steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 17:11:44 GMT
grahamThe primary impact of this pattern would be the Tories losing slightly less to Labour and slightly more to the Lib Dems.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,377
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 17:15:07 GMT
Tories are not only incompetent in running the country but also in running their party
Tory MPs are 'fuming', perhaps it gives them an idea of what the rest of us have been feeling for years
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 17:16:18 GMT
RafwanI'm probably about as left as a lib dem can get I've no problem with a left of centre Labour leader winning and Labour being the largest party in parliament. It's just a shame that they've haven't found one who can achieve the plurality of voters that is required, before or after I was a party member.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 15, 2023 17:17:23 GMT
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. Surely you are missing the key "what if" here. If May had polled two million less votes, Corbyn would have won a handsome majority. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 17:18:32 GMT
neilj Tories are quite happy not mentioning they're Tories in their campaign literature. But they normally do mention where they are standing. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 17:31:14 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. 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*. 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. I have no interest in belonging to a pressure group You and I would disagree on so many things , so I feel moved to respond the the above opinions-because I absolutely agree with them. And your final comment shows that you understand exactly why your opinions in this regard are called " one dimensional" here by the Make Corbyn Great Again ( McGA) brigade. They are talking about what appealed to a bunch of LP members and their Rent a Crowd street mobs. You are talking about what appeals to voters in their daily lives.. You are talking about practical politics and Government. They are talking about theoretical politics and Demonstrations. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 18:05:36 GMT
Tories are not only incompetent in running the country but also in running their party Tory MPs are 'fuming', perhaps it gives them an idea of what the rest of us have been feeling for years As my good chum Lee Anderson might say, if they don’t like it they can fuck off back to their old civvy jobs. |
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 15, 2023 18:14:54 GMT
Just saw this quote of Starmer, in the Telegraph
“Speaking before a visit to Rutherglen in Scotland, where a crucial by-election is imminent, Starmer declared that “there may have been times in the recent past where Labour was afraid to speak the language of class at all – but not my Labour Party. No, for me, the ‘class ceiling’ that holds working people back is our defining purpose.”“
|
|
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 18:22:30 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. 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*. 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. I have no interest in belonging to a pressure group You and I would disagree on so many things , so I feel moved to respond the the above opinions-because I absolutely agree with them. And your final comment shows that you understand exactly why your opinions in this regard are called " one dimensional" here by the Make Corbyn Great Again ( McGA) brigade. They are talking about what appealed to a bunch of LP members and their Rent a Crowd street mobs. You are talking about what appeals to voters in their daily lives.. You are talking about practical politics and Government. They are talking about theoretical politics and Demonstrations. It doesn't surprise me that you agree, as those on the centre-right/right have always appreciated the value of obtaining power and office and actively seek it. There are people on the left who are like that, but also an awful lot for whom "having fought the good fight" is enough, even if you go on to lose. To take an example that is not Corbyn, there is no way Kinnock should have been allowed to fight a second election having been trounced in 1987. |
|
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 18:28:13 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). Sorry PJ but this is far too bleak and stifling a take; (sternly) you are dwelling too much on the past! On the contrary, I'm quite chipper about Labour being 20 points ahead and in with a good chance of winning the next election. the future is rosy in that respect. It is others - carfrew in this case - who keep harping back to the golden age of Labour losing 4 elections in a row. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 15, 2023 18:32:14 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. 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*. 