|
|
Post by eor on Jun 30, 2024 22:32:20 GMT
To be fair, it's not a symmetrical thing - if the left alliance came third in a seat there's very probably no point in contesting the run-off because they're not going to pick up any real support from eliminated parties; whoever has finished second to Le Pen's lot is likely to be more appealing as a compromise anyway. Whereas if Macron's candidate has come third and isn't too far behind the NFP candidate in second, they might well be better placed to pick up ROC and other support in the second round than the NFP candidate - that will likely be negotiated seat-by-seat. Also it remains to be seen how magnanimous Melenchon and co are actually being. They'd have to have got about 20% or more of the vote to qualify for the run-off from third place - the number of seats that's actually happened in (and where Le Pen's lot have also come top) might turn out to be a relatively painless sacrifice anyway. I don't claim to be an expert, but I read that because of the high turnout and the fact there are three sizable main blocs rather than a multitude of smaller parties it is likely there will be many more seats where three candidates have qualified for the second round than is usual. I don't claim expertise here either - I've followed French politics very closely at times over the years but between child, job, US and UK elections I just haven't had time to keep up this time around. For what it's worth my understanding is the same as yours, that the turnout last time was about 45% I think, so for someone outside the top two to make the run-off then 12.5% of the electorate would have translated to something like 28% of the votes cast in the first round, and you're obviously not going to get that in many seats and still have two candidates ahead of you. Whereas with 19-20% needed typically this time it'll be more common, especially with the left alliance significantly reducing the vote-splitting. And by the same token there'll probably be more seats won outright on the first round this year, as with a turnout well over 50% the requirement for having 25% of the electorate will be met automatically by anyone getting 50% of the votes. My slightly cynical point at the end was more based on the exit poll VI splits - the NFP were predicted to come first or second in many of the seats anyway. So of the ones they have come third in, once you take out those where they haven't made the threshold, those where Le Pen's lot didn't come first, and those where the seat was won outright, it may turn out that meeting that pledge requires relatively few withdrawals. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 30, 2024 22:34:07 GMT
Yes, I was surprised by his vicious reaction and personal abuse, Paul Or should I have been? Probably not. I thought receiving a "vicious reaction and personal abuse" usually means you've made a good (irrefutable and factual) point here? Wow! I must make a lot of good points then.  As do you of course. |
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Jun 30, 2024 22:34:09 GMT
I thought he was joking but perhaps he has a touch of Colin From Accounts. Whilst norbold is the finest of fellows I do look forward to hearing less about Clacton. If Farage wins you may continue to here a lot about Clacton. I set that up for you. I thought you were in need of a snappy repost/ripost. As I sd before some of my best memories of my happy childhood recall Clacton. |
|
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 Jun 30, 2024 22:35:22 GMT
ping "Did the truculent Reform voters tend towards a certain demographic?" - They were white, but 95% of the people I talked to were white, so that doesn't really mean anything, of both sexes and middle aged rather than elderly. "Two separate women said they couldn't tell me how they would vote as their husbands decided that and told them what to do and they hadn't had their orders yet. - Very concerning, unless it was just their way of avoiding the conversation. I sometimes adopt that strategy with door-to-door salespeople. "Oh, I'll have to discuss that with my husband first. He tends to handle the [insert relevant aspect of life]. I of course internally flagellate myself for doing so." I got the impression they actually meant it. One was middle aged, the other quite young, in her 30s at most. When she told me that, to be honest I was pretty stunned and I said "But you have a vote too you know" and she said "But I don't understand all that stuff so I just do what he tells me." My mother would have give my father a right flea in his ear if he had tried to tell her how to vote (or how to do anything else for that matter), so I'm not used to this idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbold on Jun 30, 2024 22:37:36 GMT
For someone who spends so much time on here being rude, dismissive and arrogant towards other posters, ole Natty is a very touchy bloke who cant take any teasing at all. I thought he was joking but perhaps he has a touch of Colin From Accounts. Whilst norbold is the finest of fellows I do look forward to hearing less about Clacton. When did I last post about Clacton? |
|
|
|
Post by ping on Jun 30, 2024 22:40:22 GMT
Some interesting polling here from Techne for the Independent newspaper. It suggests that the Tories dire warnings about handing Starmer a supermajority have backfired somewhat in terms of herding frightened voters into the Tory fold. Seems to have instead firmed up the Labour vote. There's some interesting alleged inside information here too about how early postal voting is breaking. Feels a bit voodoo to me. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-project-feat-super-mahjority-poll-b2570841.htmlNot sure I like the super-majority question. If someone asked me: "Have Conservative warnings of a Labour supermajority made you (i) indifferent, (ii) more likely to vote Labour etc. etc., I might say more likely to vote Labour (even though it actually made no difference) just because I don't like the tactic. I'm also confused about the postal vote part: "Considering only the vote by post, the Conservatives would get 30 per cent, Labour 33 per cent, Reform UK 26 per cent and the Lib Dems 6 per cent." I assume this is polling of people who have already voted by post? "Pollster Lord Robert Hayward, a Tory peer, said the intelligence he has heard on postal votes suggests they are closer than the polls have suggested over the past few weeks." Closer than which polls? Postal votes are always skewed towards the Tories, so is he comparing like with like? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jun 30, 2024 22:44:31 GMT
"Steve may have a touch og the Colin's only other people can be rude"
I can see there are words in the above comment but they don't seem to even be on nodding terms with each other.
