|
|
Post by mandolinist on May 9, 2024 10:57:26 GMT
So do people think this latest move will move the dial on Labour attracting Tory voters, or not? And will any more Tory politicians follow her lead and join Labour? (Like maybe Boris. Or Truss. Maybe Sunak, he seems quite opportunist, ask Boris about that) I appreciate your post is a bit tongue in cheek, and the Elphicke defection seems to have genuinely taken all sides by surprise, but Sky, particularly, have been broadly hinting lately that there are ongoing discussions between LAB and various CON MPs regarding possible further defections. Only this morning, they used the term 'multiple' in this context, although meaning more than one, rather than a coachload, I think! If there is anything in this, I think we can expect any such defections to be timed for maximum damage/embarrassment for CON, like the Elphicke announcement, which seems almost like an unexpected bonus. It feels almost possible that we could have a change of Government without an election if enough of them cross the floor. After all, we have had two or three new PM's without troubling the electorate. Brenda from Bristol must be regretting that famous line, "what another one?"
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,658
|
Post by steve on May 9, 2024 10:59:59 GMT
At least Sunakered can rely on the unwavering support from his one remaining metromayor Ben Houchen
Or not.
"Ben Houchen says Tory party in state of chaos and 'ultimately' Sunak has to take blame
Ben Houchen, who was the Conservative to win a metro mayor electoral contest last week (he was re-elected as Tees Valley mayor), has said that the route to Tory electoral recovery is “getting narrower by the day”.
In an interview with BBC Radio Tees, he said:
Things don’t look great for the Conservative Party at the moment … There is still a way through but that way through is getting narrower by the day.
Asked if Rishi Sunak was to blame for the party’s problems, Houchen replied:
Ultimately it always rests on the shoulders of the leader, all responsibility goes back to the top, it’s the same in my job as well. Ultimately, you’re the one responsible for it.
But there are lots of people who are involved in the problems with the Conservative party. It’s a bit of chaos at the minute, right, isn’t it?"
That's got to hurt!😂😂😂😂
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,388
|
Post by Danny on May 9, 2024 11:00:52 GMT
Rest is Politics poll, I suspect Labour's lead is somewhere between 15 and 30 😀 NEW The Rest is Politics / J.L. Partners voting intention poll - May 2024 *Labour leads by 15 points* Labour: 41% (-1) Conservatives: 26% (-2) Reform UK: 13% (-) Lib Dems: 11% (+1) Green: 5% (-) Other: 4% (-2) Are there methodological reasons for the divergence of pollsters? The difference in the size of the Labour lead, and the respective party VIs, is so consistent that they can't be explained away by periodic sampling errors, fieldwork timings and rogue outcomes. For one pollster to consistently have Labour ahead by 15 points and another by 25-30 points does bring opinion polling into semi-disrepute. I've never quite understood why they use different methodologies, to be honest. Is this just stubborn eccentricity or the sensible adherence to methods that, over time, have proved to be more accurate? What you can say however is that whatever house method they are using, there is little sign of swingback to the governing party. We are well past the point this was expected according to past examples, whereas instead their poll ratings seem to become slowly worse. The ongoing departures of con MPs seems to confirm that they too think the game is already over, so its only a question of what sort of splash they want to make on the way out. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,658
|
Post by steve on May 9, 2024 11:02:02 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,388
|
Post by Danny on May 9, 2024 11:12:12 GMT
"Ben Houchen says Tory party in state of chaos and 'ultimately' Sunak has to take blame It is ultimately part of the job description of leader to take the blame for failure. However whats gone wrong has little to do with Sunak personally. From 2010 there is the failure to restore the sort of economic performance seen under labour pre the 2008 US bank created recession. There are all the broken brexit promises. Theres covid mismanagement. And then there is the problem it is tory policy to cut back state services, inevitably leading to their deterioration. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on May 9, 2024 11:31:24 GMT
