news & politics:discussion

[sime]

17 hours ago, steviewevie said:

 

What a snowflake

[eFestivals]

40 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Pissed away is government sponsored private monopolies. You spend more on rail fare for a inferior service, the profits go to wealthy shareholders and are whisked away to the BVI.

Pissed away is not closing tax loopholes. 

Pissed away is a nuclear deterrent we'll never use.

Pissed away is the house of lords.

Who knew economics can be done in different ways? The problems for elections is about getting enough people on board around a single idea.

Which takes listening to other ideas to find out what idea(s) can get the necessary solidarity.

 

Quote

Most economists worth listening to advocate Corbynesque spending plans these days.

lol. "My chosen disciples all agree with me".

Apart from the ones who don't, obvs. 😛 

Can your chosen disciples give you a winning margin?

 

Quote

The aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis was basically a great A/B test of whether Keynesian/MMT fiscal stimulus plans or monetarist QE, austerity plans worked best in the event of an economic downturn. The former won.

oooh, you want to quote Keynes?

Want to say when your good ideas go into the debt-repayment mode that Keynes also talks about alongside depression spending? 

Perhaps you'll campaign for less for all for that period? 😛 

 

Quote

I don't contest that the man himself had a past that, whilst personally doesnt cause me any offense (nor anybody reasonable), could be leveraged by those who are opposed to progressive politics in the media and in the PLP.

lol. all reasonable people call Hamas their friends. All reasonable people were on the side of the IRA when they murdered UK forces as well as civilians in places such as London, Manchester, Birmingham, Guildford, & Aldershot. All reasonable people think we should reject our govts (govt agency findings!) findings in favour of what Russia says. All reasonable people think we should spend the money on nukes but not have nukes because jobs, because they're the best jobs. Etc, etc, etc.

I personally agree with Corbyn's take (or parts of his take) on many things, but I'm also able to notice that many of his and my views greatly offend many many people. 

And defining just yourself as the only reasonable people only shows that you're not.

Edited February 19, 2021 by eFestivals

[mattiloy]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Who knew economics can be done in different ways? The problems for elections is about getting enough people on board around a single idea.

Which takes listening to other ideas to find out what idea(s) can get the necessary solidarity.

 

lol. "My chosen disciples all agree with me".

Apart from the ones who don't, obvs. 😛 

Can your chosen disciples give you a winning margin?

 

oooh, you want to quote Keynes?

Want to say when your good ideas go into the debt-repayment mode that Keynes also talks about alongside depression spending? 

Perhaps you'll campaign for less for all for that period? 😛 

 

lol. all reasonable people call Hamas their friends. All reasonable people were on the side of the IRA when they murdered UK forces. All reasonable people think we should reject our govts (govt agency findings!) findings in favour of what Russia says. All reasonable people think we should spend the money on nukes but not have nukes because jobs, because they're the best jobs. Etc, etc, etc.

I personally agree with Corbyn's take (or parts of his take) on many things, but I'm also able to notice that many of his and my views greatly offend many many people. 

And defining just yourself as the only reasonable people only shows that you're not.

Keynes says that deficit spending brings the economy back to growth and full employment, at full employment welfare spending naturally drops and tax receipts naturally rise, thus the budget surplus pays the accumulated debt of the downturn. I don’t see how that is controversial?

MMT goes further and says that so long as your govt debt is held in your own currency then low-moderate (ie not uncontrolled/destabilising) inflation in the upturn is also not a problem because it simply reduces the real value of the govt debt.

Neither implies an increase in the rate of tax or a decrease in spending, only that a surplus will occur as a consequence of growth.

Anyway I’m happy to leave it here and agree to disagree, I think its becoming a circular argument. I certainly don’t think I’m going to persuade you that talking to Hamas/IRA and trying to understand their grievances is a reasonable thing to do for a politician. That they are just human beings in the end, seeing that if you had been born into that conflict you may yourself have been inclined to join. They are not innately evil and that black and white thinking never resolves anything. But there we are.

I am willing to accept that you can’t have it all your way in a big tent but it seems obvious to me that if the left agrees to go along with a centrist manifesto in the anticipation of a shift left once in power, we’ll be disappointed. For example Biden has already reneged on minimum wage, ICE, warmed relations with Saudi and backed their heinous yemen campaign. 

