neilj
Member
Posts: 6,392
|
Post by neilj on Jun 13, 2024 14:08:27 GMT
We Think
Westminster Voting Intention:
LAB: 43% (-2)
CON: 20% (=)
RFM: 14% (-1)
LDM: 11% (+1)
GRN: 6% (+1)
SNP: 2% (-1)
Via
@wethinkpolling
, 12-13 Jun.
Changes w/ 6-7 Jun.
|
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Jun 13, 2024 14:28:39 GMT
Apologies for interrupting stuff about Lab Manifesto 1. I was accused of being intolerant because I said " Fuck feeling sorry for politicians" as a reaction to posters expressing sympathy for Sunak, using crossbat11 as an example. I could have used eor 's extensive account of how Sunak may hv suffered because he was one of the vast majority who didn't have SKY. Come on. All kids hv consumption needs beyond their resources! Think of the basic material deprivation suffered by kids pushed into poverty since 2010, or the closure of Sure Start centres, policies which Sunak has fashioned as much as anyone. They suffer. I asked for evidence of his humanitarianism to match his sympathisers': none has been forthcoming. 2. Moreover I didn't say a la crossbat11 " I thought your suggestion that Darbyshire (sic) attracted some of the the praise she did because of her recent cancer diagnosis and subsequent treatment, a very strange one indeed." It would have been strange if I had said it. I didn't. I said (not v elegantly) " As for V. Derbyshire: lots of MPs from all parties cosy up to her because the poor woman had breast cancer. That includes MPs who have voted for tax cuts over adequate NHS provision. Don't make me laugh." The point? Anecdotal evidence that some Tory MPs were nice to her does not cancel their utter indifference to all the cancer patients on the waiting list, some of whom die as a result of delays. Her rather sketchy article proved little. 3. As for the BBC. I don't give a flying fornication about Kuenssberg. She is probably crap. My point was that posters constantly criticise the way in which BBC journalists present politics & fail to seek contrary evidence, which is essential to a proper debate. Eg., N Robinson has given Sunak a hard ride now & in the recent past. Hardly mentioned. Many BBC radio journos are v incisive & critical of the Tories (& of Labour) & people, old ones, ( the ones that actually vote) get a lot news that way. They are pretty much ignored. @crossbat ".. but nobody is getting personal or hating anybody here. I'm surprised you're creating straw men by suggesting they are." The comments about Kuenssberg & others are not personal. Really? I don't need to create straw men; there are plenty of real ones. If I had ranted about Kuenssberg I would have got 5 likes. The renewed attack on her by say domjg demonstrates my point perfectly. " I'd be interested to see how you would defend Kuenssberg. (I don't). She doesn't even attempt to hide her 'one of them' Tory party clubbiness and inability to be impartial, she seems proud of her 'connections' instead of her independence. That and her comical levels of self-aggrandising self-importance make her ludicrously ill suited for her role in my opinion but then the ueber nepotistic (sic) BBC seems unable to appoint based on suitability. " That isn't personal? He ends with " The wider point is that BBC political reporting occurs in a place where the above is tolerated and probably encouraged. Tells me all I need to know about the reliability and integrity of the BBC news organisation these days." So one example & the whole BBC coverage is condemned. Some straw man. Yet another eg then that the notion that posters present a "nuanced" view of BBC's political coverage is untrue. If I can muster enough "self-importance" to demonstrate, by reviewing the posts, I shall. As governments weaken, the criticism mounts. |I recall it from '97, when Humphries couldn't believe the nonsense Tories said. Eg., N Ferrari is pretty rightish: now he openly scoffs at Tory politicians. I don't give a toss whether politicians are nice or not, & the modern fad to reveal their true nature, whether conveyed by Derbyshire or anyone else, is nonsense. The questions asked about Sunak's childhood are rubbish. Who cares. All that matters is what they do, not whether they preferred Coco pops to Cornflakes. "The evil that men do lives after them: the good (if any) is interred with their bones" I feel I'm disturbing a cosy set-up. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Jun 13, 2024 14:29:22 GMT
Neil, thanks - particularly pleased to see the below which was opposed from Sein Fein to TUV and all in between.
