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 Aug 15, 2023 8:44:36 GMT
Maybe should have used a cricket metaphor, but still. (And apologies to Accrington Stanley and, well everyone really)
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 8:50:22 GMT
pjw1961Miliband was the last leader of the Labour party that I fully endorsed, Although his brother would have been the better choice.
|
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 8:51:48 GMT
His brother was a loser too tho’
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Aug 15, 2023 8:53:03 GMT
Re Corbyn:
I think the point that is often overlooked in the discussion of the period of his leadership is how far he, personally, moved to the centre/right in policy terms in the policies set out in the 2017 manifesto. Much of the concern then and later appeared to be about his original position on the political spectrum, perhaps on the basis he would revert when in power! The same approach does not, as yet, appear to have taken to Starmer's shift in position at least as far as the general public is concerned.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 8:55:17 GMT
Sure, that’s a valid issue to consider. I’m not keen on losing free movement myself. But many in the middle-class are relatively protected from some of the economic effects of EU and globalism more generally. (E.g. my partner did not have a queue of East Europeans competing with her when she got her headship). There does still seem to be a demand for british teachers to work abroad, dont know about heads as that is a bit specialist. But traditionally wouldnt we have placed doctors and teachers on a par, but nowadays doctors are romping ahead in public standing and it would seem in pay? Despite the attempts to cut their salarries in the UK, far less successful than those which have dropped the pay of teachers. It is funny how we expect kids to stay in education for longer than ever in history, and yet its a time standards have declined, its all about providing a service on the minimum budget, and outcomes very much depend on whether the indiviual kids want to be educated and so will educate themselves. On a different tack, I was talking to someone about their children who should have started school during covid, but therefore didnt. The result for one has been they are very much desocialised from the whole idea of attending school and miles behind in learning to read. It strikes me we have debated the immediate issue of lost education for those who were taking or about to take exams during covid, but there is another problem coming along the line of those whose entry into education and learning the basics of reading and writing were upest by covid. Who will continue to have this legacy of under achieveing throughout their career and will pop up as a dip in performance once they reach exam age. This doesnt seem to be getting any mention. I dont exactly remember now what class size limits were at A level when I was at school. for o level it was 30, but A level maybe half that from what I remember. Just chatted to another teacher moving to the private sector, where at interview the hadmaster apologised to her she would face an A level class of 9. Compared to 30 in her current state school. Like....seriously? And that isnt the worst school locally! |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 15, 2023 8:56:24 GMT
My memory of the Referendum Campaign was of a parade of opposing emotions. Lots of flag waving on both sides. It was a fact free zone I can't disagree. For voting on such an important, potentially systemic change it was treated unseriously and flippantly by all. I volunteered for the 'better together' campaign and it was depressingly complacent, ill-prepared and half-hearted. Despite the poll warnings it seems many people thought it was just going through the motions and that nothing would actually change. Don't forget too, albeit Graham was a rather more extreme and self-defeating version of this than me, that many abstained in protest at Cameron's tawdry political stunt in organising a plebiscite on our membership of the EU. He convened it to try and solve an internal party management issue and to try and stitch the centre right vote back together. He complacently thought he could blag the result his way too Plebiscites have no real place in a representative democracy and there is no better example of the damage that they can do than the 2016 in/out EU referendum. It got the pitiful campaign it deserved. I wanted no part in Cameron's stunt and so abstained. Do I regret that decision now? Yes, because of the result and its baleful consequences, not just for our economy but for our democracy too, but there comes a time when you have to ask a simple question of yourself. Do I have to take part in something that I think should never be taking place? In a democracy, the answer to that question must always be no. |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 8:56:53 GMT
T Some people might have quite rationally deduced that on balance, something like impact on GDP is for them outweighed by other things. My memory of the Referendum Campaign was of a parade of opposing emotions. Lots of flag waving on both sides. It was a fact free zone well campaigns might quite often appeal to emotions. Esp. when the issues are so complicated that it’s hard to make a proper case. But some people may have decided according to their personal circumstances, regardless of the campaigning. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 15, 2023 9:00:14 GMT
Breakfast with the Befuddled Badger comes to an end.