Wowser Labour lead at *30 points* in this week's YouGov poll for The Times That's the biggest Labour lead since Truss CON 18 (=) LAB 48 (+4) LIB DEM 9 (-1) REF UK 13 (-2) GRN 7 (-1) Fieldwork 7 - 8 May Tables are now available for those interested in further analysis and/or gloating... ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_240508_HungP_W.pdfAll the usual regional differences apply. The overall swing is 21%. This is only 11% in London, and 27% in the South of England sample, which shows Labour 22% ahead, rather than the more typical 12%. The figures continue to show the Conservatives faring proportionately worse in the South. Their GB vote retention is 40% (18/44.7%) but in the South it is just 36% (20/55%). A few other details: those who say they are 'certain to vote' are up to 56%, compared to around 52% on average in recent months. 82% of 2016 Remainers say they are either 'certain' on '9 out of 10' to vote, but for 2016 Leavers the figure is only 65%. By my estimate, those who voted Leave in 2016 are likely to make up only around 37-38% of voters at the next GE; about 18-20% will be those who didn't or couldn't vote and probably around 44% 2016 Remainers. And there are signs than Labour really are getting ahead in Scotland. The six-poll average now shows them 6-7% ahead of the SNP on average. However, as always with Scotland it should be remembered that small movements shift a significant proportion of seats either way. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 9, 2024 11:48:45 GMT
I do hope you don't join the oldnat and shevii gang.. I will almost certainly be voting LD in my constituency at the next election, but I'll be doing so because I want a Labour govt as I've always done when in a constituency where LDs are the main challengers to the tories. The Tories are gone matey so I fail to see the mild antagonism you would have for people voting Green or looking elsewhere than Labour. Given this is a polling site, the Tories aren't going to be forming a government on 25%. They aren't going to be forming a government if they somehow manage to get up to 30% and I'd say, with their lack of allies and tactical voting, it is pretty unlikely they would be forming a government on 35%, although that would be too close for comfort. Most importantly their own voters have deserted them. The perfect result for some of the other things you want Labour to do is a Green vote of 10% that puts pressure on Labour take note rather than take more notice of their increasingly corporate sponsors and the right wing press. It's the same way Tories took note of UKIP (and are taking note of Reform now as well for creating policies that Sunak probably has little interest in) and it's also the reason they are starting to take note of the Muslim vote, although as yet that's not filtered through to policy because they know this just affects a handful of seats at most. That Green vote of 10% is not going to happen although it may do next time, and I'm coming to the conclusion that they may not even reach my predicted vote of 5% once all the squeeze and two horse races are taken into account. But for anyone who actually wants to keep Labour real they should welcome that sort of vote percentage for the Greens rather than creaming their jeans about huge Labour majorities. In your determination to get rid of the Tories you are endorsing what will be the most right wing Labour government in history- economically and socially. In giving them an absolute free run it's also probably going to sow the seeds of apathy down the line from voters Labour was set up to represent and an add on to what happened when New Labour were partially responsible for creating a deprived will not vote (or vote far right) demographic. It's Tory voters who are getting rid of the Tories regardless of who LOC voters decide to vote for. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,658
|
Post by steve on May 9, 2024 12:04:40 GMT
"The perfect result for some of the other things you want Labour to do is a Green vote of 10% that puts pressure on Labour"
Really unfortunately under fptp a 10% vote for the greens might just win them 2 seats.
A 10-12% vote for the lib dems with a collapsed Tory vote could win 50+.