It's as if someone's randomly hit the spell checker bar.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 30, 2024 22:47:26 GMT
ping "Did the truculent Reform voters tend towards a certain demographic?" - They were white, but 95% of the people I talked to were white, so that doesn't really mean anything, of both sexes and middle aged rather than elderly. "Two separate women said they couldn't tell me how they would vote as their husbands decided that and told them what to do and they hadn't had their orders yet. - Very concerning, unless it was just their way of avoiding the conversation. I sometimes adopt that strategy with door-to-door salespeople. "Oh, I'll have to discuss that with my husband first. He tends to handle the [insert relevant aspect of life]. I of course internally flagellate myself for doing so." I got the impression they actually meant it. One was middle aged, the other quite young, in her 30s at most. When she told me that, to be honest I was pretty stunned and I said "But you have a vote too you know" and she said "But I don't understand all that stuff so I just do what he tells me." My mother would have give my father a right flea in his ear if he had tried to tell her how to vote (or how to do anything else for that matter), so I'm not used to this idea. It's extraordinary to think that some families still pass on backwards attitudes that I would have assumed had been more or less wiped out in most demographics by the eighties at the latest. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 30, 2024 22:53:14 GMT
I don't claim to be an expert, but I read that because of the high turnout and the fact there are three sizable main blocs rather than a multitude of smaller parties it is likely there will be many more seats where three candidates have qualified for the second round than is usual. I don't claim expertise here either - I've followed French politics very closely at times over the years but between child, job, US and UK elections I just haven't had time to keep up this time around. For what it's worth my understanding is the same as yours, that the turnout last time was about 45% I think, so for someone outside the top two to make the run-off then 12.5% of the electorate would have translated to something like 28% of the votes cast in the first round, and you're obviously not going to get that in many seats and still have two candidates ahead of you. Whereas with 19-20% needed typically this time it'll be more common, especially with the left alliance significantly reducing the vote-splitting. And by the same token there'll probably be more seats won outright on the first round this year, as with a turnout well over 50% the requirement for having 25% of the electorate will be met automatically by anyone getting 50% of the votes. My slightly cynical point at the end was more based on the exit poll VI splits - the NFP were predicted to come first or second in many of the seats anyway. So of the ones they have come third in, once you take out those where they haven't made the threshold, those where Le Pen's lot didn't come first, and those where the seat was won outright, it may turn out that meeting that pledge requires relatively few withdrawals. 45% seems incredibly low to me for parliamentary elections, it seems to suggest perhaps that the French see them almost as glorified local elections with the Presidential election being the big one. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2024 23:01:00 GMT
I thought he was joking but perhaps he has a touch of Colin From Accounts. Whilst norbold is the finest of fellows I do look forward to hearing less about Clacton. When did I last post about Clacton? Didn’t know you had? |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 30, 2024 23:08:26 GMT
Is this midnight with @fecklessmiser now?