I apologise to all my miserabilist muesli munching mates, but I'm off out for the day.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 9:07:31 GMT
A few strands of the story of the cost to governments of the long years of Cheap Money Policy ( aka QE) have emerged recently. NIESR's recent economic report and the BoE's APF Report cover the situation in UK :- "From the beginning of the APF’s life up to 28th February 2022, the gilts that it had acquired generally appreciated in price and the APF had made a cumulative profit of £96.9 billion. Gilt prices have fallen very heavily since February 2022, because of rising inflation and short-term interest rates, and because QE has been replaced by its opposite, known as QT – quantitative tightening. In the year to 28th February 2023, the APF made a loss of £169.1 billion: over its entire life up to 28th February 2023, it had made a cumulative loss of £72.3 billion, or about 2.7% of the GDP of 2023." OBR and others are forecasting total losses of £200bn +. The Treasury is liable for these losses. Why? Off hand the bank spent £500bn to $1 trillion on buying government debt. It created this money out of thin air. I dont see any reason to charge the Uk government if it makes a loss on the exercise because its only a notional loss or gain based upon genuine capital loss of nothing whatever. Hmm. But surely they also did that in 2008, when they bailed out banks despite the 'contract' being that banks were liable for their own foolish investment strategies? What is this contract then, heads I win and tails you lose? Isnt debt default only banned because of some decision by the US to impose this on other nations? But actually the US is contemplating defaulting itself so maybe they will abandon that rule too. It caused a lot of problems in 2008. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 9:25:21 GMT
Plebiscites have no real place in a representative democracy Maybe they dont have a role in any system where someone fears politicians will do things voters do not approve of? Our problem is not having referenda, but cherry picking when to have them for political advantage. There should be something like the US system where enough voters can require a binding question be put to the nation. (though it should require a healthy majority to pass unlike the brexit one). We shpuld be entitled to a rfeerndum on rejoin right now. To make clear the UK has reversed its opinion. Similarly its a stupid nonsense westminster refusing to allow Scotland a referendum on independence. (though in that case maybe it should also ask the English if they are willing to grant Scotland freedom since we currently rule Scotland.) |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 9:32:55 GMT
Sure, that’s a valid issue to consider. I’m not keen on losing free movement myself. But many in the middle-class are relatively protected from some of the economic effects of EU and globalism more generally. (E.g. my partner did not have a queue of East Europeans competing with her when she got her headship). There does still seem to be a demand for british teachers to work abroad, dont know about heads as that is a bit specialist. But traditionally wouldnt we have placed doctors and teachers on a par, but nowadays doctors are romping ahead in public standing and it would seem in pay? Despite the attempts to cut their salarries in the UK, far less successful than those which have dropped the pay of teachers. It is funny how we expect kids to stay in education for longer than ever in history, and yet its a time standards have declined, its all about providing a service on the minimum budget, and outcomes very much depend on whether the indiviual kids want to be educated and so will educate themselves. On a different tack, I was talking to someone about their children who should have started school during covid, but therefore didnt. The result for one has been they are very much desocialised from the whole idea of attending school and miles behind in learning to read. It strikes me we have debated the immediate issue of lost education for those who were taking or about to take exams during covid, but there is another problem coming along the line of those whose entry into education and learning the basics of reading and writing were upest by covid. Who will continue to have this legacy of under achieveing throughout their career and will pop up as a dip in performance once they reach exam age. This doesnt seem to be getting any mention. I dont exactly remember now what class size limits were at A level when I was at school. for o level it was 30, but A level maybe half that from what I remember. Just chatted to another teacher moving to the private sector, where at interview the hadmaster apologised to her she would face an A level class of 9. Compared to 30 in her current state school. Like....seriously? And that isnt the worst school locally! Well as the number of those with degrees has