If the result is closer than anticipated then it's the liberal democrats who might have a bit of influence as it happens in parliament the one existing green mp sits with the lib dems in the house and mostly vote the same way so even without parliamentary members they sort of get representation from my party.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,388
|
Post by Danny on May 9, 2024 12:16:57 GMT
They also say: “ However, a recent – although perhaps not scientific – piece of research conducted by the restaurant chain Prezzo found that Gen Z (those currently aged between 12 and 27) suffer from “menu anxiety” and are too socially nervous to strike up a conversation with a waiter in the first place.” (though not sure if that’s down to Corby too… )To be credible this would need a percentage, and then find the corresponding percentage before the invention of mobile phones. It might have been higher back then. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,388
|
Post by Danny on May 9, 2024 12:24:38 GMT
Another consideration is something I read recently, that modern farming methods mean food is becoming less nutritious A while ago i heard something like this on the R4 food program. Unfortunately the other side of the argument came back claiming that past testing had not been as accurate as modern, so you couldn't necessarily compare. They were talking about trace minerals reducing. |
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on May 9, 2024 12:30:23 GMT
I do hope you don't join the oldnat and shevii gang.. I will almost certainly be voting LD in my constituency at the next election, but I'll be doing so because I want a Labour govt as I've always done when in a constituency where LDs are the main challengers to the tories. The Tories are gone matey so I fail to see the mild antagonism you would have for people voting Green or looking elsewhere than Labour. Given this is a polling site, the Tories aren't going to be forming a government on 25%. They aren't going to be forming a government if they somehow manage to get up to 30% and I'd say, with their lack of allies and tactical voting, it is pretty unlikely they would be forming a government on 35%, although that would be too close for comfort. Most importantly their own voters have deserted them. The perfect result for some of the other things you want Labour to do is a Green vote of 10% that puts pressure on Labour take note rather than take more notice of their increasingly corporate sponsors and the right wing press. It's the same way Tories took note of UKIP (and are taking note of Reform now as well for creating policies that Sunak probably has little interest in) and it's also the reason they are starting to take note of the Muslim vote, although as yet that's not filtered through to policy because they know this just affects a handful of seats at most. That Green vote of 10% is not going to happen although it may do next time, and I'm coming to the conclusion that they may not even reach my predicted vote of 5% once all the squeeze and two horse races are taken into account. But for anyone who actually wants to keep Labour real they should welcome that sort of vote percentage for the Greens rather than creaming their jeans about huge Labour majorities. In your determination to get rid of the Tories you are endorsing what will be the most right wing Labour government in history- economically and socially. In giving them an absolute free run it's also probably going to sow the seeds of apathy down the line from voters Labour was set up to represent and an add on to what happened when New Labour were partially responsible for creating a deprived will not vote (or vote far right) demographic. It's Tory voters who are getting rid of the Tories regardless of who LOC voters decide to vote for. I have become inreasingly convinced by this argument. The watering down of Labours proposals for a Green New Deal may just be reversed if enough voters move to the Green party, with the news this week about sea temperatures continuing to rise and the growing impacts on food production of climate change we have no choice but to act, we have to do all we can to slow the march to climate chaos. |
|
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: 6,759
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2024 12:40:26 GMT
Another consideration is something I read recently, that modern farming methods mean food is becoming less nutritious A while ago i heard something like this on the R4 food program. Unfortunately the other side of the argument came back claiming that past testing had not been as accurate as modern, so you couldn't necessarily compare. They were talking about trace minerals reducing. Ah yes, that’s a good point Danny, and something else to keep an eye on for more info.! (At first blush, it occurs that if we are going to increasingly use regenerative farming methods - which in the article they talk about as being to some extent a reversion to traditional farming methods, then we can use modern testing methods to compare the nutrient profile of food produced using regenerative methods, compared with the profile of food from the modern intensive methods that the regenerative methods are supposed to replace?) |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,130
|
Post by domjg on May 9, 2024 12:42:08 GMT