|
|
|
|
Post by guymonde on Jun 30, 2024 23:36:28 GMT
I'm afraid I find that approach rather common amongst mainly immigrant communities mainly from the sub-continent, I think particularly among Muslims. Most commonly, that the head of the family (always dad) decides because that's the way it is, or because others think they don't know enough
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jun 30, 2024 23:59:08 GMT
ping "Did the truculent Reform voters tend towards a certain demographic?" - They were white, but 95% of the people I talked to were white, so that doesn't really mean anything, of both sexes and middle aged rather than elderly. "Two separate women said they couldn't tell me how they would vote as their husbands decided that and told them what to do and they hadn't had their orders yet. - Very concerning, unless it was just their way of avoiding the conversation. I sometimes adopt that strategy with door-to-door salespeople. "Oh, I'll have to discuss that with my husband first. He tends to handle the [insert relevant aspect of life]. I of course internally flagellate myself for doing so." I got the impression they actually meant it. One was middle aged, the other quite young, in her 30s at most. When she told me that, to be honest I was pretty stunned and I said "But you have a vote too you know" and she said "But I don't understand all that stuff so I just do what he tells me." My mother would have give my father a right flea in his ear if he had tried to tell her how to vote (or how to do anything else for that matter), so I'm not used to this idea. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Jul 1, 2024 0:29:57 GMT
There is some tasty labour on SNP and vice versa action on here tonight. Old Nat flying the flag for the SNP being the most progressive UK Party. Somewhat surprised we haven't had a run out of the Red Tories attack line. The SNP has to be a very broad Coalition to achieve it's goal of Independence, hence the 'Wheest for Indy' philosophy which succeeds to a degree in keeping everyone in the tent. So this broad Coalition throws up a Leadership Election whereby Ash Regan ( someone who would be quite at home in Cameron's Tory Party) receives 11% of the vote , Kate Forbes a Christian fundamentalist 40%, only bested by the hapless centrist Humza Yousaf with 48%. This is obviously a snapshot of the politics of the members, (It's hard to envisage someone like Regan being on the ballot for Labour) The SNP's so called progressive offer has always been about triangulation to maximise the vote for Indy, which explains how they morphed from the 'Tartan Tories' a traditional right of centre Nationalist party to the Janus faced party they are today. If they achieve their goal of Independence the different factions will go their separate ways. I have never been a fan of Nationalism in any guise and don't welcome Nationalists trying to take the moral high ground.
I made no claim that the SNP is "the most progressive UK Party" (assuming you meant "political party in the UK"). The SGP is much more progressive, and others will be too. The current iteration of UK Labour, however, certainly isn't.
I presume that you are using "Nationalist" to mean those who wish that the different polities in the UK should be independent states, but "in any guise" simply conceals the reality you are a "UK Nationalist" who wishes the current structure to continue. Taking a conservative nationalist position is neither better nor worse than a radical one, and we can agree to differ on whether the UK is a useful construct in the 21st century - and for whom it is useful.
In political party terms, however, I support the SNP and SGP who want to see Scotland as an independent (Nationalist if you wish) state in a wider European Union (a Unionist stance). You support a party which insists on the continuation of the current UK state (equally Nationalist) while declaring that that state will never be in union with most of the rest of Europe (Separatist).
There's no "moral high ground" involved. I prefer a redistributive, egalitarian society as part of a co-operative union of European states, and will vote for parties that can bring that closer. You choose to support a separatist nationalist party that has chosen to downplay redistribution in order to get votes from the already advantaged.