expanded, there can be more people in contention for teaching posts, allowing them to drive down pay to the point just before too many reject it as an option. Harder to become a doctor, you can’t just do a history degree then decide you want to be a doctor and do a one-year qualification like a PGCE. Regarding pupils wanting to educated, the current educational model tends to favour some over others. E.g. neilj ’s point about problem-solving. By the age of 15 I had had enough of the paradigm and increasingly did my own thing, which did not garner the approval of all my teachers, but there wasn’t any choice really. Had tried it their way and it left quite a bit to be desired. Regarding learning the basics of reading and writing by coming to school, an advantage of coming to school is that even if the teacher isn’t much cop, pupils may see others doing well at reading and be motivated to get more help with it back at home. If the help is available of course. But schools can hold things back too. Regarding class sizes, bigger class sizes can be an advantage in some ways, if you know how to use it. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Aug 15, 2023 9:34:44 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w " Some people might have quite rationally deduced that on balance, something like impact on GDP is for them outweighed by other things. " Indeed the damaging impact on gdp was outweighed for me by our freedoms and franchise being stolen by the brexitanians. Sure, that’s a valid issue to consider. I’m not keen on losing free movement myself. But many in the middle-class are relatively protected from some of the economic effects of EU and globalism more generally. (E.g. my partner did not have a queue of East Europeans competing with her when she got her headship). In the nearly 20 years I have served as a School Governor, I have not met a Head Teacher from Eastern Europe, nor even come across an applicant in cases where I have served on a HT selection panel, before and after we left the EU. (That's not to say that they wouldn't be welcome, but it just doesn't happen, in my experience). And we've touched before on the fact that Leave voters overwhelmingly did not expect negative economic consequences of Leaving. This is from YouGov 20 June 2016, with a sample of 1,643 leave voters. "Do you think Britain would be economically better or worse off if we left the European Union, or would it make no difference?" Worse Off 4%Better Off 48% No difference 38% Don't Know 10% [And, for the question "Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference?" - just 3% of those voting Leave answered "Worse Off", compared to 57% of those voting Remain. ] |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 9:35:40 GMT
But while it may not have been a perfect campaign, it was hardly a meltdown was it! It’s not like her polling had collapsed to circa 25% after some economic disaster. And you can’t just go by whether someone wins, because they may have been handed a very stacked deck. Like, equally, as you note, it’s not fair to just dismiss you as a loser, because after all you were dealing with a deck stacked against you. Blair inherited an effed-up Tory party. And it was effed-up before Blair, you can’t just disregard that. Otherwise it’s like saying Accrington Stanley are a brilliant football team of winners after they beat the Prem champions 457-nil, when half their opponents’ squad had been unable to play because caught a bug, and the remainder were sent off by half-time for no good reason by a dodgy ref. "And you can’t just go by whether someone wins," - On the contrary, in the FPTP 'winner takes all' system it is the only criterion that matters. To be in government under the Westminster system is to wield essentially unlimited authority (not quite the same thing as power, as the current shower are demonstrating) whereas to be in opposition lets you do nothing except talk*. As to me I said I was a loser - I lost! My point was that my party did well where it intended to (although they still lost - the Conservatives kept a majority on the council). If you just use a personal criterion, then Callaghan, Foot, Kinnock, Brown and Corbyn were all winners - they were reelected to parliament - but the Leader of the Opposition (or PM in a couple of those cases) has only one job in an election, which is to win more seats than the other party and form a government. Anything else is failure It really is a zero sum game, with no worthwhile prizes for coming second. *(Before the, 'UKIP were a successful pressure group' argument is wheeled out, I have no interest in belonging to a pressure group and UKIP were only successful because Cameron folded to them - he should have faced them down. But he put party before country as Tories typically do.) |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Aug 15, 2023 9:44:38 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w"Regarding where May’s votes