''Repeal and replace the Legacy Act''
|
|
|
|
Post by athena on Jun 13, 2024 14:32:29 GMT
I hope people like the look of Starmer, because by my count there a 22 pictures of him, plus 4 of him with Reeves, 2 of him with Rayner and 1 each of him with Miliband, Cooper, Streeting, Gething and Lammy. There is one picture only of a Labour politician sans the leader - Angela Rayner. So are those the members of the Shadow Cabinet who can be confident of making it into his first Cabinet or just the ones Lab thinks are most popular with voters? Either way the inclusion of Gething, but not Sarwar is a complete mystery. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 13, 2024 14:40:59 GMT
Apologies for interrupting stuff about Lab Manifesto 1. I was accused of being intolerant because I said " Fuck feeling sorry for politicians" as a reaction to posters expressing sympathy for Sunak, using crossbat11 as an example. I could have used eor 's extensive account of how Sunak may hv suffered because he was one of the vast majority who didn't have SKY. Come on. All kids hv consumption needs beyond their resources! Think of the basic material deprivation suffered by kids pushed into poverty since 2010, or the closure of Sure Start centres, policies which Sunak has fashioned as much as anyone. They suffer. I asked for evidence of his humanitarianism to match his sympathisers': none has been forthcoming. 2. Moreover I didn't say a la crossbat11 " I thought your suggestion that Darbyshire (sic) attracted some of the the praise she did because of her recent cancer diagnosis and subsequent treatment, a very strange one indeed." It would have been strange if I had said it. I didn't. I said (not v elegantly) " As for V. Derbyshire: lots of MPs from all parties cosy up to her because the poor woman had breast cancer. That includes MPs who have voted for tax cuts over adequate NHS provision. Don't make me laugh." The point? Anecdotal evidence that some Tory MPs were nice to her does not cancel their utter indifference to all the cancer patients on the waiting list, some of whom die as a result of delays. Her rather sketchy article proved little. 3. As for the BBC. I don't give a flying fornication about Kuenssberg. She is probably crap. My point was that posters constantly criticise the way in which BBC journalists present politics & fail to seek contrary evidence, which is essential to a proper debate. Eg., N Robinson has given Sunak a hard ride now & in the recent past. Hardly mentioned. Many BBC radio journos are v incisive & critical of the Tories (& of Labour) & people, old ones, ( the ones that actually vote) get a lot news that way. They are pretty much ignored. @crossbat ".. but nobody is getting personal or hating anybody here. I'm surprised you're creating straw men by suggesting they are." The comments about Kuenssberg & others are not personal. Really? I don't need to create straw men; there are plenty of real ones. If I had ranted about Kuenssberg I would have got 5 likes. The renewed attack on her by say domjg demonstrates my point perfectly. " I'd be interested to see how you would defend Kuenssberg. (I don't). She doesn't even attempt to hide her 'one of them' Tory party clubbiness and inability to be impartial, she seems proud of her 'connections' instead of her independence. That and her comical levels of self-aggrandising self-importance make her ludicrously ill suited for her role in my opinion but then the ueber nepotistic (sic) BBC seems unable to appoint based on suitability. " That isn't personal? He ends with " The wider point is that BBC political reporting occurs in a place where the above is tolerated and probably encouraged. Tells me all I need to know about the reliability and integrity of the BBC news organisation these days." So one example & the whole BBC coverage is condemned. Some straw man. Yet another eg then that the notion that posters present a "nuanced" view of BBC's political coverage is untrue. If I can muster enough "self-importance" to demonstrate, by reviewing the posts, I shall. As governments weaken, the criticism mounts. |I recall it from '97, when Humphries couldn't believe the nonsense Tories said. Eg., N Ferrari is pretty rightish: now he openly scoffs at Tory politicians. I don't give a toss whether politicians are nice or not, & the modern fad to reveal their true nature, whether conveyed by Derbyshire or anyone else, is nonsense. The questions asked about Sunak's childhood are rubbish. Who cares. All that matters is what they do, not whether they preferred Coco pops to Cornflakes. "The evil that men do lives after them: the good (if any) is interred with their bones" I feel I'm disturbing a cosy set-up. "So one example & the whole BBC coverage is condemned" - Yes, because Kuennsberg is such a key part of it and undoubtedly helps set the culture. I must admit as it's literally years since I've voluntarily watched more than a few minutes of BBC political coverage it's certainly possible that I'm missing many attempts at real balance and holding the gvt to account, ie your mention that N Robinson has given Sunak a grilling of late. Recent reports from others on here though such as attempts to explain away Sunak's early departure from the D-day commemorations and treating the £2000 tax rise lie as a clever wheeze give me cause to doubt it. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 13, 2024 14:42:25 GMT
