oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Aug 15, 2023 20:53:35 GMT
Some may remember the criticism of Sunak for not being able to name any of Douglas Ross's Holyrood front bench, when questioned by Scots journalists.
Good leaders also have good back-up teams who anticipate that their guy will face similar questions, and brief them accordingly. However, .....
|
|
|
|
Post by peterbell on Aug 15, 2023 21:01:53 GMT
Rafwan wrote "First, there is a complete lack of clarity about what constitutes ‘left’ politics (especially what constitutes unacceptable ‘far-left’ politics)."
The few polls I have seen in the past year or so would suggest that many left wing policies are favoured by the public. As well as support for teh NHS, education etc., this extends to key nationalisations such as rail, water, energy. The Tory press has always said that nationalisation is an anethma but it seems that the majority of the public are in favour. It would be interesting to see some more recent polling on this.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 21:01:55 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. I can see there is going to be plenty of rewriting of history going on. In 2017 yes labour said as little as possible about brexit, which still seems to be its policy. But May absolutely made this an election issue saying Brexit means brexit. Everyone understood she meant as hard and complete a brexit as it was possible to imagine. I'm not sayin that was her real goal, just that it was what she said. In the face of labour silence, labour then became the party of at least mitigating brexit. By 2019 it was plain labour wasn't mitigating anything, was not even prepared to use divisions within the conservative party to halt or soften brexit in parliament, so it lost credibility as the remain side, and therefore came out of the election worse not better. Con didnt do terribly well in 2010, but only did as well as they did by being strongly eurosceptic. In 2015 they only won by promising a referendum and getting onboard UKIP voters. In 2017 remainers united against them under labour, but the result mirrored the referendum position, small win for con. In 2019 labour had lost enough of the remain vote so con got a firm majority. Con deciding to adopt an anti EU position was the single most important decision to get them 13 years in power. It was an incredibly successful strategy to get them into office. Shame to do so they had to betray the nation, but that did not harm any of them personally, so why not? |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on Aug 15, 2023 21:11:17 GMT
Interesting polling on electoral systems, little change from February
|
|
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 21:12:24 GMT
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’. I liked a lot of the 2017 policies - which weren't that different from 2015 really - although not all (but that's always the case and will be next time). The 2019 manifesto was a bit of a mess, mainly through lack of focus and too many promises - people just didn't believe it. For what its worth I think Starmer did need to move to the right, especially on tax and spend, so as to be trusted on the economy given the mess the country is in, but I also think he has gone further to the right on a number of issues than he needs to, and I have to assume that is from a mix of timidity (fear of the Tory press in particular) but also where he is comfortable. So I would like to see more backbone in defending - for example - the green agenda. As to the next set of actual policy positions, I'm waiting for the manifesto and I will assess it then. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 21:15:18 GMT
Why is rising pay not a good thing ? If your employees learn how to make twice as many widgets in unit time, then if you pay them 50% more, they get more money but you still get widgets made more cheaply and so also make more profit. Widgets will likely fall a bit in price. If the materials you need to make widgets rise in price so they cost double, then your and other workers can no longer afford to buy them. The workers demand more money and you are forced to pay more, so lets say they now get double wages so they can still afford the same number of widgets. Only, that money has to come from somewhere, so you are then forced to double the price of your widgets once again. Now workers can no longer afford them once again, so they once again demand their wages to be doubled. And so widget prices double again. And so wages double again. And so....inflation goes out of control. The problem is that if materials cost more, then someone has to bear that cost and accept fewer output goods shared around. The nation is fundamentally poorer. This can only be resolved by people accepting a cut in their standard of living. The cut has in reality already happened, but the people have not accepted it, and until they do inflation will keep rising. Inflation is part of the mechanism whereby we share out the new poverty. Another part of the problem is that while a government can appeal to people and say this is a one off price surge we have to accept, that becomes somewhat incredible if your pay has already fallen 1/3 over the last 15 years or so. Doctors arent alone in this, many other sectors have had real pay cuts since the 2008 crash and change of government. These people are in no mood to accept more cuts. So then its a war between the half of the population which has been losing ground for 15 years, and the half which through all that time had real growth in its income. Who will ultimately pay? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 21:16:04 GMT
And well done Rangers. 🏀 ⚽️
( I believe quite a few of their team are regular lurkers here.)