So the left needs to set out its stall now, fight back against losing ground to the centre, make it clear that we need to be courted just as much as the centre, and that there is the credible threat of punishment. Make it clear that even of Starmer isnt out man, he is party accountable to us. In this case this is the withholding of the left wing vote. If Starmer underperforms in the local elections in May and analysis shows that the left has deserted him, then he will hopefully realise that the withholding of the vote from the left is a real problem and he will have to offer something more.

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Keynes says that deficit spending brings the economy back to growth and full employment, at full employment welfare spending naturally drops and tax receipts naturally rise, thus the budget surplus pays the accumulated debt of the downturn. I don’t see how that is controversial?

what's controversial is your selective and simplified take where it all magically works out for the best, no matter what levels of Kenysian investment and no matter where and how those investments are made.

21 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

MMT goes further and says that so long as your govt debt is held in your own currency then low-moderate (ie not uncontrolled/destabilising) inflation in the upturn is also not a problem because it simply reduces the real value of the govt debt.

only true with closed borders.

In the real world that geezer in China wants something equal to the value of his labour, not you agreeing to open the door for him every times he needs the door opening.

23 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

I certainly don’t think I’m going to persuade you that talking to Hamas/IRA and trying to understand their grievances is a reasonable thing to do for a politician.

which only shows how far up your own arse you've crawled, and that you're blind to everything.

But ultimately, it doesn't matter a fuck if I agree with Corbyn or you agree with Corbyn. What matters is whether enough people to win an election agree with Corbyn - and when you find enough of those IRA & Hamas supporting geezers in the people of this country (and happy to have the IRA killing perhaps their own son), you're in. 

There is only one electorate, and far too few of them agree with you or me. That's how it is, and if you *really* want to change people's lives rather than pontificate about your self-ordained political purity you'll need to work with them rather than telling them they're thick, stupid, a tory, or that only you know what's best for them. 

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

rather than telling them they're thick, stupid, a tory, or that only you know what's best for them

ps: i'm not claiming that i've never done that.

I'm pointing out it's not a winning strategy. Hating the working classes cannot be a winning strategy for a party that claims to represent the working classes.

[Haan]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Hating the working classes cannot be a winning strategy for a party that claims to represent the working classes.

There are basically 0 left wing policies which amount to hating the working class. Labour under corbyn represented the working class, it did in the North and it did in London too- Tottenham is as working class as a Northern Yorkshire town. 

 

I find it interesting that you frame some of this as the politics of "me". How? How is for example, wanting to increase education funding the politics of me when I am not in school and it doesn't effect me in the slightest? You're framing this all as if we are all refusing to listen to the electorates wishes, when in many cases the electorate is WRONG. We don't need tighter controls on immigration, that is a fact. Abolishing the Lords will be better for this country, increasing worker rights will be better for this country. And obviously we will strongly believe we're right and their wrong, otherwise why would you even be passionate about politics in the first place?

I also think framing this in terms of electoral victories is wrong too. Farage and UKIP electorally  have not done that well at all but they have achieved a hell of a lot politically. We should be hammering home left wing ideas and refusing to budge because we need to push the Overton window left. Look at how no Tory is daring to mention Austerity now, look at how Boris talks about increasing NHS nurses and shit, we need to continue to push these talking points and shift the conversation. Conceding to the right on every whim because the polls or the wider public seem to in support of those ideas will just leave us with nothing. 

Now I'm not saying Starmer should be the one to do those things necessarily, but if the left doesn't apply this kind of pressure to him he won't feel like he needs put forward any left wing policies

Edited February 19, 2021 by Haan

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, Haan said:

There are basically 0 left wing policies which amount to hating the working class. Labour under corbyn represented the working class, it did in the North and it did in London too- Tottenham is as working class as a Northern Yorkshire town. 

and yet the working classes can be very (small 'c') conservative, often at odds with the views of the likes of mattiloy or Corbyn. And certain sections of that support respond with "well fuck of and join the tories then". 

17 minutes ago, Haan said:

I find it interesting that you frame some of this as the politics of "me". How?

For some people, only "what I want" is acceptable. mattiloy, for example, where he has his view, it's right, and everyone else must accept it \and if you don't you get the hates lines of being a tory, "centrist dad", etc.
(the problem there is that not enough others do accept it, and the hate lines have their own effect).

It takes the rejection of "what I want" to accept others have different ideas, and to work with them to achieve progress where enough agreement can be made.