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. I have no interest in belonging to a pressure group You and I would disagree on so many things , so I feel moved to respond the the above opinions-because I absolutely agree with them. And your final comment shows that you understand exactly why your opinions in this regard are called " one dimensional" here by the Make Corbyn Great Again ( McGA) brigade. They are talking about what appealed to a bunch of LP members and their Rent a Crowd street mobs. You are talking about what appeals to voters in their daily lives.. You are talking about practical politics and Government. They are talking about theoretical politics and Demonstrations. Voters, in England at least, do seem to like 'Tory' parties but occasionally don't mind giving the Red ones a go (as per Blair era). However, a faction within a broad church party can exert influence on that party and even a smaller party can exert significant influence (eg UKIP into GE'15) Winning for the sake of winning does however have it's downsides and whilst we obviously can't see into 'parallel universes' then given how bad CON have been on delivery and how bad the (global) economic backdrop has been then IMO even Comrade Corbyn could have been 20pt+, maybe 30pt+, ahead at the moment (although perhaps only if the RW of LAB had been prepared to allow a LW-LAB leader/govt) I don't think there is a McGA brigade as such, just a lot of people who have pointed out how well Corbyn did in GE'17 and how far LAB has moved to the Right/Climate Delay/Anti-Woke/'Make Brexit Work' side since Starmer became leader of LAB* I'm quite happy with most of the shifts from LAB under Starmer but IMO they've gone too 'Tory' on economic and climate side, hence why I sometimes state I'm LoS (Left of Starmer). There are multiple dimensions in politics but folks do often simplify many of the measures onto a single axis. I posted YG analysis from a while back showing Left/Right is not so simples. Repost below:
Left-wing vs right-wing: it’s complicatedyougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/14/left-wing-vs-right-wing-its-complicatedOf course if your ambition is to become a politician and you've tied your own colours to Red/Blue/Orange mast then you might well 'blow with the wind' and have supported Corbyn-LAB and now Starmer-LAB even though the difference between those two is much larger than the difference between Starmer-Reeves and Rishi-Hunt. * EG From the FLW of the twitterverse (who came up Sir Keith Stalin, Sir Kid Starver and do like to get the crayons out to highlight there disapproval of LAB being back under RW management) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 15, 2023 18:38:53 GMT
Just saw this quote of Starmer, in the Telegraph “ Speaking before a visit to Rutherglen in Scotland, where a crucial by-election is imminent, Starmer declared that “there may have been times in the recent past where Labour was afraid to speak the language of class at all – but not my Labour Party. No, for me, the ‘class ceiling’ that holds working people back is our defining purpose.”“  IIRC then under Corbyn then LAB was not afraid to talk about social class so who is Starmer trying to fool? "Words are wind" as they say. Although if you went to a fee paying school (as he did) then the 'class' ceiling is a typically a bit higher - if that is what he meant? Given he's in Scotland then no doubt he'll spout some Wokey stuff as that goes down well in the Utopian Scottish Socialist Republic (and places like 'Woke-on-Thames') but it's a different tune when he's in places like Stoke-on-Trent. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 18:44:23 GMT
Rafwan I'm probably about as left as a lib dem can get I've no problem with a left of centre Labour leader winning and Labour being the largest party in parliament. It's just a shame that they've haven't found one who can achieve the plurality of voters that is required, before or after I was a party member. Why do you think, in policy/programme terms, we have been unable to achieve that plurality? Are you able to say what, in policy/programme terms, led you to leave the Labour Party? Or was it solely the personality/character of the leader? |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 15, 2023 18:54:10 GMT
The 'hierarchy of racism' within LAB issue is ongoing I see
It was wrong under Corbyn and now that it has been 'inverted' under Starmer it is also wrong. There should be no 'hierarchy'. Racism is racism - no matter who the victims are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 18:56:33 GMT
pjw1961“ On the contrary, I'm quite chipper about Labour being 20 points ahead and in with a good chance of winning the next election. the future is rosy in that respect. It is others - carfrew in this case - who keep harping back to the golden age of Labour losing 4 elections in a row. ” There is a something slightly odd about someone who doesn’t vote, continually analysing the previous Labour leader’s ratings etc etc (etc…) and saying how popular his policies were and so on. Yet someone like me and many of my friends, who really never liked or rated him, actually voted for him twice. Partly my reason was personal due the fact we had an excellent Labour MP in this constituency. (Sadly she was replaced by someone so dedicated that, at the first sign she would lose at the next GE, said she was off.) The other reason for this situation is, of course, that I dislike Tory governments even more and FPTP means, for me anyway, that voting for any other Party in a FPTP system would be self indulgent posturing. (We see a lot of that here from one or two posters - though that is a legitimate, personal choice of course.I just think that it is pointless; FPTP says “vote for who you think is the least awful.”) Our system is in really urgent need of overhaul or, in my view, our long trip down the proverbial pan will get steeper and faster.