I do hope you don't join the oldnat and shevii gang.. I will almost certainly be voting LD in my constituency at the next election, but I'll be doing so because I want a Labour govt as I've always done when in a constituency where LDs are the main challengers to the tories. The Tories are gone matey so I fail to see the mild antagonism you would have for people voting Green or looking elsewhere than Labour. Given this is a polling site, the Tories aren't going to be forming a government on 25%. They aren't going to be forming a government if they somehow manage to get up to 30% and I'd say, with their lack of allies and tactical voting, it is pretty unlikely they would be forming a government on 35%, although that would be too close for comfort. Most importantly their own voters have deserted them. The perfect result for some of the other things you want Labour to do is a Green vote of 10% that puts pressure on Labour take note rather than take more notice of their increasingly corporate sponsors and the right wing press. It's the same way Tories took note of UKIP (and are taking note of Reform now as well for creating policies that Sunak probably has little interest in) and it's also the reason they are starting to take note of the Muslim vote, although as yet that's not filtered through to policy because they know this just affects a handful of seats at most. That Green vote of 10% is not going to happen although it may do next time, and I'm coming to the conclusion that they may not even reach my predicted vote of 5% once all the squeeze and two horse races are taken into account. But for anyone who actually wants to keep Labour real they should welcome that sort of vote percentage for the Greens rather than creaming their jeans about huge Labour majorities. In your determination to get rid of the Tories you are endorsing what will be the most right wing Labour government in history- economically and socially. In giving them an absolute free run it's also probably going to sow the seeds of apathy down the line from voters Labour was set up to represent and an add on to what happened when New Labour were partially responsible for creating a deprived will not vote (or vote far right) demographic. It's Tory voters who are getting rid of the Tories regardless of who LOC voters decide to vote for. Maybe you're right. I really don't think you are but we won't have an idea until about a year after the election. There is no roc economic consensus to cling to in the way there was in 97. Everything's up for grabs and most of the public now seem open at least to wide scale nationalisation. I don't remember Mr Tony promising to renationalise the railways. What's going on now is electioneering and electioneering only as currently it's all that actually matters, practically. Stroking the brows of already entrenched lefties is rightly not on Starmer's agenda as it would gain vanishingly little. What's the alternative anyway other than continued tory banana republicanism? Do you not want the return of Surestart, better funding for our truly desperate schools and teachers and the NHS as a very minimum? Or are you only satisfied when you get a govt that matches the template in your own mind? As in 97 I'll believe the tories are definitely gone once they're gone and won't take anything for granted in making sure they're gone big style. Surely, in any case, the smaller the majority Labour get the more likely they are to try to woo ex tories and cling to a more rightish agenda and rhetoric. A big majority allows them to be bold. The only reason they are doing the former at the moment is not conviction but fear. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 9, 2024 12:48:21 GMT
I think the last 24 hours has finally convinced me that, were a GE held tomorrow, I'd vote Green.
That comes with two caveats. They weigh the Labour vote here and te tories are nowhere so I don't have to worry about letting a tory in by the back door. I've essentially got a free hit.
Secondly, the debates and manifestos are yet to come, so my current voting intention is not set in stone, my vote is *potentially* up for grabs.
But, if it were right now, it would be Green.
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 9, 2024 12:49:34 GMT
"The perfect result for some of the other things you want Labour to do is a Green vote of 10% that puts pressure on Labour" Really unfortunately under fptp a 10% vote for the greens might just win them 2 seats. A 10-12% vote for the lib dems with a collapsed Tory vote could win 50+. If the result is closer than anticipated then it's the liberal democrats who might have a bit of influence as it happens in parliament the one existing green mp sits with the lib dems in the house and mostly vote the same way so even without parliamentary members they sort of get representation from my party. I don't expect either to happen. Zero seats for the Greens is more likely than 2. LDs likely to end up with circa 25 seats. |
|
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: 6,759
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2024 12:50:08 GMT
Well no, there is a HOPE that it’s just electioneering, but when you are dealing with politicians who are so cynical they can backtrack on all sorts of stuff, break pledges left right and centre, you don’t really know what the f*cketh you are voting for. (Some people are just hoping it won’t be too left-wing and upset the middle-class apple cart).
If you really want to be rid of corruption then it’s not necessarily a great plan to start by endorsing the politically corrupt.
Feel free to say what you think they will actually do to improve things, as opposed to what they just say they will do to get elected, and what your evidence for it is but I suspect it might be a rather short post.
As others are pointing out, the stakes are very high here, whether it’s the impact of climate change, energy deficits, AI etc., things with potentially not just very large, but also very rapid effects, and the increasing devastation and illness caused by insane inflation of essential costs, like housing, utilities, food, et cetera, owing to decades of right-wing economic extremist dogma which also leads to nonsense like sewage in rivers etc., and the growing problems of things like pollution and infections that can sweep around the world, and globalism leading to highly integrated economies that can rapidly subject us to energy and food shocks in short-order, and other resources shocks, including microprocessors, and so no, it isn’t necessarily enough just to get rid of the fecking Tories.
(I have a suspicion that maybe Labour will be a bit more left-wing than it might currently seem, but I really don’t have anything that definitive to go on. Part of the problem is that in order to be able to gaslight people, parties are increasingly resorting to parachuting in leaders with very little hinterland, not been MPs long, so you have even less idea of what you are getting than before).