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 21:18:28 GMT
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. But few people did want them doing the job. It wasnt a free election, you could not cross out the candidate name and write in who you really wanted to be PM or MP. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 21:20:08 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. because those elections were all about brexit. Johnson won in 19 by being clear he would immediately implement brexit (immediately was it two years later, but hey...)May fought on brexit means brexit, and in 2017 labour was still the credible remain party. Sure, if a party had campaigned to vivisect cats in public then it could have influenced the results, but otherwise it was same old same old. It was about brexit, and its still about brexit even now. Con will campaign they are the only party to guaranteed hard brexit continues and thats why starmer is afraid to offer rejoin now. But its a dwindling band of believers, and thats why con will lose this time round. Not because they are incompetent, but because they do not have this draw of a magic brexit to solve all our problems. You're good at dreaming up things that will happen. It remains to be seen but I very much doubt that the Tories will mention Brexit at all unless forced to, because it's so low on normal voters' priorities. Assuming they can claim to have achieved any of Sunak's 5 pledges or objectives or whatever they were, they are likely to go hard on those. We'll see what the future holds, as unlike you I have no crystal ball. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 21:23:54 GMT
@danny Unfortunately single market membership isn't easy, but it is achievable well within a parliament, given good will and placing the national interests first. While I am confident that European union membership will be achieved it requires vanilla extract Brexit Starmer to understand the political benefits of catching up with public sentiment, any moves on the Labour leadership part towards becoming a pro rejoin party are likely to not be seen until the end of the next parliament (2029) and realistically rejoin couldn't be achieved without an overwhelming mandate at that election ( which would mitigate the need for another referendum) much before 2032/5. I would dearly love it to be more rapid but short of the Labour party being dependent on my parties support post election I can't see how it could happen any earlier. Finally a bit of realism! I've been saying that for months. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Aug 15, 2023 21:24:48 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. i'm not convinced Russia is about to rebel against Putin and end the war. He has seen that coming and made this a fight between the west and all Russia. The real question is more likely whether Russia becomes unable to pay for foreign imports to keep the war going. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 21:34:55 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. Only anecdotal, but whenever I heard him discussed the subject of his perceived sympathy for any anti-British or anti-Western group came up. e.g. IRA and so on. Manifestos don't matter much to voters if a potential PM is seen as being antithetical to security of citizens. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 21:43:20 GMT
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. No wonder Labour (nearly) always lose. Principles instead of practicality. Never mind you'll always have the moral high ground 🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 21:51:38 GMT
*(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.) I wonder how Labour would have reacted had (say) TUSC got 3.8 million votes in the 2015 GE? |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:01:33 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. Ooh, I do hope they go for Diane Abbot or Lady Nugee! 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:03:38 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! I think you'll find that that would only be popular if 90%+ were denied asylum. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:06:17 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 Yes, I remember he claimed to have 'saved the world' before hastily correcting himself when the opposition p--d themselves laughing. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 22:29:32 GMT
mercianI really don't care if racists won't be happy if those with a valid asylum claim are granted leave to remain that's as it should be, they're refugees lets hope we never find ourselves where our fate depends simply on the whims of xenophobes. Talking about xenophobia here's various members of the Sunakered regime spouting utter bollocks on asylum. youtu.be/k9HiTmATBI8
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Aug 15, 2023 22:40:14 GMT
Rafwan I have covered my issues with the Labour party under Corbyn before. Very briefly Totally inadequate response to Brexit Opposed to PR and cross party cooperation on issues where there is agreement Very ambivalent position on NATO and Russian aggression. I didn't have fundamental objections to much of the economic and social policy but I fundamentally believed that Corbyn because of his unwillingness to compromise and the fact that a large percentage of the electorate simply didn't consider him suitable that Labour under his leadership were never going to be placed in a position by the electorate to deliver anything. Some but by no means all of these issues have been addressed by a more plausible leader. If you are asking whether I think Corbyn should ever have been elected in the first place of course I don't that's why I voted for other candidates twice. Personally I think his serial disloyalty to Labour in government should have had him de-selected as a candidate in 2001.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:44:36 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 I make that 81%-19% in favour of RoC. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:49:37 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?
You lot keep going on about this but can anyone actually show any figures to prove that people are worse of because of Brexit? I know it's widely accepted amongst Remoaners and yes we are in tough times for a lot of people, but can any specific Brexit financial effects be disentangled from Covid and Putin's war? |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:52:26 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." So that was a 'probably not' then? |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 15, 2023 22:55:27 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 ? Because if the MPC considers that inflation going forward will be driven by pay rises, they will raise interest rates even more, producing a recession and even higher unemployment. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 15, 2023 22:59:07 GMT
Got to go else I'll turn into a pumpkin. It's goodnight from 23:58 with Mercian.
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Aug 15, 2023 23:01:17 GMT
You lot keep going on about this but can anyone actually show any figures to prove that people are worse of because of Brexit? I know it's widely accepted amongst Remoaners and yes we are in tough times for a lot of people, but can any specific Brexit financial effects be disentangled from Covid and Putin's war? This seems to be about the fairest assessment available (or at least that I have seen) cepr.org/voxeu/columns/impact-brexit-uk-economy-reviewing-evidence |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Aug 16, 2023 0:07:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by eor on Aug 16, 2023 0:40:04 GMT
… 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. The awkward point in this case being that in 2015 parties pledging to hold such a referendum got the majority of votes cast in the election, and won the majority of seats. So holding it was one of the very jobs they were elected to do  More generally, I think significant constitutional change should indeed be subject to referendum, if just because the impacts of such change may not be practically reversible by simply changing the government at the next GE, or if we're talking changes to the electoral system itself then they may significantly reduce the chances of the incumbent government being removable at that election! At the same time, 50%+1 is crazy for that kind of vote, there should need to be overwhelming support for constitutional change, precisely to avoid the kind of situation we have now with Brexit, where something drastic that support has ebbed to and fro on over many years gets fixed in place based on a narrow snapshot moment. |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Aug 16, 2023 0:53:27 GMT
Interesting polling on electoral systems, little change from February - I'd love to see a similar poll done in the aftermath of Labour being elected with a landslide majority. That's not meant in a snide way - I'd be genuinely curious to see whether Labour voters' views about the system would change with the onset of a likely prolonged period of unchallenged power. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 16, 2023 0:55:42 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. and mentioning that Starmer-LAB policies are pretty much the exact same as CON policies seems to upset some people as well  If this is the most Far-Right govt ever (or at least since whoever) and LAB have pretty much the exact same policies as CON then what does that say about LAB? Certainly not Corbyn or any of the 10 pledges that Starmer pinky promised to become leader of LAB and start his 'purge' of anyone from the LW of LAB who pops their head up and criticises his regime. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 16, 2023 0:57:10 GMT
Interesting polling on electoral systems, little change from February Ah but Starmer is apparently long opposed to PR (well at least since he became leader of LAB). Yet another example of Starmer-LAB adopting Tory policies. Perhaps it would be easier for anyone intending to vote LAB to state where they see significant policy difference to CON. Vote LAB = Get Tory |
|
