neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 11:36:33 GMT
The fact he didn't answer the question asked directly strongly suggests to me he's hiding something
|
|
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 11:44:21 GMT
"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. You are dodging the point. Please provide me with a list of all the tremendous reforming acts of parliament that the Corbyn government passed. |
|
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 11:51:02 GMT
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. You are dodging the point. Please provide me with a list of all the tremendous reforming acts of parliament that the Corbyn government passed. I am not dodging that he didn’t get into power and hence couldn’t enact much policy. You have fairly established that point. That is obvious. What is at issue is the reasons for it. You are ok with considering mitigating reasons why when you lose, but not when Corbyn loses. Related issue with Blair. He won for reasons that had a great deal not to do with him. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 15, 2023 11:51:29 GMT
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? You tend to get spoiled when your party starts off with leaders as good as Paddy Ashdown and Charles Kennedy, regardless of their personal failings. It's only when you get Nick 'Bloody' Clegg and Jo Swinson that you realise that good leaders are only slightly more common than hen's teeth and that possession of two X chromosomes is no guarantee of a good leader as the Tories discovered with both May and Truss. Labour should take note and not rush into selecting a female leader unless she has real leadership qualities. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Aug 15, 2023 11:53:53 GMT
A month ago, I flagged up an increase in the unemployment rate from 3.8% to 4.0, which had gone almost completely unremarked in the media. While one data point didn't on its own make a trend, I suggested we might have reached a tipping point, and that if a rising trend became established, it would become highly salient politically. Unemployment is one of the few economic indicators that hits home with most of the electorate (excluding, of course, 'I'm all right, Jack' retirees). Today the rate increased by 0.2% again, to 4.2%. And again, not much reaction.
Watch this space.
|
|
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 11:56:24 GMT
thought you would be used to a lack of hope with the LDs, Leftie? You tend to get spoiled when your party starts off with leaders as good as Paddy Ashdown and Charles Kennedy, regardless of their personal failings. It's only when you get Nick 'Bloody' Clegg and Jo Swinson that you realise that good leaders are only slightly more common than hen's teeth and that possession of two X chromosomes is no guarantee of a good leader as the Tories discovered with both May and Truss. Labour should take note and not rush into selecting a female leader unless she has real leadership qualities. Well, if it makes you feel any better Leftie, we don’t really know for sure how Ashdown and Kennedy would have turned out in power. Cable for example said some sensible things before getting onto power, then it was a bit of a shock. (Mind you, I do tend to a certain cynicism with many of them. I’d have been wary of Corbyn too etc.) |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Aug 15, 2023 12:18:39 GMT
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 agree, in my opinion a referendum is the best way to address constitutional issues that cross party lines. It was the calamitous way the referendum and its aftermath were handled by all the parties which was the problem. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 12:24:22 GMT
"Sunak claims holding asylum seekers on barges like the Bibby Stockholm is about 'fairness' to UK taxpayer"
The problem with this particular Sunakered load of old cobblers is that unless each barge designed for 250 has 1000 asylum seekers housed in it ( physically impossible) then it's no cheaper than hotel accommodation.
Taxpayers would get a fairer deal if the asylum seekers claims were processed promptly and then the vast majority who were granted leave to remain could be tax payers as well!
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 15, 2023 12:31:40 GMT
Not a good sign: www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/15/bank-of-england-under-pressure-to-raise-interest-rates-after-record-jump-in-basic-payTotal pay, including bonuses, rose by 8.2% a year in the three months to June, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported, stronger than the 7.3% analysts expected.
Regular pay, which excludes bonus payments, rose by 7.8% in the quarter, the highest regular annual growth rate since comparable records began in 2001, up from 7.5% in March-May.
Policymakers at the Bank of England pushed the cost of borrowing to 5.25% earlier this month, the 14th consecutive interest rate rise.
The money markets indicate there is an 84% chance of the Bank raising rates by a quarter of a percentage point in September to 5.5%, and a 16% chance of a larger, half-point increase to 5.75%.