|
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 15, 2023 19:05:14 GMT
There is a something slightly odd about someone who doesn’t vote, continually analysing the previous Labour leader’s ratings etc etc (etc…) Hardly, it’s a polling site. And the 2017 election never got so much attention at the time. It’s not the only polling I look at, the other day it was the EU ref. It’s just that some seem to find discussion of Corbyn a bit vexing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 19:32:21 GMT
There is a something slightly odd about someone who doesn’t vote, continually analysing the previous Labour leader’s ratings etc etc (etc…) Hardly, it’s a polling site. And the 2017 election never got so much attention at the time. It’s not the only polling I look at, the other day it was the EU ref. It’s just that some seem to find discussion of Corbyn a bit vexing. More incredibly repetitive Carfs. Mind you, unlike ole graham you don’t go back to the early 1800s. (Actually I thought I had written ironic so I blame spellcheck.) |
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 15, 2023 19:35:30 GMT
Hardly, it’s a polling site. And the 2017 election never got so much attention at the time. It’s not the only polling I look at, the other day it was the EU ref. It’s just that some seem to find discussion of Corbyn a bit vexing. More incredibly repetitive Carfs. Mind you, unlike ole graham you don’t go back to the early 1800s. (Actually I thought I had written ironic so I blame spellcheck.) Well it might have been in response to the oft-repeated victory of Blair etc. Lots of people repeat things. E.g. you keep hassling me about posting about polling on a polling board, which might be considered odd. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Aug 15, 2023 19:40:38 GMT
Sorry PJ but this is far too bleak and stifling a take; (sternly) you are dwelling too much on the past! On the contrary, I'm quite chipper about Labour being 20 points ahead and in with a good chance of winning the next election. the future is rosy in that respect. It is others - carfrew in this case - who keep harping back to the golden age of Labour losing 4 elections in a row. Indeed, yes. I spoke a little out of turn, there. I guess I really just want to establish the actual policy differences. But then I forget how quickly RW seek to circumscribe such debate in terms of ‘culture war’. |
|
|
|
Post by peterbell on Aug 15, 2023 19:46:08 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. RoC = 33% LoC = 66% Depending on the rounding up that means 2:1 in support of LoC. Can't be bad |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 15, 2023 20:14:09 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. RoC = 33% LoC = 66% Depending on the rounding up that means 2:1 in support of LoC. Can't be bad Con + NeoTories + Tory Collaborators + Reform = 91%.
Very bad indeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Aug 15, 2023 20:21:31 GMT
RoC = 33% LoC = 66% Depending on the rounding up that means 2:1 in support of LoC. Can't be bad Con + NeoTories + Tory Collaborators + Reform = 91%.
Very bad indeed.
Nah nah ne nah nah... |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 20:30:35 GMT
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. Hmm. A degree did not used to be necessary at all. So arguably the barrier to entry has risen, not fallen. Schools nowadays often connive to get around these nominal requirements, as by using 'teaching assistants' instead of teachers to teach a class. The bulletin boards are currently buzzing with adverts for teaching posts to start in the autumn term. Lots of vacancies. The government setting policy has not minded that pay has already been driven down below the point at which it will attract enough acceptable quality staff. Again you set me wondering whether the quantity of qualifications required to become a doctor has also risen in the last 50 years? Its clear this is the case for becoming a nurse, as the practical 'apprenticeship' path learning while working was axed some time ago. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 20:37:55 GMT
[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. ] Various pollsters have claimed to tabulate reasons why people voted leave, and indeed they gave many reasons. However what you point out is that they still all had this in common, that they believed it would not cost anything. The people who did believe it would cost them might still have wanted to get immigrants out, or stop Brussels interfering in the Uk, but recognised they were not willing to pay a price to achieve that. The lie which caused brexit to happen was that it would be at no financial cost.