Politics is all about the exercise of power to achieve what are deemed desirable aims. Your aims and mine are just very different. |
|
|
|
Post by ptarmigan on Jul 1, 2024 0:40:09 GMT
I don't think anyone thinks that Starmer and Farage are politically similar - the contention was simply that they are comparable in terms of their relationship with the truth. I don't think that's a particularly controversial or inflammatory claim. Ok, if you and others wish to carry on legitimising Farage as a normal mainstream politician and help with his rise I can't stop you. This is not about Starmer by the way - slag him off as much as you like - but don't couple him or any other mainstream politician with Farage. If you look at Farage's long history as the "acceptable" front man of the far right, there is simply no comparison in the danger he represents to society. I'm rather baffled by this response. I don't see how I'm lending Farage any sort of legitimacy. It's the mainstream media and mainstream politicians themselves who lend Farage legitimacy via 1) The media obsession with and endless focus on him. The public broadcaster platforming him at any given opportunity. 2) Mainstream politicians adopting some of his stances. Mainstream politicians failing to materially improve people's lives and their adherence to a failed economic model which increases inequality and feeds disillusionment. I'm afraid lying contributes to this discontent and a feeling that they're all the same which is why it should be highlighted and condemned. The political and media class continuing to behave as they currently do will only bring a figure like Farage closer to power. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 5:14:29 GMT
By Friday morning, Britain could have its most state-educated cabinet in decades. The shadow cabinet heading into the general election is 77.5% state-educated, with seven out of 31 members having attended fee-paying schools. That is of course still three times the percentage of fee charging school members as the wider public.But a significant improvement. Improvement? How? Based on over performance in state examinations, privately educated kids get a better education. You are arguing its a bad thing those governing us got a better than average education? |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 5:25:59 GMT
Yes, but I can't think there has ever been an instance of a LOTO with such negative approval ratings leading a party to a landslide GE victory. It is unusual. Obviously one reason is brexit, which is a national disaster supported by both lab and con. A lot more lab voters opposed brexit than con voters, so of course even if they still prefer lab they arent happy. What would you suggest lock them up again? .Well he’s done quite a few posts re: ventilation, improvement of, for eggers, if that helps any?… Assuming there is no magic money left on a new crop of magic money tress, just how would you pay for that? The only way would be to divert money from eg treating cancer, heart attack, car crash, pregnant women, etc, etc. Which is fundamentally the same argument that locking down the world economy at vast expense could never be cost effective expenditure even first time around. It was a horrendous mistake. I very much doubt I am the only person who thinks this, I seem to remember Heseltine and lord Sumption publicly attacking lockdown at the time, there will be plenty of others who believe what the conservative government with the agreement of the labour opposition did in imposing lockdown on us was very wrong. That is inevitably part of why both parties are so unpopular. Two national major disasters approved by both lab and con. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 1, 2024 5:27:16 GMT
As a lib dem I like graphs . Here's a selection.    |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 1, 2024 5:29:58 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 5:35:27 GMT
Covid isn't going away any time soon,children are going to be exposed,that's an unavoidable fact, fortunately the overwhelming majority won't come to any significant harm." You have no way of knowing whether anyone will or won't come to significant harm. The data is suggesting a large proportion suffering a significant level of harm seems more likely than not. Its now 4 years since covid peaked around the world. Society in health terms is pretty much back to normal. Sure, covid is likely to be a permanent circulating disease now but there is nothing unusual about new diseases breaking through to the human population. Nor has this one never been wild amongst humans in the past, we managed to prove that, its come and gone before. Nor was it actually a serious diseases by historic standards. It will persist as an annual infectious disease, slowly fading in severity and coming and going like flu. What we saw was an utter over reaction and an attempt to control it using modern technological means, ie specific mass testing and fast vaccination rollout. Both failed to control it. Had we known at the outset they would both fail, its quite possible the world would have chosen not to lockdown, because using testing to prevent spread and then ending it entirely with vaccinations were both key arguments used to justify proposed lockdown. Neither worked. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 5:45:18 GMT
Given the dire nature of Tory prospects, I am a little surprised that the likes of John Major and Kenneth Clarke have not been wheeled out to press party loyalty buttons and stiffen up support amongst traditional older Tory supporters. They might think labour is currently the better bet. It might just remind voters that the Tories were better back in the day. Some conservatives from that era have said they never envisaged university fees soaring as they did. They maintained a larger army. They were pro EU. Heseltine for one opposed lockdown. There was at least some coherent policy to ensure UK energy supplies independant of world shocks. The biggest government created problem in the Uk is probably the shortage of houses, which never should have been permitted and has made the UK far less competitive. Cheap houses means lower wages and therefore more competitive industry. While the Thatcher government started this disastrous policy, they at least envisaged the private sector would take over housebuilding from the state. Never happened, but its fair to say they argued it would. But voters still threw out the tories that time round too. It might just remind voters that the Tories were better back in the day. I agree with you the labour party today is rather right wing compared to labour in the Thatcher era. Starmer is son of Blair, and Blair was son of Thatcher. The unpopularity of labour now compared to at the dawn of the Blair government is very likely precisely because the shine has worn off Thatcherism a whole lot more than it had in 1997. Labour's strategy to try to capture the further right voters may or may not be the correct one, but as a consequence it means the genuinely left voters or traditional labour left are far from happy with the party they are voting for. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,381
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Jul 1, 2024 5:51:41 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 1, 2024 5:54:12 GMT
As the newspaper front pages are covered with frolicking millionaire kick ball players there's not much space to see if the traditional Tory supporters might be considering labourism this time.