 

17 minutes ago, Haan said:

when in many cases the electorate is WRONG

lol, again, at "There are basically 0 left wing policies which amount to hating the working class".

no shit sherlock. You think you've got the wrong electorate for that socialist utopia and if only you had the right electorate you'd be in power for millennium.

Back on planet earth there is only the one electorate, and wrong or not they have to be worked with if we want progress.

We can have progress. Progress, not perfection. Or you can keep telling them how wrong they are for not agreeing with your every idea.

21 minutes ago, Haan said:

We don't need tighter controls on immigration, that is a fact.

Whether it is or isn't, lots of people disagree and telling them they're wrong isn't going to change their minds.

Instead, perhaps we could try a different debate, of what level of immigration is what we need, where both sides can agree that immigration can be a good thing, and where both sides can agree that unlimited would eventually not be a good thing. Just a thought!

 

27 minutes ago, Haan said:

Abolishing the Lords will be better for this country

I agree.

And yet if the tories were doing it, I suspect you'd have some concerns about how they were trying to manipulate the political system in their favour, and you'd feel strongly against it.

Think about it.

29 minutes ago, Haan said:

And obviously we will strongly believe we're right and their wrong, otherwise why would you even be passionate about politics in the first place?

that might indeed be the case but it'll never be a winning strategy.

There are some arguments that cannot be won (or won yet). There are others that can be won.

When Blair went for Civil Partnerships and not equal marriage was that clever political strategy or a betrayal of liberal values?
(note: 'liberal values'. Not even 'working class values').

[Haan]

29 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

We can have progress. Progress, not perfection. Or you can keep telling them how wrong they are for not agreeing with your every idea.

I honestly do not think this is what we're doing though, my ideal utopia is a lot different to what I am asking or what I even speak about. I agree we need progress but if we don't talk about actual policies that help people we won't ever push the conversation that way. It just reads like you're conceding way too much in order to "win". All I am saying is that we should always push the conversation left where we can. 

If we can't even speak about actual facts when it comes to these issues, like for example the fact that Theresa May repressed 9 reports which said immigration was not having a negative impact on wages, or that 1% of migrants claim benefits compared to 4% of the British population, how do you expect us to make any progress on these issues? And I'm not talking about my utopian fantasy of living in a classless, stateless society by the way, I just mean having an actual evidence based immigration conversation amongst the electorate

[eFestivals]

 

4 minutes ago, Haan said:

It just reads like you're conceding way too much in order to "win".

I'm merely attempting to recognise how there might be a win, because something is better than nothing.

The electorate is what it is. They're not going to wake up tomorrow and all start buying the Socialist Worker.

 

4 minutes ago, Haan said:

All I am saying is that we should always push the conversation left where we can. 

No one has an issue with that, but when things are pushed beyond what the electorate will support, that's a push too far.

It's not about political purity, it's about changing lives where you're able to (and accepting that sometimes you're not able to).

 

4 minutes ago, Haan said:

If we can't even speak about actual facts when it comes to these issues, like for example the fact that Theresa May repressed 9 reports which said immigration was not having a negative impact on wages, or that 1% of migrants claim benefits compared to 4% of the British population, how do you expect us to make any progress on these issues? And I'm not talking about my utopian fantasy of living in a classless, stateless society by the way, I just mean having an actual evidence based immigration conversation amongst the electorate

I reckon the biggest progress 'the left' could make on this issue would be to give a number that they felt would be too much immigration.

Some of the left would reject even trying to think of a number, and there lies a problem.

[Haan]

 

 

[eFestivals]

14 hours ago, Haan said:

 

 

interesting. I wonder what Finnish kids would have made of Labour's 2019 manifesto, with all of those spending pledges...? 😛 

[Ozanne]

 

[mattiloy]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

interesting. I wonder what Finnish kids would have made of Labour's 2019 manifesto, with all of those spending pledges...? 😛 

Probably would have thought they were reasonable given that they would still would have left the UK with a much smaller govt spending as a % of gdp than Finland.

But yeah, keep demonstrating the point that most UK voters are operating with a poor understanding of economics.

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Probably would have thought they were reasonable given that they would still would have left the UK with a much smaller govt spending as a % of gdp than Finland.

Finland taxes heavily for it's spend. Corbyn didn't have any of that.

 

30 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

But yeah, keep demonstrating the point that most UK voters are operating with a poor understanding of economics.

Lol, see above.