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 9, 2024 12:51:31 GMT
I think the last 24 hours has finally convinced me that, were a GE held tomorrow, I'd vote Green. That comes with two caveats. They weigh the Labour vote here and te tories are nowhere so I don't have to worry about letting a tory in by the back door. I've essentially got a free hit. Secondly, the debates and manifestos are yet to come, so my current voting intention is not set in stone, my vote is *potentially* up for grabs. But, if it were right now, it would be Green. Not sure we will have Debates this year. Personally I hope not. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,583
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 9, 2024 13:10:57 GMT
I think the last 24 hours has finally convinced me that, were a GE held tomorrow, I'd vote Green. That comes with two caveats. They weigh the Labour vote here and te tories are nowhere so I don't have to worry about letting a tory in by the back door. I've essentially got a free hit. Secondly, the debates and manifestos are yet to come, so my current voting intention is not set in stone, my vote is *potentially* up for grabs. But, if it were right now, it would be Green. Not sure we will have Debates this year. Personally I hope not. Labour will want them (preferably Starmer v Sunak, confining the smaller parties to a separate event) and the smaller parties will want them for the publicity value. My crystal ball tells me Sunak will say no, because he knows he will show up badly. Starmer will then refuse to participate without Sunak (nothing to gain from being attacked by the leaders of the smaller parties). So they won't happen in any meaningful form. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 9, 2024 13:20:15 GMT
Not sure we will have Debates this year. Personally I hope not. Labour will want them (preferably Starmer v Sunak, confining the smaller parties to a separate event) and the smaller parties will want them for the publicity value. My crystal ball tells me Sunak will say no, because he knows he will show up badly. Starmer will then refuse to participate without Sunak (nothing to gain from being attacked by the leaders of the smaller parties). So they won't happen in any meaningful form. That is very plausible and would take us back to the pre- 2010 satus quo ante. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on May 9, 2024 14:03:46 GMT
Why would anyone for a second get into handwringing over the Elphicke defection as if it was indicative of something wider? This is politics for heavens sake, it's just temporary, tory damaging optics with their own natural supporters. You do realise politics and getting elected is in large part a game in which you take every opportunity to score? It can't be all principle and virtue, that's very nice but I'm afraid gets you precisely nowhere with the British press and electorate alas. jen SNP less 'corrupt' than Labour? That's an 'interesting' interpretation of recent events.. Nicely put. Some people take themselves and their principles much too seriously. I say just enjoy it while we can. If it affects morale within the tories, that's enough for me. The backbiting and disappointment will commence in earnest about a year in to a Labour Govmt if elected. As for the Nats, their very being depends on sowing division in the Union and boring us all continuously with how different they are from the rest of us......so tiresome! |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,583
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 9, 2024 14:22:53 GMT
It can't be all principle and virtue, that's very nice but I'm afraid gets you precisely nowhere with the British press and electorate alas. jen SNP less 'corrupt' than Labour? That's an 'interesting' interpretation of recent events.. Nicely put. Some people take themselves and their principles much too seriously. I say just enjoy it while we can. If it affects morale within the tories, that's enough for me. The backbiting and disappointment will commence in earnest about a year in to a Labour Govmt if elected. As for the Nats, their very being depends on sowing division in the Union and boring us all continuously with how different they are from the rest of us......so tiresome! Ironically, with elections looming, the SNP (being a party of government rather than protest) are tacking to the centre and losing activists to their left, just as Labour are. "Speaking to BBC Radio Scotland on Thursday morning, Harvie’s fellow co-leader, Lorna Slater ( Scottish Greens), said her party was experiencing a “surge” in membership, “particularly people in the LGBTQ+ community [who] are now looking at the SNP and thinking: ‘Oh my goodness, is this really the home for me?’.”" www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/09/john-swinney-scraps-scottish-minister-for-independence-focus-economyThe unfortunate fact is there just aren't enough lefties to win an election. To do anything you have to win an election and Labour has only been able to do that from the centre ground since at least 1979. EDIT - the Scottish Greens had this to say of the SNP today: "The Scottish Greens have been clear that we acknowledge the SNP’s right to form a minority government. But we’ve been equally clear that the first minister must quickly give a signal of the direction his government will take. Yesterday that signal came pretty clearly: progressive ministers sacked and the second most powerful job in government given to someone who has opposed LGBT people’s legal equality, who’s expressed judgmental attitudes against abortion, and who’s even expressed the view that people who have families without being married are doing something wrong. Is this the Scottish government’s vision for the future of Scotland, taking us back to the repressive values of the 1950s?" |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on May 9, 2024 14:40:27 GMT
pjw1961“party of government rather than protest”. That is a false and deeply damaging dichotomy. “Labour has only been able to do that from the centre ground” And that is applying a deeply damaging dead hand of history. Sorry, pj; 95% of your stuff is brilliant and always worth reading, but in this you have a terrible debilitating blind spot.