The torygraph might I suppose of been a contender, but as around the frolickers it finds time to get very excited about the Tories sister party in France getting around 30% and space for some total load of old cobblers from Sunakered about Putin standing as a Labour candidate or something like that, it appears they don't wish to be labourite curious.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 1, 2024 6:01:33 GMT
This summer's must have gift for the children of the hard of thinking.  |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 6:02:10 GMT
I have gone off Farage personally a bit because of his equivocal stance on the Russia-Ukraine war. I think the reaction to his remarks has been a bit overdone, but he seemed to just use the situation to have another go at the EU. That battle is over for a generation. Ah, see what you mean: yes that would perhaps explain why he did it. Because he sees that the question of EU membership is wholly not settled for a generation. And thinking longer term, it will have to be a serious issue at the next election. Not as if he stands the slightest chance of significant numbers of MPs this time, its still a long game still playing. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 6:25:26 GMT
Reform UK The out and proud Reform voters were a truculent lot and notable for seeming extremely angry about something not necessarily that specific - it wasn't Labour or the government or even immigration, they were just angry and defiant, possibly with the world in general. My Labour colleague I was canvassing with said they were exactly the same sort of people who hero-worshipped Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s and I think this a shrewd observation. The similarity is less about the exact policies, more about admiring 'strong leadership' and 'putting the Great into Great Britain'. Farage makes them feel good about themselves, as Maggie did. ]Yes. Good point. In addition there were another set who hid behind claiming to be undecided, but were likely Reform voters, while being a bit more ashamed to admit their choice. Reform has also managed to irritate a lot of ordinary voters as they have been bombarding the area with multiple leaflets. Several people complained about this and didn't much like the fact that Reform were obviously spending a lot of national campaigning money there - they felt they were being used. Theres plenty of centre ground people who are however affected by VAT on fees. Attacking private education is completely insane when the existence of the private sector is probably the only factor still propping up standards in state schools. This is a witch hunt in much the same spirit that brexit would solve all the nations problems. Certainly Farage's problem long term is how to get centre support, but it depends what his goal really is. If its just to end immigration, then he could achieve that. Con have the problem its a core policy plank to encourage immigration, whatever they say rhetorically. Brexit was a consensus disaster. Lockdown was a consensus disaster. Both main parties broadly agree a budget which they each say the other cannot make work, and independent experts agree neither can make work. Things like failing NHS and potholes are both consequences of no solution to finding more money (ok, there is an underlying difference that con WANT to reduce services delivered by government, whereas lab cannot show how they could improve them and dont accept the UK is under taxed compared to international comparisons). The Ukraine war is going badly but again largely consensus (which that chap in the US used as one of his key points to gauge winning the presidency) |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 6:37:29 GMT
As is my wont, I like to be the sword of truth on this forum and cut through the zealotry and obfuscation of some of our more partisan correspondents. I therefore feel obliged to familiarise you all with the good Scottish boys in blue ongoing investigation into the SNP's alleged misuse of party funds. The SNP currently being the devolved governing party in Scotland. I warn you that the contents are deeply disturbing. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Branchform# I'm really not sure whether you are being serious or satirical. The first charge seems to be transferring money raised for independance campaigning to general party funding. Since independance is a core SNP goal, this could easily be regarded as a technicality. There are then mention of '1000 alleged instances of fraud'. It doesnt explain so no idea whether they are credible or not. Nor is this question of cars parked on driveways really cleared up one way or another. Its extraordianary after so much time we do do not have a clear explanation what happened here. Justice delayed is clearly justice denied in this case. Theres a suggestion of adopting people as candidates after they made donations, and covering up that they made those donations. Didnt I hear the conservatives have some big donors as candidates? The point seems more to create an impression of sleaze and it being one of those issues police have to take very seriously because elected politicians are involved. Conservatives adopting Brexit as a strategy to become the elected government was far more of a betrayal of the country and their traditional voters (if its fundamental truths we are after).