Ultimately, whether they are or aren't, it's fuck all use demanding that people with different views fall in line when they're not going to.

[mattiloy]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Finland taxes heavily for it's spend. Corbyn didn't have any of that.

 

Lol, see above.

Ultimately, whether they are or aren't, it's fuck all use demanding that people with different views fall in line when they're not going to.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-labour-manifesto-general-election-tax-spending-plans-boris-johnson-a9212251.html

[Ozanne]

 

[blutarsky]

Think this is the most appropriate place for this: 

I wrote it to post as a Twitter thread but didn’t as some of my relatives follow me. 
 

My Dad supports Brexit and votes Tory.

Despite the #BrexitDisaster unfolding before his very eyes, he maintains it’s “best for Britain”. 

On one hand he claims industries aren’t suffering from a devastating barrage of red tape and denies there are any problems occurring because this is fabricated by the MSM. 

On the other, he cites the fact industries such as fishing are in crisis as evidence of the EU’s evil corruption. “That’s the EU doing that mate.”

Fish rotting on dock sides: EU’s fault. 

Exporters struggling to send goods overseas due to non functioning export software and excessive costs: not actually happening. 

The NHS being understaffed due to EU native staff leaving the UK: The EU’s fault in the first place for ‘forcing’ the NHS to be reliant on overseas workers. 

The Tory government rejecting the EU’s offer of visa free travel for performers: the EU being manipulative and spiteful. 

The EU is also being spiteful and “punishing” Britain by sticking to the trade rules agreed in Johnson’s Christmas Eve deal, apparently. 

VdL’s actions over article 16 and vaccines: the EU showing it’s true colours (despite the fact the leaders of EU member states got her to walk back). 

This is normally where people say “now my Dad’s not a stupid man” but I’m not going to. He *is* a stupid man and sadly he’s representative of many people who think of themselves as “intelligent, free thinkers”, despite their obvious lack of cognitive ability. 

He isn’t trying to gaslight me with his statements. He isn’t smart enough for that. He simply believes the first thing he hears on any given subject, which is normally from Farage, Rees-Mogg, Johnson etc via talk radio while he’s behind the wheel of his white van. 

He’s naive enough to believe these people have things in common with him. “They’re good normal people with common sense, not like you, lefty idealists.” 

He doesn’t seem to understand that someone like Rishi Sunak and his £700m personal fortune doesn’t actually have the best interests of a 56-year-old data- communications engineer from the. South West at the forefront of their mind. 

He likes to paint himself as an “individual thinker” who gets his news from a variety of sources, when in fact he just parrots the views of other people who have ulterior motives, without realising there is any motive. 

“I’m open to reading any source,” he says. I bought him a subscription to Private Eye. He’s had a dozen copies and hasn’t read any. 

Any information he dislikes or which doesn’t fit his world view is dismissed. If it’s from me it’s because I’m a “woolly jumpered idealist” who “doesn’t live in the real world”. 

If it’s from the BBC it’s because the BBC is “so left wing” - despite the fact Laura Kuennsberg is its chief reporter. Despite the fact it chose not to run a story about the Supreme Court finding Matt Hancock guilty of *actual corruption* in its evening bulletins. 

“The BBC has a left wing agenda,” he says. He then tells me I’m being daft if I suggest the Barclay brothers or Murdoch may have an agenda. 

Despite all this, yesterday when he became frustrated with me he said, “you think I’m right wing.” I do. He then told me he thought of himself as “a centrist, left of centre actually.” 

My jaw hit the floor. This is from a man who wants Bulgarians out of the country because “they nick tools on sites I work on. You wouldn’t know, you don’t live in the real world like I do.”  

A man who makes jokes about CSE, or that people who live in council houses don’t shower. A man who thinks bankers should get tax breaks on their million pound bonuses because they “keep our economy strong.” A man who told me (a teacher in a school with a higher than average number of disadvantaged students) that it’s a myth there are children who *need* a free school meal.

A man who thinks Covid is “just the flu” and that the figures for deaths and hospitalisation are fabricated. Of those he does accept died of Covid, he says, “most of those people would have died anyway so it’s just natural selection.” Quite the compassionate socialist.

Yesterday I had to explain the concept of empathy to him and he *could not* get it. 

If this man sees himself as a left of centre socialist, and sees his son (LD councillor so hardly a radical communist) as a “woke snowflake lefty” (his words) then the entire political spectrum has shifted massively to the right. 