I hope people like the look of Starmer, because by my count there a 22 pictures of him, plus 4 of him with Reeves, 2 of him with Rayner and 1 each of him with Miliband, Cooper, Streeting, Gething and Lammy. There is one picture only of a Labour politician sans the leader - Angela Rayner. So are those the members of the Shadow Cabinet who can be confident of making it into his first Cabinet or just the ones Lab thinks are most popular with voters? Either way the inclusion of Gething, but not Sarwar is a complete mystery. They are probably regarded as the 'big hitters' at the moment and I think will be in the cabinet. There was a picture of Starmer with some bloke I didn't recognise who may well have been a Labour Mayor or something, but it certainly wasn't Sarwar (or Sadiq Khan). |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 13, 2024 14:51:31 GMT
That manifesto does address the lazy trope that there is no difference between Labour and the Conservatives. Anyone can rightly say they don't like where Labour is positioned - that's a matter of free choice - but there are very plainly things in Labour's manifesto that would never appear in that of the current Conservative Party. To be honest the most positive element was that they didn't rule our CGT rises which I thought they had done so maybe read to much into one of Reeve's comments on tax rises ("none" probably). With the LD manifesto that included CGT "reforms" I would argue that LD are, on paper, economically to the left of Labour. I think I'd also say that a lot of this stuff like GB Energy is still without much substance- I think GB Energy has the most potential of any of the policies but without detail it wouldn't take too much to put a tick by a kept promise without achieving very much at all. Policy on rents was probably the other big potentially good thing, but again very little detail and it's hard to imagine that landlords won't find ways around "no fault evictions" which achieve much the same- rental contracts with limited periods for example? A lot of the other good things (on NHS for example) would be a good start but don't marry with the money needed from the current black hole in government finances being left by the Tories and/or Labour fiscal rules to have debt falling at the end of 5 years. A good write up is from the Resolution Foundation: www.resolutionfoundation.org/press-releases/labour-manifesto-2024/"Labour’s boldness on labour market reform contrasts sharply with a politically cautious approach to tax and spend. Their current stance sets the scene for a parliament of further tax rises, hard to deliver spending cuts, and the risk that a weaker productivity forecast from the OBR at the next fiscal event could force an incoming Labour Chancellor into fresh hard choices in order to meet their stated fiscal rule of getting debt falling by the fifth year of the forecast." "Labour’s modest pledges to increase spending largely lie in departments that are already protected, such as education and health and social care. This means that an incoming Labour government would still need to deliver around £18 billion of cuts to unprotected departments such as Transport, Justice and the Home Office. Neither party has said anything on how they intend to deliver these extremely challenging cuts." |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jun 13, 2024 15:01:36 GMT
What Elephant?  |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Jun 13, 2024 15:08:05 GMT
"Get debt falling by 5th year of parliament"
Means it could rise for 4 years than be projected to start falling which gives scope for borrowing to invest beyond the apparent level.
Also the 2 statements below could herald ending higher rate tax relief on pension contributions? Either way they are in there to provide a platform/cover imo.
'' Undertake a review of the pension landscape"
"Adopt reforms to workplace pensions to deliver better outcomes for UK savers and pensioners"
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 13, 2024 15:12:01 GMT
WeThink
@wethinkpolling
1/ Labour’s lead is cut by two but they still lead by 23 with just three weeks until the #GeneralElection. And independent candidates make our chart for the first time...