Interest rates are forecast to peak at 6% next February, higher than the 5.75% expected before Tuesday’s labour market report was released. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 12:31:55 GMT
@c-a-r-f-r-e-w
You do make a good point about only really being able to test a leader is when they get into power
Yes you can be a good leader in opposition, but the real test comes when you start to weild power. The difficult choices you must make when faced with economic reality
|
|
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 13:01:24 GMT
@c-a-r-f-r-e-w You do make a good point about only really being able to test a leader is when they get into power Yes you can be a good leader in opposition, but the real test comes when you start to weild power. The difficult choices you must make when faced with economic reality Indeed Neil. E.g. despite some other criticisms of Brown, when faced with the banking crisis he handled it rather well and was quite influential internationally on the matter |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 13:10:45 GMT
A month ago, I flagged up an increase in the unemployment rate from 3.8% to 4.0, which had gone almost completely unremarked in the media. While one data point didn't on its own make a trend, I suggested we might have reached a tipping point, and that if a rising trend became established, it would become highly salient politically. Unemployment is one of the few economic indicators that hits home with most of the electorate (excluding, of course, 'I'm all right, Jack' retirees). Today the rate increased by 0.2% again, to 4.2%. And again, not much reaction.
Watch this space.
Indeed. Such a rate is already double what would have been seen as high unemployment throughout the 1960s. Unemployment at 1,439,000 is a long way from the full employment levels claimed by Tory apologists. In the second half of the 1960s Harold Wilson's Labour government was attacked for allowing the figures to exceed 500,000.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 15, 2023 13:13:14 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. There are several things that often get overlooked. Firstly, on the tory side, they didn't go into meltdown. Not at all. Yes, the 2017 campaign in general - and May in particullar - could acurately be described as 'bastard awful', but, the tory vote not only held steady, but, actually increased. Could it have increased forther with a half decent campaign? It's possible, but, IMO, doubtful. You have to go back to elections before multi-party voting for atory vote share beyond the 42-43% that May got. On the Labour side, two main factors, firtly, despite avoiding talking about brexit at all costs, Labour were seen as de-facto remain, something they at least partially lost in 2019 when brexit simply couldn't be abided, plus, Corbyn'Labour's later dithering on the issue. Secondly, Corbyn himself, right from the start, was villified, indeed demonised in the media...but, they went too far. When the 2017 election campaign was underway and the media had to give time and coverage to Labour/Corbyn, a fir few people realised that he wasn't the monster he was made out to be. That is not to say that there were still people who still disliked him and voted Labour through gritted teeth, but, overall the perception of him changed, again, imply because the press/media had overdone their hatchet job. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 13:44:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Aug 15, 2023 13:50:15 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. There are several things that often get overlooked. Firstly, on the tory side, they didn't go into meltdown. Not at all. Yes, the 2017 campaign in general - and May in particullar - could acurately be described as 'bastard awful', but, the tory vote not only held steady, but, actually increased. Could it have increased forther with a half decent campaign? It's possible, but, IMO, doubtful. You have to go back to elections before multi-party voting for atory vote share beyond the 42-43% that May got. On the Labour side, two main factors, firtly, despite avoiding talking about brexit at all costs, Labour were seen as de-facto remain, something they at least partially lost in 2019 when brexit simply couldn't be abided, plus, Corbyn'Labour's later dithering on the issue. Secondly, Corbyn himself, right from the start, was villified, indeed demonised in the media...but, they went too far. When the 2017 election campaign was underway and the media had to give time and coverage to Labour/Corbyn, a fir few people realised that he wasn't the monster he was made out to be. That is not to say that there were still people who still disliked him and voted Labour through gritted teeth, but, overall the perception of him changed, again, imply because the press/media had overdone their hatchet job. Don't forget that May only called the election because the opinion polls said she'd win a huge majority. Then the Tory campaign was lacklustre and there was a huge press campaign (including the right wing press) against the so-called 'dementia tax'. Brexit didn't really feature as a big issue - it was still seen as a 'done-deal' at that point. The fact that May still won shows how unpopular Corbyn was. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 15, 2023 14:13:22 GMT