I fear this is the case. There are many more like my Dad. Angry men who don’t really know what they’re angry about, but nevertheless blame others for it. Lately the EU has been a handy scapegoat. Prior to 2016 he had no view on the EU. 

However, he, like so many others, is far too easily manipulated by people with ulterior motives who channel his anger towards their own goals - which are inevitably their own enrichment, to the detriment of the finances or quality of life of the people they exploit. 

So why does this work? Because all too often men like my Dad have an inbuilt, extremely strong and inexplicable sense that their opinion on anything is important and correct. He honestly believes everything he says with 100% certainty. 

I think I’m intelligent. I have a degree in journalism and a post-grad qualification in education. My A-levels were in History, Politics, Media, English and Critical Thinking. I am a district councillor. I feel this all qualifies me as relatively knowledgeable when it comes to the news cycle but I don’t claim anything like 100% certainty on any topic. Unlike my dad. 

It almost seems like a superpower to be as certain as angry men like him are. So that’s why I feel we’re fucked as a nation. Johnson and his cronies could achieve anything they want as long as they continue to tap into the power bank of angry white *whatever it is*. 

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, mattiloy said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-labour-manifesto-general-election-tax-spending-plans-boris-johnson-a9212251.html

The countries in Europe that Corbynites like to make comparisons with because of decent levels of public services have tax rates vastly different to anything Corbyn proposed. They don't pretend it can all be paid for by others.

And I'm guessing they don't add a further £100Bn or so extra spending after publishing their manifestos, either. While still trying to pretend the numbers add up.

But mostly, nothing Corbyn did gave the electorate confidence that he could keep control of and properly manage the biggest ever expansion of UK public spending. And that's an important part of things because it's ultimately the electorate's money that is being spent and people want it spent wisely and to their benefit, not spunked up the wall. In politics high ambition requires high competence.

[Losing my hair]

4 hours ago, blutarsky said:

Think this is the most appropriate place for this: 

I wrote it to post as a Twitter thread but didn’t as some of my relatives follow me. 
 

My Dad supports Brexit and votes Tory.

Despite the #BrexitDisaster unfolding before his very eyes, he maintains it’s “best for Britain”. 

On one hand he claims industries aren’t suffering from a devastating barrage of red tape and denies there are any problems occurring because this is fabricated by the MSM. 

On the other, he cites the fact industries such as fishing are in crisis as evidence of the EU’s evil corruption. “That’s the EU doing that mate.”

Fish rotting on dock sides: EU’s fault. 

Exporters struggling to send goods overseas due to non functioning export software and excessive costs: not actually happening. 

The NHS being understaffed due to EU native staff leaving the UK: The EU’s fault in the first place for ‘forcing’ the NHS to be reliant on overseas workers. 

The Tory government rejecting the EU’s offer of visa free travel for performers: the EU being manipulative and spiteful. 

The EU is also being spiteful and “punishing” Britain by sticking to the trade rules agreed in Johnson’s Christmas Eve deal, apparently. 

VdL’s actions over article 16 and vaccines: the EU showing it’s true colours (despite the fact the leaders of EU member states got her to walk back). 

This is normally where people say “now my Dad’s not a stupid man” but I’m not going to. He *is* a stupid man and sadly he’s representative of many people who think of themselves as “intelligent, free thinkers”, despite their obvious lack of cognitive ability. 

He isn’t trying to gaslight me with his statements. He isn’t smart enough for that. He simply believes the first thing he hears on any given subject, which is normally from Farage, Rees-Mogg, Johnson etc via talk radio while he’s behind the wheel of his white van. 

He’s naive enough to believe these people have things in common with him. “They’re good normal people with common sense, not like you, lefty idealists.” 

He doesn’t seem to understand that someone like Rishi Sunak and his £700m personal fortune doesn’t actually have the best interests of a 56-year-old data- communications engineer from the. South West at the forefront of their mind. 

He likes to paint himself as an “individual thinker” who gets his news from a variety of sources, when in fact he just parrots the views of other people who have ulterior motives, without realising there is any motive. 

“I’m open to reading any source,” he says. I bought him a subscription to Private Eye. He’s had a dozen copies and hasn’t read any. 

Any information he dislikes or which doesn’t fit his world view is dismissed. If it’s from me it’s because I’m a “woolly jumpered idealist” who “doesn’t live in the real world”. 