🔴 Lab 43% (-2)
🔵 Con 20% (NC)
⚪ Ref 14% (-1)
🟠 LD 11% (+1)
🟢 Green 6% (+1)
🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
⚫ Ind 2%
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 13, 2024 15:16:35 GMT
WeThink
@wethinkpolling
·
1h
4b/ And if Britain had to adopt the euro as a condition of re-joining the EU, how would people vote if there was a referendum tomorrow?
❎ Stay out: 43% (+2)
☑️ Rejoin: 37% (-2)
🤷 Don’t know: 11% (NC)
😐 Won’t vote: 9% (NC)
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jun 13, 2024 15:26:32 GMT
shevii Sweden "has" to adopt the Euro 29 years after joining the European union it hasnt.
|
|
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: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 13, 2024 15:27:24 GMT
Nothing in the manifesto on VAR then? Or spaceports? Or Alternative battery chemistries? (Maybe they’re afraid Tories will nick it) Anyway, in other news… “Welcome to the most unpopular G7 summit ever
As world leaders descend on Puglia, Italy, Rishi Sunak leads a who’s who of global disapproval ratings”
TelegraphAttachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 13, 2024 15:30:32 GMT
Fuck feeling sorry for politicians. Victoria Derbyshire wouldn't agree with you. I’ve spent a lifetime interviewing politicians – trust me, they’re not all the sameTherefore can I make an appeal for a little tolerance? It’s mildly irritating when I see all that all members of one profession – say social workers, or bus drivers or even journalists are generally dismissed as worthless, so shall we stop doing it with politicians?It would be nice if we could stop doing it with groups of voters too - e.g. Leave voters |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jun 13, 2024 15:34:52 GMT
I hope people like the look of Starmer, because by my count there a 22 pictures of him, plus 4 of him with Reeves, 2 of him with Rayner and 1 each of him with Miliband, Cooper, Streeting, Gething and Lammy. There is one picture only of a Labour politician sans the leader - Angela Rayner. The redoubtable and much missed Lady Valerie used to quite like the look of Starmer, I think. Likened him to Jane Austen's Darcy, if I remember rightly. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jun 13, 2024 15:40:46 GMT
WeThink @wethinkpolling · 1h 4b/ And if Britain had to adopt the euro as a condition of re-joining the EU, how would people vote if there was a referendum tomorrow? ❎ Stay out: 43% (+2) ☑️ Rejoin: 37% (-2) 🤷 Don’t know: 11% (NC) 😐 Won’t vote: 9% (NC) A bit too voodoo this for my liking. Shades of push polling. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jun 13, 2024 15:48:16 GMT
Full list of what's included in the Labour Manifesto x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1801227981655847178Worth reading it all, but a selection here - Remove hereditary peers' voting rights and set a mandatory retirement age of 80 in the House of Lords The devil is in the detail here as one consequence of this could be an increase in the Prime Minister's patronage. Removing the last of the hereditary peers takes us part of the the way in shrinking the Lords back to a reasonable size, but it is Prime Ministerial patronage that has inflated it. I would like to see a severe restriction on the number of Lords a Prime Minister can appoint (perhaps on the basis of two out, one in to continue to reduce the size of the Lords to a level that the Lords themselves have asked for) with more Lords appointed by the Lords Appointments Commission rather than the PM. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jun 13, 2024 15:50:34 GMT
crossbat11Indeed if a question such as if British people were able to work and travel freely in the European union with no restrictions how would you vote in a referendum. The difference being of course this would actually be a condition of membership.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 13, 2024 15:53:32 GMT
I hope people like the look of Starmer, because by my count there a 22 pictures of him, plus 4 of him with Reeves, 2 of him with Rayner and 1 each of him with Miliband, Cooper, Streeting, Gething and Lammy. There is one picture only of a Labour politician sans the leader - Angela Rayner. The redoubtable and much missed Lady Valerie used to quite like the look of Starmer, I think. Likened him to Jane Austen's Darcy, if I remember rightly. Is it permitted in that case to say that I quite like the look of Ms Rayner, or would that be sexist? |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Jun 13, 2024 15:55:22 GMT
WeThink @wethinkpolling 1/ Labour’s lead is cut by two but they still lead by 23 with just three weeks until the #GeneralElection. And independent candidates make our chart for the first time... 🔴 Lab 43% (-2) 🔵 Con 20% (NC) ⚪ Ref 14% (-1) 🟠 LD 11% (+1) 🟢 Green 6% (+1) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1) ⚫ Ind 2% I wonder if the Independents are or include Muslim Independent candidates which the recent poll of the VI of Muslim voters didn't seem to take account of. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jun 13, 2024 15:58:38 GMT