went, not sure, but I think James E might have said something about that previously?" This is what I said previously about GE2017 campaign movements (from first polls of the campaign to election day). The Tories lost about 3 points over the 2017 campaign, from 46.5% to 43.5%. May called the election on 18 April. These are the comparative figures for the 7 polls on 18-20 April 2017 compared to the actual result. Con 43.5% (down 3 from 46.5) Lab 41% ( up 15 from 26%) - But final pre-election polls averaged 36.5% for Lab and overstated UKIP LD 7.6% (down 3.4 from 11%) UKIP 1.9% (down by 6.4 from 8.3% av) Green 1.7 (down 1.3 from 3%) The Tories probably lost more than 3 points to Lab in the campaign, as their 3-point fall in VI coincided with a spectacular fall in the UKIP VI - from 8.3% in the early polls to a 1.9% share on election day. It isn't credible to suggest that three-quarters of those who had been backing UKIP just a few weeks earlier switched to Labour during the campaign. YouGov's final poll of the campaign showed just 18% of the UKIP2015 vote switching to Lab and 44% of it going to the Conservatives. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election [However, if Lab did win support from Con during the campaign as this suggests, then it may well have been a case of winning back deserters from 2015. The overall share of Con2015 who went to Lab in 2017 was put at around 9%, with a similar percentage going the other way] yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/22/how-did-2015-voters-cast-their-ballot-2017-general
|
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 9:45:15 GMT
Sure, that’s a valid issue to consider. I’m not keen on losing free movement myself. But many in the middle-class are relatively protected from some of the economic effects of EU and globalism more generally. (E.g. my partner did not have a queue of East Europeans competing with her when she got her headship). In the nearly 20 years I have served as a School Governor, I have not met a Head Teacher from Eastern Europe, nor even come across an applicant in cases where I have served on a HT selection panel, before and after we left the EU. (That's not to say that they wouldn't be welcome, but it just doesn't happen, in my experience). And we've touched before on the fact that Leave voters overwhelmingly did not expect negative economic consequences of Leaving. This is from YouGov 20 June 2016, with a sample of 1,643 leave voters. "Do you think Britain would be economically better or worse off if we left the European Union, or would it make no difference?" Worse Off 4%Better Off 48% No difference 38% Don't Know 10% Yes exactly. Some careers experience more foreign competition than others. And I wasn’t talking about whether people necessarily were voting in terms of what was right for Britain, but was saying that in some cases they may instead be considering their own economic circumstances, or sometimes those of their family etc. |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 9:49:22 GMT
But while it may not have been a perfect campaign, it was hardly a meltdown was it! It’s not like her polling had collapsed to circa 25% after some economic disaster. And you can’t just go by whether someone wins, because they may have been handed a very stacked deck. Like, equally, as you note, it’s not fair to just dismiss you as a loser, because after all you were dealing with a deck stacked against you. Blair inherited an effed-up Tory party. And it was effed-up before Blair, you can’t just disregard that. Otherwise it’s like saying Accrington Stanley are a brilliant football team of winners after they beat the Prem champions 457-nil, when half their opponents’ squad had been unable to play because caught a bug, and the remainder were sent off by half-time for no good reason by a dodgy ref. "And you can’t just go by whether someone wins," - On the contrary, in the FPTP 'winner takes all' system it is the only criterion that matters. That is what determines victory, but it’s dodging the point. Someone can win in that system more through luck than ability. And may lose through having a lot stacked against, rather than it being of their own making. (Which you know, which is why you gave reasons to explain away your loss. And you try and come up with excuses to undermine Corbyn’s improvement in 2017, saying May had a meltdown when she didn’t). If the right do well with Tories majorly effing up, the right still get the credit. Can’t be anything else. If Corbyn does better than expected, then Tories gets the credit. Even though they didn’t melt down. The attribution is very selective. |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 9:50:22 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w "Regarding where May’s votes went, not sure, but I think James E might have said something about that previously?" This is what I said previously about GE2017 campaign movements (from first polls of the