|
|
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: 6,759
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2024 15:02:37 GMT
Some people are still talking about winning an election when others are talking about how do you influence policy when you know who is likely to win an election. (And elections are quite often not won on the centre ground, if the more central vote is split, or there are extremists in a party sabotaging the centrists prospects’, or if a centrist party in power gets trashed by some global economic crisis, or a more extreme party benefits from a global boom due to oil prices when people aren’t aware why things are going better etc.)
|
|
|
|
Post by athena on May 9, 2024 15:20:35 GMT
What's going on now is electioneering and electioneering only as currently it's all that actually matters, practically. [...] A big majority allows them [Lab] to be bold. The only reason they are doing the former [clinging to a more rightish agenda and rhetoric] at the moment is not conviction but fear. The difficulty with this argument is that voters have to have faith that Lab will be bold and that its boldness will take a form they like. Lab seems determined to be vague and to caveat anything that looks like a commitment, so it isn't going to have a mandate for anything much and we're all trying to interpret the mood music. Whilst Elphicke is saying 'Lab has changed,' (echoing a Starmer refrain, incidentally), other Labourites believe or hope that Lab's leftie DNA (or its 'governing culture') still counts for plenty and that once in office, Lab will do more and go further on the issues they care about. Mark seems inclined to think that if Starmer's inviting Ms Elphicke to dance, it's probably not going to be his kind of music. If an incoming Lab govt does anything bold it's quite likely that a significant segment of Starmer's FPTP election-winning coalition will feel betrayed. When parties go against the letter or spirit of the manifesto on which they were elected voters tend - justifiably - to punish them for it. Policy success doesn't necessarily provide immunity to the electoral punishment either - voters may not attribute the success to the policy they hated. |
|
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: 6,759
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2024 15:49:03 GMT
The reason Starmer is able to keep moving right is because the left are so willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
The right, within Labour and without, have no such compunction, with Tories breaking away to Reform and before that to UKIP. And within Labour, the right would not back the left in 1983 or 2017.
The right expect a loyalty from the left that they do not expect from the right. And many on the right in the Tory party feel they are not getting what they voted for. It is thus not irrational for left or right to back something different to keep pressure on the party in power to stay honest.
Voting a party in, in the hope they will do the right thing, without any pressure on them to stay honest, is very dangerous, because they may not only fail to do what you thought they would do, but they may race to stack the deck against it ever happening in future. That is what happened under Blair, to some extent with the Lib Dems, and is happening now with the Tories, as Sunak races, to make the globalist approach more of a fait accomplis.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,583
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 9, 2024 15:50:23 GMT
pjw1961 “party of government rather than protest”. That is a false and deeply damaging dichotomy. “Labour has only been able to do that from the centre ground” And that is applying a deeply damaging dead hand of history. Sorry, pj; 95% of your stuff is brilliant and always worth reading, but in this you have a terrible debilitating blind spot. How is it false?. I said since 1979 - The Conservatives won four elections in a row 1979-1992 and were in power for 18 years. The centrist Blair won three elections in a row 1997-2005 and Labour were in power for 13 years. Labour shifted to the left after 2010 and lost another four elections in a row and the Tories (with a bit of help from the Lib Dems and DUP) have been in power for 14 years. The last time Labour won on anything approaching a left wing manifesto was by a tiny majority 50 years ago. To have voted then you would need to be at least 68 now. The point about government v protest is that Reform or Galloway's worker's party or the Greens can advance any policies they fancy knowing they will never have to enact them. Parties that expect to actually govern - like the SNP in Scotland, or the Conservatives and Labour in Westminster have to advance policies that will appeal to enough people to build a winning voting coalition. It is basic politics really. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 9, 2024 15:50:28 GMT