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,637
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Jul 1, 2024 7:08:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jul 1, 2024 7:08:42 GMT
There is some tasty labour on SNP and vice versa action on here tonight. Old Nat flying the flag for the SNP being the most progressive UK Party. Somewhat surprised we haven't had a run out of the Red Tories attack line. The SNP has to be a very broad Coalition to achieve it's goal of Independence, hence the 'Wheest for Indy' philosophy which succeeds to a degree in keeping everyone in the tent. So this broad Coalition throws up a Leadership Election whereby Ash Regan ( someone who would be quite at home in Cameron's Tory Party) receives 11% of the vote , Kate Forbes a Christian fundamentalist 40%, only bested by the hapless centrist Humza Yousaf with 48%. This is obviously a snapshot of the politics of the members, (It's hard to envisage someone like Regan being on the ballot for Labour) The SNP's so called progressive offer has always been about triangulation to maximise the vote for Indy, which explains how they morphed from the 'Tartan Tories' a traditional right of centre Nationalist party to the Janus faced party they are today. If they achieve their goal of Independence the different factions will go their separate ways. I have never been a fan of Nationalism in any guise and don't welcome Nationalists trying to take the moral high ground.
I made no claim that the SNP is "the most progressive UK Party" (assuming you meant "political party in the UK"). The SGP is much more progressive, and others will be too. The current iteration of UK Labour, however, certainly isn't.
I presume that you are using "Nationalist" to mean those who wish that the different polities in the UK should be independent states, but "in any guise" simply conceals the reality you are a "UK Nationalist" who wishes the current structure to continue. Taking a conservative nationalist position is neither better nor worse than a radical one, and we can agree to differ on whether the UK is a useful construct in the 21st century - and for whom it is useful.
In political party terms, however, I support the SNP and SGP who want to see Scotland as an independent (Nationalist if you wish) state in a wider European Union (a Unionist stance). You support a party which insists on the continuation of the current UK state (equally Nationalist) while declaring that that state will never be in union with most of the rest of Europe (Separatist).
There's no "moral high ground" involved. I prefer a redistributive, egalitarian society as part of a co-operative union of European states, and will vote for parties that can bring that closer. You choose to support a separatist nationalist party that has chosen to downplay redistribution in order to get votes from the already advantaged.
Politics is all about the exercise of power to achieve what are deemed desirable aims. Your aims and mine are just very different.This exchange with a couple of ITV breakfast presenters is getting a lot of attention in Wales. Apologies if you've already seen it:- x.com/OwsWills/status/1807382351657201942?t=uUXeQzVW_WPkWmTsh58ShA&s=19 |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jul 1, 2024 7:20:27 GMT
Financial crash, maybe? I witnessed a depressing conversation on the train a couple of weeks ago between two women in their twenties and two thirty-something men. One of the women was saying something to the effect of: "Whenever Labour are in, they spend all the money and then the Tories have to come in and sort everything out." One of the men tentatively suggested that Labour couldn't be entirely blamed for a global financial crash. Striking that this view of Labour being economically incompetent has such staying power given the last few years... Labour implicitly always accepts it is worse at managing the economy than the conservatives, so no surprise voters think so. Back in 2010 lab were openly agreeing they could have managed the economy better, whereas as we now see it was a textbook model of good management compared to the 14 years since they left power. Today labour are scared to explain what they would do to balance the Uk budget. The conservatives position is essentially the same, neither is addressing the structural underfunding of government services which conservatives have engineered and which far exceeds the total of any details of policy spending in the manifestos. Conservatives are basically saying they want to continue the rundown of state services in favour of reducing taxes, whereas the Uk is under taxed compared to comparable developed nations. The fact is state monopoly services are usually cheaper than privately operated monopoly services, conservative ideology seeks to create room in the provision of essential national services for private individuals or companies to make profit. Thats their USP, which frankly is the wrong policy for most people. Anyone who had to pay £500,000 for their home instead of £50,000 should thank the conservatives for their £450,000 loss of money they could have spent on something else. |
|
As do you of course.