An idea has been brewing in my head. The Tory Party needs to go back to the drawing board and decide what it is. So a period in opposition is prescribed. It is no duty of a roc voter to provide the reluctant and self-conscious "centrism" of a Starmer manifesto with a thumping majority in Parliament. So-a no vote is called for in the ballot box. Needs further thought. I'd currently expect fairly low turnout (not quite as low as GE'01 but much less than GE'17/19) and high abstentions ("no votes") - Similar policies from both main parties - Lack of charisma in both party leaders - Nothing like 'Get Brexit Done' (or undone) to stimulate a higher turnout (or any major party offering the Rejoiner fanatics the chance to Rejoin) - Nothing like ABCorbyn to stimulate a higher turnout - Even in Scotland the Indy issue has quietened down but I'd still expect Scotland to get higher turnout than E&W Both parties seem likely to focus on reasons why not to vote CON (or LAB) without giving much/any reason to actually vote for LAB (or CON). It's possible RUK* or Green provide a bit of a 'protest vote' (or at least are not as 'squeezed' as they were in GE'17/19) and LDEM will do well on low overall turnout (maybe 20+ seats) but LAB will likely win an OM on fairly low total votes - but a win is still a win. * UKIP/BXP as predecessors |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 14:19:36 GMT
There are several things that often get overlooked. Firstly, on the tory side, they didn't go into meltdown. Not at all. Yes, the 2017 campaign in general - and May in particullar - could acurately be described as 'bastard awful', but, the tory vote not only held steady, but, actually increased. Could it have increased forther with a half decent campaign? It's possible, but, IMO, doubtful. You have to go back to elections before multi-party voting for atory vote share beyond the 42-43% that May got. On the Labour side, two main factors, firtly, despite avoiding talking about brexit at all costs, Labour were seen as de-facto remain, something they at least partially lost in 2019 when brexit simply couldn't be abided, plus, Corbyn'Labour's later dithering on the issue. Secondly, Corbyn himself, right from the start, was villified, indeed demonised in the media...but, they went too far. When the 2017 election campaign was underway and the media had to give time and coverage to Labour/Corbyn, a fir few people realised that he wasn't the monster he was made out to be. That is not to say that there were still people who still disliked him and voted Labour through gritted teeth, but, overall the perception of him changed, again, imply because the press/media had overdone their hatchet job. Don't forget that May only called the election because the opinion polls said she'd win a huge majority. Then the Tory campaign was lacklustre and there was a huge press campaign (including the right wing press) against the so-called 'dementia tax'. Brexit didn't really feature as a big issue - it was still seen as a 'done-deal' at that point. The fact that May still won shows how unpopular Corbyn was. Had UKIP not stood aside in half the seats in 2017, Corbyn might well have been able to form a minority Government. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 15, 2023 14:19:45 GMT
ONS Labour market surveywww.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/august2023BoE will be focussed on the wage data and Sonia market is down 11bpts or so (ie priced back in about 1/2 an extra rate hike from expectations before the data). Will they ever realise that hiking rates is part of the reason why people are asking for higher wages (ie they are part of the problem)? Probably not. 🤦♂️ Not good with 'triple lock' and benefits indexation date coming up and some public sector workers still striking for higher pay. Although other parts of the report do show the Labour market is cooling a bit and we're getting closer to NAIRU.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 15:47:12 GMT
Not a good sign: www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/15/bank-of-england-under-pressure-to-raise-interest-rates-after-record-jump-in-basic-payTotal pay, including bonuses, rose by 8.2% a year in the three months to June, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported, stronger than the 7.3% analysts expected.
Regular pay, which excludes bonus payments, rose by 7.8% in the quarter, the highest regular annual growth rate since comparable records began in 2001, up from 7.5% in March-May.
Policymakers at the Bank of England pushed the cost of borrowing to 5.25% earlier this month, the 14th consecutive interest rate rise.
The money markets indicate there is an 84% chance of the Bank raising rates by a quarter of a percentage point in September to 5.5%, and a 16% chance of a larger, half-point increase to 5.75%.
Interest rates are forecast to peak at 6% next February, higher than the 5.75% expected before Tuesday’s labour market report was released.Why is rising pay not a good thing ? |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 16:01:23 GMT
@redfieldwilton
The Conservatives lead by 1% in the Blue Wall, their first lead in these seats since 22 May.
Blue Wall VI (12-13 August):
Conservative 33% (+2)
Labour 32% (-3)
Liberal Democrat 25% (+1)
Reform UK 5% (-1)
Green 5% (+2)
Other 0% (-1)
Changes +/- 30 July
|
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 16:04:06 GMT
Ah well PJ, you just said “loser”, you didn’t say anything about mitigating circumstances (which strangely don’t seem to apply when the left lose after the right in the party shaft them, or when the right win after being gifted a Tory meltdown). Starmer wasn’t doing so well till the Tory meltdown over partygate and Truss. The lesson is the right only win after a Tory meltdown and the Left got close with a more centre left manifesto. (And the Tories had to change leader and shift left in response). If only the right in the party hadn’t opposed them… 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). Sorry PJ but this is far too bleak and stifling a take; (sternly) you are dwelling too much on the past! |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 16:15:00 GMT
In Tory racism news.
The Conservative party chair, Greg Hands, has been urged to launch an internal investigation into the Welsh secretary, David TC Davies, over “unacceptable” and “racist” comments against the Traveller community.