Maybe you're right. I really don't think you are but we won't have an idea until about a year after the election. There is no roc economic consensus to cling to in the way there was in 97. Everything's up for grabs and most of the public now seem open at least to wide scale nationalisation. I don't remember Mr Tony promising to renationalise the railways. What's going on now is electioneering and electioneering only as currently it's all that actually matters, practically. Stroking the brows of already entrenched lefties is rightly not on Starmer's agenda as it would gain vanishingly little. What's the alternative anyway other than continued tory banana republicanism? Do you not want the return of Surestart, better funding for our truly desperate schools and teachers and the NHS as a very minimum? Or are you only satisfied when you get a govt that matches the template in your own mind? As in 97 I'll believe the tories are definitely gone once they're gone and won't take anything for granted in making sure they're gone big style. Surely, in any case, the smaller the majority Labour get the more likely they are to try to woo ex tories and cling to a more rightish agenda and rhetoric. A big majority allows them to be bold. The only reason they are doing the former at the moment is not conviction but fear. I think you believe I'm more purist than I actually am! If I felt Labour was going to fund the NHS and education "significantly" better than the Tories like Blair did, whatever his other failings, then I would agree with you, but I have my doubts and especially with Streeting at NHS I think he could even make the situation even worse- you could even see NHS staff who have been holding on to see what the alternative is like to just pack up and go to other jobs or to another country. Equally you could be right that Labour will be bolder in power but it seems very fixed in to me with the fiscal rules and there's literally no evidence for this thinking. I guess we find out in about 6 months and/or the first Labour budget... I also disagree that Labour will disregard a 10% Green vote and simply try to eat further into the Tory vote. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 9, 2024 15:52:54 GMT
Danny - "....that wasnt really a big change after vaccinating everyone and ending lockdowns. And yet the whole world decided to go back to normal." Quite hard to think of a more unintelligent statement on this, tbh. "And yet the whole world decided to go back to normal." Just have a wee think about the implications of what you just said.
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 9, 2024 15:58:19 GMT
Labour will want them (preferably Starmer v Sunak, confining the smaller parties to a separate event) and the smaller parties will want them for the publicity value. My crystal ball tells me Sunak will say no, because he knows he will show up badly. Starmer will then refuse to participate without Sunak (nothing to gain from being attacked by the leaders of the smaller parties). So they won't happen in any meaningful form. I'd be surprised if someone with nothing to lose didn't want the debates. I'd tend to agree with your opinion that Starmer would do as well or better than Sunak but I wouldn't bet my house on it. Since his Covid stardom, Sunak has looked incredibly weak and does not present anything like the image he did during Covid but I think Starmer is not good under pressure in interviews and he hasn't had many of those to contend with and with the confidence of a big poll lead he seems less nervous. Certainly best for none of them to debate with the smaller parties- Miliband came off dreadfully when he had the SNP and Greens picking on him from one side and the Tories from the other. I'd take any of the main Green faces to wipe the floor with Starmer in a debate. |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on May 9, 2024 17:13:18 GMT
I'm definitely with domjg on the Natalie Elphicke thing. I was initially dismayed yesterday but I was listening to James O'brien this morning and he said he had been convinced by a series of tweets by Andrew Levi (tweets as Andrew PR Levi but I'm not on X so can't read the whole thread). His view is that Starmer has a grand vision - one to rewire Britain in a way that will stop future Tory governments from just reversing everything. Much as Atlee did after the war. He changed the Overton window for 40 years until Thatcher got in. She then rewired Britain in her own image and this has lasted ever since. That's what Starmer needs to do. To achieve that he needs not only a massive majority and 3 terms but a country wide consensus covering everyone from all political perspectives. So his view is everyone is welcome in the Labour Party. Doesn't mean they get to set policy or stand fior election - but the two tribes created by Thatcher are disposed of finally and Labour become the party of the whole country, a one nation government much as Atlee's Party did, ensuring that future Conservative governments will largely continue to deliver Labour policies as they did after 1945. Margaret Thatcher did something similar ensuring that furure Labour governments continued to deliver her policies. I think this is where Starmer's admiration of Thatcher comes from. Not her views, policies or ideology but her ability to reshape Britain for a generation or more. That's what Starmer wants to do. He's probably the cleverest PM we'll have in a long time. Intensely strategic with a single minded determination to win power and a big majority in order to change Britain for the better and for a long time. If that means being pragmatic now and upsetting some core voters in order to attract people who would never previously have voted Tory that's fine by me. I'm 100% for him. I don't care what the individual policies are I want to get this Tory government out not just for 5 years but for a generation. Bring it on. |
|