campaign to election day). The Tories lost about 3 points over the 2017 campaign, from 46.5% to 43.5%. May called the election on 18 April. These are the comparative figures for the 7 polls on 18-20 April 2017 compared to the actual result. Con 43.5% (down 3 from 46.5) Lab 41% ( up 15 from 26%) - But final pre-election polls averaged 36.5% for Lab and overstated UKIP LD 7.6% (down 3.4 from 11%) UKIP 1.9% (down by 6.4 from 8.3% av) Green 1.7 (down 1.3 from 3%) The Tories probably lost more than 3 points to Lab in the campaign, as their 3-point fall in VI coincided with a spectacular fall in the UKIP VI - from 8.3% in the early polls to a 1.9% share on election day. It isn't credible to suggest that three-quarters of those who had been backing UKIP just a few weeks earlier switched to Labour during the campaign. YouGov's final poll of the campaign showed just 18% of the UKIP2015 vote switching to Lab and 44% of it going to the Conservatives. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election [However, if Lab did win support from Con during the campaign as this suggests, then it may well have been a case of winning back deserters from 2015. The overall share of Con2015 who went to Lab in 2017 was put at around 9%, with a similar percentage going the other way] yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/22/how-did-2015-voters-cast-their-ballot-2017-general Thanks for that James! |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 10:01:52 GMT
Bravo la Roja
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 10:36:33 GMT
carfrew I'd agree with you that May's Tories didn't go into anything like a meltdown in 2017 but they did stall quite abruptly after trouncing Labour in the May local elections and having enjoyed huge long-standing leads over Labour in the polls. May also led Corbyn on personal approval ratings too for most of her time as PM up to the 2017 election. Was Labour's campaign surge due to voters liking what they saw of Corbyn or suddenly seeing May in a different light as she wilted under the glare of sustained publicity? I am not sure, to be honest. Maybe a bit of both, and some of Labour's policies on tuition fees and public ownership struck chords. However, even though the public began to warm to Corbyn, who had the benefit of appearing to be a fully paid up member of the human race compared to the robotic and soulless May, never at any stage of the campaign did I have the remotest sense that Labour were winning. A sullen but determined voting bloc of the newly united right remained in their way. The Tories biggest popular vote for nearly a quarter of a century. But - to the surprise of most pundits - Corbyn did poll far more votes in 2017 than Blair received post - Iraq in 2005.Admittedly Tory support had increased even more sharply. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Aug 15, 2023 10:42:32 GMT
Every dog on the street knew Corbyn had no enthusiasm for the remain campaign. If he didn't go on holiday for as long as is alleged he may as well have gone because his interventions had little impact and everyone knew he was indifferent regarding the outcome. My experience is that people who say “everyone knew …” generally turn out to mean “nobody actually knew this at all”. ESPECIALLY the ones with dogs in the street. I have no idea what difference Corbyn may or may not have made, but we do know, courtesy of YouGov, that Labour voters split 65/35 in favour of remain, which was fairly close to LibDems on 68/32. God, how many MORE times does it have to be said? The idiom 'Every dog on the street....' comes from Ireland I think. My experience from working in N Islington for about 10 years was different from yours. Imo he wasn't up for it, (the remain campaign) and he had his own agenda. I agree it probably made little difference either way to the ultimate outcome. His luke warm approach didn't warm me to him though. He's best forgotten about now as an aberration. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 10:47:18 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w But that isn't where the main cohort of leave voters were the majority of people under state retirement age voted remain, those most likely to be competing with European union workers in the 18-30 age cohort overwhelmingly so. The unemployment rate for much of the last two decades of our membership was historically low ,the fact is as can be seen by the impact on agriculture, hospitality and the care sector that there wasn't actually a indigenous demand for these jobs , if there had been we would see it now and we don't. Unemployment remained well above the levels seen in the UK over the two decades prior to joining the EEC in 1973. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Aug 15, 2023 10:50:58 GMT