The question is, what retribution will leave voters exact as more and more of them come to realise they were comprehensively lied to by the leave campaign in this absolutely key respect?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 20:42:30 GMT
More incredibly repetitive Carfs. Mind you, unlike ole graham you don’t go back to the early 1800s. (Actually I thought I had written ironic so I blame spellcheck.) Well it might have been in response to the oft-repeated victory of Blair etc. Lots of people repeat things. E.g. you keep hassling me about posting about polling on a polling board, which might be considered odd. That’s a really daft thing to say, I am just surprised by your oft repeated admiration and sympathy for Corbyn when that still wasn’t enough for you to vote for him. And it IS ironic that FPTP ensured that, in comparison, I actually DID vote for the old bugger despite having very little time for him as a Party Leader. Have others have commented, you need more than endless meetings with people who already agree with you to actually lead a major party into government. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 20:43:03 GMT
its only a notional loss or gain based 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 So where precisely did the trillion pounds used to buy bonds come from? I mean, did they borrow it from someone so it has to be paid back? Ans- no, they just invented it from thin air. Doesnt matter if they never got any of it back, they would never have to repay anything to anyone. Thats what it means to be a central bank. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 20:43:20 GMT
Anyway, the Gills top of their league already.  ⚽️ |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 20:48:44 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.
The idea is if more people are unemployed, then more will compete for each available job pushing down wages. Only last week I heard another news item, about how companies are having to raise the wages of people they are already employing to stop them leaving to go elsewhere. This rather sounds like it is totally short circuiting the employment marketplace. If firms want to keep the employees they have and have no interest in the rising number of unemployed, then the strategy cannot help to cut inflation. It might result in increasing unemployment and thus poverty, combined with entrenched inflation as the wages paid to those already in work keep rising.
The simplistic economic theory relies on workers being interchangeable, and they arent.
|
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Aug 15, 2023 20:50:52 GMT
It seems that Labour's ambition is to implement the rape clause of the 2 child cap on benefits " more fairly".
Here is the Herald's report on Starmer's explanation of this:
"Asked if that meant he was going to amend or change how the cap operates, he replied: “On any policy, there’s always a question of whether it can operate more fairly. Of course, there is. That will be across the board. Nobody is saying no policy can change ever on anything.
“What we’re being absolutely clear about is that an anti-poverty strategy driven by an incoming Labour government will focus on growing the economy and making sure that we get that growth in every part of the county.
“Because there are different models for growth. You can have a model that says some places make the growth, make the money and then you just redistribute it elsewhere across Scotland.
“I don’t believe in that model. I actually think we should have growth everywhere so that people have the dignity and respect and the self-worth of being part of that growth and seeing the yield of the growth."
|
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 15, 2023 20:51:32 GMT
Well it might have been in response to the oft-repeated victory of Blair etc. Lots of people repeat things. E.g. you keep hassling me about posting about polling on a polling board, which might be considered odd. That’s a really daft thing to say, I am just surprised by your oft repeated admiration and sympathy for Corbyn when that still wasn’t enough for you to vote for him. And it IS ironic that FPTP ensured that, in comparison, I actually DID vote for the old bugger despite having very little time for him as a Party Leader. Have others have commented, you need more than endless meetings with people who already agree with you to actually lead a major party into government. Just making stuff up to no purpose, given that I don’t have such admiration for him, indeed I said I thought he should have stood down before GE 2019. You do seem keen to keep talking about him tho’... |
|
⚽️ 