If it’s from the BBC it’s because the BBC is “so left wing” - despite the fact Laura Kuennsberg is its chief reporter. Despite the fact it chose not to run a story about the Supreme Court finding Matt Hancock guilty of *actual corruption* in its evening bulletins. 

“The BBC has a left wing agenda,” he says. He then tells me I’m being daft if I suggest the Barclay brothers or Murdoch may have an agenda. 

Despite all this, yesterday when he became frustrated with me he said, “you think I’m right wing.” I do. He then told me he thought of himself as “a centrist, left of centre actually.” 

My jaw hit the floor. This is from a man who wants Bulgarians out of the country because “they nick tools on sites I work on. You wouldn’t know, you don’t live in the real world like I do.”  

A man who makes jokes about CSE, or that people who live in council houses don’t shower. A man who thinks bankers should get tax breaks on their million pound bonuses because they “keep our economy strong.” A man who told me (a teacher in a school with a higher than average number of disadvantaged students) that it’s a myth there are children who *need* a free school meal.

A man who thinks Covid is “just the flu” and that the figures for deaths and hospitalisation are fabricated. Of those he does accept died of Covid, he says, “most of those people would have died anyway so it’s just natural selection.” Quite the compassionate socialist.

Yesterday I had to explain the concept of empathy to him and he *could not* get it. 

If this man sees himself as a left of centre socialist, and sees his son (LD councillor so hardly a radical communist) as a “woke snowflake lefty” (his words) then the entire political spectrum has shifted massively to the right. 

I fear this is the case. There are many more like my Dad. Angry men who don’t really know what they’re angry about, but nevertheless blame others for it. Lately the EU has been a handy scapegoat. Prior to 2016 he had no view on the EU. 

However, he, like so many others, is far too easily manipulated by people with ulterior motives who channel his anger towards their own goals - which are inevitably their own enrichment, to the detriment of the finances or quality of life of the people they exploit. 

So why does this work? Because all too often men like my Dad have an inbuilt, extremely strong and inexplicable sense that their opinion on anything is important and correct. He honestly believes everything he says with 100% certainty. 

I think I’m intelligent. I have a degree in journalism and a post-grad qualification in education. My A-levels were in History, Politics, Media, English and Critical Thinking. I am a district councillor. I feel this all qualifies me as relatively knowledgeable when it comes to the news cycle but I don’t claim anything like 100% certainty on any topic. Unlike my dad. 

It almost seems like a superpower to be as certain as angry men like him are. So that’s why I feel we’re fucked as a nation. Johnson and his cronies could achieve anything they want as long as they continue to tap into the power bank of angry white *whatever it is*. 

I too know many people like this, which is how I predicted the outcome of Brexit rather than assuming that they would vote remain because it was in their best interests, luckily for me I'm not related to them.

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, Losing my hair said:

I too know many people like this, which is how I predicted the outcome of Brexit rather than assuming that they would vote remain because it was in their best interests, luckily for me I'm not related to them.

around 10 years before the EU ref I got into a bit of a discussion about 'the state of the country' with a neighbour at the local. He told me with quite a straight face that his friends were moving to Spain because "England's changed".

All it really shows is that some people are immune to the facts and their minds aren't going to be changed. (and it's worth realising that similar exists on 'the left' too).

There's little point trying to reach those people for their votes, but between 'the left' and those who won't have their minds changed are people open to being convinced.

[SwedgeAntilles]

 

The James Milner of politics speaks

[Ryan1984]

21 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

 

The James Milner of politics speaks

James Milner. Solid, reliable and astute in various positions but possibly considered a bit boring.

Three-time Premier League and one-time Champions League winner. Let’s hope Starmer follows Milner’s victorious reign.

[Gilgamesh69]

 

Starmer 🙄

 

 

[SwedgeAntilles]

6 minutes ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

 

Starmer 🙄

 

 

Really good that.

I wanted Starmer to do well, and I've given him the benefit of the doubt for a while now, but he's really lost me in the last few days, culminating with his pathetic reaction to the Hancock situation this morning. 

He talks about being a man of values, well it's time to exhibit some principles which aren't the result of a focus group.

[Gilgamesh69]

6 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

He talks about being a man of values, well it's time to exhibit some principles which aren't the result of a focus group.

I really don't think he has any values or ideology anymore. Perhaps long ago he did, but now he just comes off as a generic career politician