Corbyn was gifted a meltdown by May running the worst campaign in living memory in 2017 and still finished 55 seats behind her. As has been pointed out many times on this site, Johnson was not personally popular in 2019, with much of the public doubtful about him, but still got an 80 seat majority. Thatcher and the Conservatives were never wildly popular throughout the 1980s but they kept walloping Labour. Blair and Starmer have benefited from Tory meltdowns, but you still have to be positioned to take advantage. Who seriously, genuinely and honestly believes a Corbyn led Labour would be 20 points ahead in the polls now? (If anyone does, I would advise getting out more and talking to some ordinary, not very political, voters). It’s a nonsense to say TM had a meltdown, the campaign might not have been perfect but she got 42% of the vote! Six percent more than Cameron even, who nonetheless secured an overall majority against your favourite leader! (You haven’t attempted an excuse for why Miliband doesn’t count re: “loser” yet). Whether or not Johnson was personally popular might be interesting but not very relevant to the point: regardless of popularity, Tory polling turned around quite a lot with him standing for leader, having been behind Corbyn shortly before the change, to becoming substantially ahead. (For example, even if some may not have cared for him much they might have liked the policy pitch, whether it was “get Brexit done”, “Levelling up” or summat else) I don’t think Corbyn would be anything like 20 points ahead now, because he has been trashed a lot by the media etc. (and even Blair has been below Corbyn in some polling in more recent times) but if it were 2017 he might be somewhat closer and might improve rather in the six week campaign proper. (As you know from our prior exchange, I think Corbyn should maybe have stood aside before the 2019 election so they had a new leader relatively untarnished. Of course changing leader doesn’t always work, as Tories found out with the Trussterf*ck). |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 15, 2023 10:54:44 GMT
Latest Redfield and Wilton Poll: redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-13-august-2023/| Lab: | 48% | (+3) | | Con: | 28% | (+1) | | LD: | 10% | (=) | | RefUK: | 5% | (-3) | | Grn: | 4% | (-2) | | SNP: | 4% | (+1) |
2000 polled on 13th August, changes from 6th August. That drop in the RefUK polling looks significant; if it is right-wingers going back to the Tories, it may be concealing a bigger swing by right-of-centre Tory voters to Labour. Next week's poll should be interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 10:58:39 GMT
carfrew The intriguing chicken and egg question implied in your post is this. Is a more centrist Labour, you call it right wing, the factor that tends to precipitate the Tory meltdown or is it, as you suggest, merely a beneficiary of the Tories melting down for other reasons? Asked another way, do centrist and moderate Tory voters take electoral flight, not polling flight, only when a palatable Labour alternative is on offer? I have no doubt that Blair et al seriously misread the British electorate in the years leading up to 1997. They appeared to believe that their massive shift to the Right was necessary in order to achieve a bare majority similar to October 1974. Despite the polling evidence , there was no expectation of the mega landslide which occurred. It became clear - with the evidence of hindsight - that Labour was going to win the 97 election almost come what may. Had Kinnock still been leader and fought on a reprise of the 1992 manifesto , he would almost certainly have managed a majority of at least 50. John Smith probably would have had a majority nearer to 100. There really was no need for a 179 majority or the shift to the Right which brought it about. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 11:03:20 GMT
its only a notional loss or gain based [/quote] Nope-its an actual loss. But don't take my word for it :- "These are real losses, which taxpayers will have to bear. The public sector has bought assets at a high price, sold some of them at lower prices, and those that it still holds are now worth less on average than it paid for them." NIESR And just a real for The Fed and the ECB |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Aug 15, 2023 11:04:30 GMT
Following on from my earlier intervention am I correct that all Labour Leaders perceived to be on the left of the party subsequent to Atlee shifted to the centre/right in policy terms once becoming leader? If so, given the relative failure of Labour in electoral terms since WWII is it about time one started moving in the other direction  |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Aug 15, 2023 11:05:34 GMT