We Think Westminster Voting Intention: LAB: 43% (-2) CON: 20% (=) RFM: 14% (-1) LDM: 11% (+1) GRN: 6% (+1) SNP: 2% (-1) Via @wethinkpolling , 12-13 Jun. Changes w/ 6-7 Jun. These figures reflect the same overall changes I have noted from the pre-election period ( i.e 1 Jan to 22 May, when Sunak called the election). Movements compared to WeThink's averages from that period are: Lab 43% (-2) Con 20% (-4) RFM 14% (+3) LD 11% (+2) GRN 6% ( 0) |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 13, 2024 15:58:43 GMT
WeThink @wethinkpolling · 1h 4b/ And if Britain had to adopt the euro as a condition of re-joining the EU, how would people vote if there was a referendum tomorrow? ❎ Stay out: 43% (+2) ☑️ Rejoin: 37% (-2) 🤷 Don’t know: 11% (NC) 😐 Won’t vote: 9% (NC) A bit too voodoo this for my liking. Shades of push polling. I agree, although it's relevant to the issues anyone advocating rejoining, like tomorrow, would have even though the polls clearly now show rejoining might be welcomed. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,573
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 13, 2024 16:00:23 GMT
That manifesto does address the lazy trope that there is no difference between Labour and the Conservatives. Anyone can rightly say they don't like where Labour is positioned - that's a matter of free choice - but there are very plainly things in Labour's manifesto that would never appear in that of the current Conservative Party. To be honest the most positive element was that they didn't rule our CGT rises which I thought they had done so maybe read to much into one of Reeve's comments on tax rises ("none" probably). I hesitate to mention this, as I know it doesn't go far enough for the Trans lobby, but I still can't see a culture warrior like Badenoch permitting it to appear in a Tory manifesto now: "Labour will protect LGBT+ and disabled people by making all existing strands of hate crime an aggravated offence. So-called conversion therapy is abuse – there is no other word for it – so Labour will finally deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, while protecting the freedom for people to explore their sexual orientation and gender identity. We will also modernise, simplify, and reform the intrusive and outdated gender recognition law to a new process." Given where the Tories are heading, the culture war stuff is going to be a clear dividing line in the next parliament. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,641
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jun 13, 2024 16:30:46 GMT
Well that's unfortunate  |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jun 13, 2024 16:48:12 GMT
WeThink @wethinkpolling 1/ Labour’s lead is cut by two but they still lead by 23 with just three weeks until the #GeneralElection. And independent candidates make our chart for the first time... 🔴 Lab 43% (-2) 🔵 Con 20% (NC) ⚪ Ref 14% (-1) 🟠 LD 11% (+1) 🟢 Green 6% (+1) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1) ⚫ Ind 2% I wonder if the Independents are or include Muslim Independent candidates which the recent poll of the VI of Muslim voters didn't seem to take account of. Savanta's recent poll of Muslim voters included the wording '...or would you vote for another party'. 5% of respondents chose this, up from 3% in a previous poll from Oct-Nov 2023. I suppose better wording might have been 'would you vote for another party or candidate', but there was an option for someone other than the named parties. I would be very surprised if Savanta did not include Muslim Independents under 'independents'. But I would also expect that any support for Galloways's WPGB would be considered as being for another 'party' (for which there is a total of 2% support, too) and not for an 'independent' candidate. |
|
jib
Member
Posts: 3,001
Member is Online
|
Post by jib on Jun 13, 2024 16:59:05 GMT
WeThink @wethinkpolling · 1h 4b/ And if Britain had to adopt the euro as a condition of re-joining the EU, how would people vote if there was a referendum tomorrow? ❎ Stay out: 43% (+2) ☑️ Rejoin: 37% (-2) 🤷 Don’t know: 11% (NC) 😐 Won’t vote: 9% (NC) A bit too voodoo this for my liking. Shades of push polling.  |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jun 13, 2024 17:00:24 GMT
"Get debt falling by 5th year of parliament" Means it could rise for 4 years than be projected to start falling which gives scope for borrowing to invest beyond the apparent level.Also the 2 statement below could herald ended higher rate tax relief on pension contributions? Either way they are in there to provide a platform/cover imo. '' Undertake a review of the pension landscape" "Adopt reforms to workplace pensions to deliver better outcomes for UK savers and pensioners"
English only matters, inevitably loom large in a manifesto written primarily for an English audience, but I approve of some of the internal Westminster proposals, such as the (cost free) restrictions on MPs consultancies and banning ministers from lobbying for the companies they used to regulate, and compulsory retirement age in the Lords.
