greens (parts of Essex and notably Mid-Suffolk) to LDEM (around the 'West' of the M25 in the 'posh' areas elsewhere) Tories may surprise with a united front – but Sunak must bewareEG see: "In Medway, where the Tories lost the council to Labour, the MP Kelly Tolhurst blamed “unrealistic housing targets” that had forced the local authority to “build really significant numbers of homes”.inews.co.uk/opinion/tories-may-surprise-united-front-sunak-must-beware-2322484Implications? 1/ Rishi (and Gove) had already kicked planning reform and housing targets* into the long grass and won't be picking that scab again (one for LAB if/when they take over) 2/ Tax cuts will come next Spring (eg 1p off Income Tax) and 'rumour' will become defacto promise as Hunt finds he has some money down the back of the sofa 3/ Rishi needs to focus on his 5 priorities, which match the 'People's Priorities' in 'Most Important Issues' polling. With a GE getting closer then I doubt CON will go back to suicidal infighting and looking at some of the big LE hits (eg Medway, Mid-Suffolk) then 'local issues' created an opportunity to 'thump' the local incumbents for pushing unpopular local policies - forced upon them by housing targets that have now been scrapped. Is 18mths long enough to close the gap? Maybe enough to create a hung parliament and whilst I have a few ££ on that, the bookies odds of close to 50/50 for a LAB OM are probably fair (and barely moved in the last few days) www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.167249195* Government waters down compulsory house building targets after Tory backlashwww.itv.com/news/2022-12-05/government-waters-down-compulsory-house-building-targets-after-party-backlash |
|
|
|
Post by James E on May 6, 2023 9:26:44 GMT
I have checked the aggregated the results for my old home-town of Aldershot (Rushmoor Borough) where each of the 13 wards elected a councillor on Thursday. The council stays as a Con hold, as it elects by thirds, but it must count as one of Labour's greater successes in a seat which which has been held by the Tories since it was created in 1918. They currently hold it with a 35% majority, and it's Lab target number 217. Here's how it voted on Thursday ,with comparison to the GE2019 percentage votes. Lab 9,886 46.8% (+23) Con 7,822 37.1% (-21) LibDem 2,997 14.2% (-) Oth 1.9% www.rushmoor.gov.uk/your-council/elections-and-voting/local-elections-4-may-2023/election-results/EDIT I should have remembered that Aldershot Constituency also includes two wards from Hart Council. These voted heavily for the LDs with Lab in 3rd place. With those added in, Aldershot Constituency voted like this: Lab 40.8% (+17) Con 35.3% (-23) LD 21.9% (+7) Others 2% Swing Con>Lab 20.2% (in comparison to GE2019) |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 6, 2023 9:30:03 GMT
Trevor,
Apropos Green Voters: In Darlington they took their usual modest %ages in the Labour wards but massively increased in the leafier Tory held ones.
So while they are, of course, taking votes from the left of Labour, my assessment is that it was Tory-Green switching that delivered their successes.
Much of this is local Nimbyism with Greens promising to stop things they can't as developments and contracts etc are too far advanced.
Lesson for Labour is that is that we have to be careful with squeeze messaging at the GE as highlighting that only Labour can beat the Tories might move a decent number of first time Green voters back to the Tories, we may only use the squeeze in Labour wards.
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 6, 2023 9:35:01 GMT
LAB folks seem split between those who like Starmer's 'U-turns' (breaking almost all of the 10 pledges made to become leader of LAB) and those who hope he'll do 'O' turns once in power. The 'O' being a 2nd 'U-turn' back to where he was in Jan'20. TBC but the Green's surprised in the LEs and with no party standing on the 'Left' then the assumption that Green voters will back LAB in a GE might be a risky one to make. Obviously UKPR2 isn't representative but reading through the lines with most of the people on here who are fed up with Starmer I still get the feeling most will vote Labour, at least for the next election. I'd still stand by my 5% for Greens if they got 3.8% in 2015 but I may be underestimating the desire to get rid of the Tories at any cost. Also when the squeeze is on in certain seats perhaps many of the Green voters will decide they don't want their Tory MP back, and there will be quite a few Tory MPs who have a dreadful profile. As much as anything it will be the will not votes who decide it. Those are the less politically engaged who see no reason to vote because politicians aren't telling them anything they want to hear or they think will make their lives any better. This might affect both parties equally or split one way or another. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 9:43:42 GMT
I dont really agree. if we lived in russia where opposition politicians simply disappear, I might. But it is not that bad here yet. If you cannot make a case to voters to support you without lying, then you do not deserve to win. Absolutely. Indeed "necessary" lying to the electorate destroys confidence in and credibility of the system itself. The voters then turn to a populist anti-establishment plague on all their houses politician who then persuades the electorate that democracy doesn't work and needs to be replaced. With him/her forever. IMO there is a 'pecking order' for lying. From minor to serious: 1/ White lies with good intentions (eg during War, Covid, etc) 2/ 'Personal life' lies that shouldn't impact professional life 3/ 'Pragmatism' where two issues clash and a pragmatic solution is required 4/ Lying to get a job (eg LAB leader) when the person (ie Starmer) had no intention of keeping the promises made to get the job 5/ As #4 but without even the excuse of #3 (as per Starmer) IMO there are times when #1 is necessary, times when #2-3 are unavoidable (although hopefully rare) and the problem of lying is only in the most serious forms of lying (or in Boris's case so much of #2 that it spilled into his professional life and he had to go) For UKPR2 then I note several people never bother with sources, "edit" them or only use extreme biased sources. All sources are likely to be biased and that doesn't mean they are useless but I'm wasting my time with serial liars on UKPR2. I gave people a chance to change and ended up with a 'Time Out'. So back to ignoring the liars and trolls. Maybe I'll try again with a 'clean slate' opportunity on the next new thread - maybe not? |
|