This month Davies circulated a leaflet telling voters: “Gypsy and Traveller site coming to your area soon!” and asking them: “Would you like to see a Traveller site next to your house?”
It's a conundrum isn't it.
We've got Tories living next door to us it's not something we planned but people have to live somewhere.
(Actually they're a very nice elderly couple and apart from being obsessed with mowing the lawn every bloody day they are as nice as neighbours as you could hope for , outside of the ballot box, we checked they did vote remain there are some Rubicon's that just couldn't be passed)
Othering seems to be part of team Sunakered's election strategy, it's sad and divisive but entirely predictable from a policy and morality free regime.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 16:19:37 GMT
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). Miliband does count as a loser, along with Callaghan, Foot, Kinnock and Brown - that was my point. I wish that they had all won, but they didn't - only Blair managed that. I don't like the fact most of the English electorate are well to my right, but there is no point in pretending that isn't the case. As to May: www.politico.eu/article/how-theresa-may-lost-it-uk-election-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-jim-messina-lynton-crosby-uk-sarah-palin-campaign/www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40237833And most famously: www.theguardian.com/society/2017/may/22/theresa-may-u-turn-on-dementia-tax-cap-social-care-conservative-manifestoAll these accounts give Corbyn some credit, but boy did May hand him a big target to shoot at. A more able Tory leader - even someone as mediocre as Cameron for example - would undoubtedly have won a majority in 2017. Too bleak! The electorate are NOT an immovable feast! Those first two articles are no more than ex poste facto justifications by people desperate to explain a situation they had utterly failed to foresee. The most telling remark is from the Politico piece - “It was a personal triumph for Corbyn, securing his own future as Labour leader and resurrecting the party’s chances of seizing power at the next election.” The question is - what went wrong? The BBC bedrooom tax report was just a bit of excitable journalism. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 16:28:25 GMT
A slight glimmer of hope for the Republican party Chris Christie has moved into second place in the New Hampshire primary, still a very long distance behind the traitor but he does at least have some grasp on reality and is prepared to call out the disgraced former president for what he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 16:30:43 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. I am sure you are right about this. Much of the attack on Corbyn was based on his activities long before he was ever leader, or before anyone (including himself) considered it a possibility. His stances shifted significantly and necessarily. I think he had a good sense of what was possible and what was not and adapted accordingly. Perhaps not quite poacher turned gamekeeper, but a similar adaptation. I am firmly of the view that he was badly sabotaged by those from his own side. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 16:38:05 GMT
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. … 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. … Absolutely. Whatever is the point of electing people to do a job and then trying to do it yourself? If they mess up, kick them out next time. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 16:41:06 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.) Sorry (again!) PJ, but this all seems to one-dimensional … |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 16:46:55 GMT
@redfieldwilton The Conservatives lead by 1% in the Blue Wall, their first lead in these seats since 22 May. Blue Wall VI (12-13 August): Conservative 33% (+2) Labour 32% (-3) Liberal Democrat 25% (+1) Reform UK 5% (-1) Green 5% (+2) Other 0% (-1) Changes +/- 30 July That rather contradicts that pollster's national figures over that 2 week period which shows the Labour lead increasing from 15% to 20%! |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 15, 2023 16:50:22 GMT
Looks like a good old fashioned currency crisis enveloping the Russian economy. The central bank increased their base rate by 3.5% today, and the move hasn't been reported at all on state media. That's a sure sign they're up shitski creek.
While there are lots of ramifications from this, both upside and down, it appears that the sanctions really are biting, and the Kremlin's war chest it built up for the war is being whittled away. Most analysts suggest that this is the point at which the war starts to hurt ordinary Russians, other than the hundreds of thousands killed or wounded, but again, I wonder about all those who kept telling us what a genius Putin was, how he planned this all along, how he's playing the long game, West wrongfooted, etc etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 17:08:40 GMT
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. Ah, apols, wasn’t aware of the dogs in Ireland saying!! And you clearly know a lot more about Corbyn than I do. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you are right! I was just complaining about generalising from individual opinion to universal belief. Your last sentence is telling. Yes, why on earth are we all talking about Corbyn so much? I think he has come to embody ‘left’ politics and and thereby a way of attacking/suppressing this. There are two immediate problems. First, there is a complete lack of clarity about what constitutes ‘left’ politics (especially what constitutes unacceptable ‘far-left’ politics). Much worse though is that the distinctions have largely reduced to entirely factional positions. It is just no way to carry our politics!! The big question for me is what, precisely, are the political criticisms of Corbyn and what he has come to stand for? |
|