Whether the incoming government can actually do things like reducing tax avoidance remains to be seen and, even if they do, will the monies allow the suggested improvements to go ahead, or will they be swallowed up in filling the black hole in UK finances that the IFS and others have identified? As pjw1961 pointed out to me earlier, these aren't hypothecated revenues.
Your suggestion that their debt rules allow them to borrow more in the next 4 years, is an interesting one, but if that is used to cover the holes in existing public service financing, there will be little left for investment.
In a binary choice of UKGov, the question isn't really whether this is a good manifesto - just is it better than the Conservative one? It would be hard to disagree with the IFS director -
“This is a manifesto that promises a dizzying number of reviews and strategies to tackle some of the challenges facing the country. That is better than a shopping list of half-baked policy announcements. But delivering genuine change will almost certainly also require putting actual resources on the table.” |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jun 13, 2024 17:09:54 GMT
This is Will Hutton's take on the manifesto - x.com/williamnhutton/status/1801238753786110367Not sure I'd go that far, but it's fair to say that it does have substance, and as pjw1961 said (I think) the tired old trope of Starmer's Labour being 'just the same as the Tories is, well, a tired old trope. |
|
graham
Member
Posts: 3,765
Member is Online
|
Post by graham on Jun 13, 2024 17:25:10 GMT
This is Will Hutton's take on the manifesto - x.com/williamnhutton/status/1801238753786110367Not sure I'd go that far, but it's fair to say that it does have substance, and as pjw1961 said (I think) the tired old trope of Starmer's Labour being 'just the same as the Tories is, well, a tired old trope. It does not alter the fact that Starmer has reneged on many of the pledges made when running for the leadership. He was rather fortunate that at last night's Sky event hosted by Beth Rigby that nobody took the opportunity to suggest that he was as much of a compulsive liar as Boris Johnson - albeit for different reasons. When he changed his mind about policy commitments across such a wide area he ought to have gone back to the membership and sought their endorsement. That would have been honourable - but he failed to do it. As a result, his legitimacy is now undermined. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2024 17:31:27 GMT
This is Will Hutton's take on the manifesto - x.com/williamnhutton/status/1801238753786110367Not sure I'd go that far, but it's fair to say that it does have substance, and as pjw1961 said (I think) the tired old trope of Starmer's Labour being 'just the same as the Tories is, well, a tired old trope. It does not alter the fact that Starmer has reneged on many of the pledges made when running for the leadership. He was rather fortunate that at last night's Sky event hosted by Beth Rigby that nobody took the opportunity to suggest that he was as much of a compulsive liar as Boris Johnson - albeit for different reasons. When he changed hid mind about policy commitments across such a wide area he ought to have gone back to the membership and sought their endorsement. That would have been honourable - but he failed to do it. As a result, his legitimacy is now undermined. Actually I thought he answered that one OK yesterday. He took over and in the intervening years has had to adjust, prioritise and cost things for what may only be his first term's manifesto.
Plus of course a lot changes over 4.5 years - such as the economy getting far worse (Brexit, Covid, Tories...) so he can't responsibly promise all the magic money tree things he once thought he could.
And let's not forget that the election to become leader is a completely different contest to that for becoming PM, with an entirely different electorate. Any politician with half a brain would realise the need to pander to different audiences. Shame that so many think of it as lying - in a free democracy I believe people are allowed to change their mind over time.
|
|