carfrew I'd agree with you that May's Tories didn't go into anything like a meltdown in 2017 but they did stall quite abruptly after trouncing Labour in the May local elections and having enjoyed huge long-standing leads over Labour in the polls. May also led Corbyn on personal approval ratings too for most of her time as PM up to the 2017 election. Was Labour's campaign surge due to voters liking what they saw of Corbyn or suddenly seeing May in a different light as she wilted under the glare of sustained publicity? I am not sure, to be honest. Maybe a bit of both, and some of Labour's policies on tuition fees and public ownership struck chords. However, even though the public began to warm to Corbyn, who had the benefit of appearing to be a fully paid up member of the human race compared to the robotic and soulless May, never at any stage of the campaign did I have the remotest sense that Labour were winning. A sullen but determined voting bloc of the newly united right remained in their way. The Tories biggest popular vote for nearly a quarter of a century. Yes, what I felt the following day after 2017 was like I feel now about Everton playing Villa next Sunday. I'm anticipating a horrendous defeat and then we don't play too badly after all but still lose by the odd goal. Then people say....look the toffees are improving, they are on the road to mid table respectability....I think Nah...here's another season of relegation anxiety coming up. I'm just sick of it, I just want to win, that was never going to happen with Jeremy Corbyn or with Frank bloody Lampard! When I think of Jeremy Corbyn I think of the American 'Post Turtle' joke: An old rancher is talking about politics with a young man from the city. He compares a politician to a ‘post turtle.’ The young man doesn’t understand and asks him what a post turtle is. The old man says, ‘When you’re driving down a country road and you see a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that’s a post turtle. You know he didn’t get up there by himself. He doesn’t belong there; you wonder who put him there; he can’t get anything done while he’s up there; and you just want to help the poor, dumb thing down.’ |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 11:14:15 GMT
Some aren’t campaigning to win but rather exploring what influences outcomes. And clearly the right of the party weren’t that fussed about winning under Corbyn. Even Reeves said she was glad Corbyn didn’t win.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 15, 2023 11:20:09 GMT
carfrew I'd agree with you that May's Tories didn't go into anything like a meltdown in 2017 but they did stall quite abruptly after trouncing Labour in the May local elections and having enjoyed huge long-standing leads over Labour in the polls. May also led Corbyn on personal approval ratings too for most of her time as PM up to the 2017 election. Was Labour's campaign surge due to voters liking what they saw of Corbyn or suddenly seeing May in a different light as she wilted under the glare of sustained publicity? I am not sure, to be honest. Maybe a bit of both, and some of Labour's policies on tuition fees and public ownership struck chords. However, even though the public began to warm to Corbyn, who had the benefit of appearing to be a fully paid up member of the human race compared to the robotic and soulless May, never at any stage of the campaign did I have the remotest sense that Labour were winning. A sullen but determined voting bloc of the newly united right remained in their way. The Tories biggest popular vote for nearly a quarter of a century. Yes, what I felt the following day after 2017 was like I feel now about Everton playing Villa next Sunday. I'm anticipating a horrendous defeat and then we don't play too badly after all but still lose by the odd goal. Then people say....look the toffees are improving, they are on the road to mid table respectability....I think Nah...here's another season of relegation anxiety coming up. I'm just sick of it, I just want to win, that was never going to happen with Jeremy Corbyn or with Frank bloody Lampard! It's the hope that kills you - and that applies as much to Stevie Gerrard as Frank Lampard. Just be consoled that at least both Everton and Villa have good managers now and no-one can fairly blame either of them for their club's position at the end of the season. |
|
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 Aug 15, 2023 11:27:56 GMT
Yes, what I felt the following day after 2017 was like I feel now about Everton playing Villa next Sunday. I'm anticipating a horrendous defeat and then we don't play too badly after all but still lose by the odd goal. Then people say....look the toffees are improving, they are on the road to mid table respectability....I think Nah...here's another season of relegation anxiety coming up. I'm just sick of it, I just want to win, that was never going to happen with Jeremy Corbyn or with Frank bloody Lampard! It's the hope that kills you - and that applies as much to Stevie Gerrard as Frank Lampard. Just be consoled that at least both Everton and Villa have good managers now and no-one can fairly blame either of them for their club's position at the end of the season thought you would be used to a lack of hope with the LDs, Leftie? |
|
