news & politics:discussion

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, Ozanne said:

 

It's a good policy. The way the US stopped acid rain and O-Zone layer damage wasn't to ban the pollution, but to codify the cost of the pollution so they couldn't legally argue against it.

[steviewevie]

40 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

People talk about Tory voters staying at home, but a huge amount of the red wall was Labour voters staying at home because they couldn't stomach Corbyn. A lot of those seats went from 35k Labour 15k Tory, to 20k Tory 18k Labour. Yes it was a 22k swing, but you'd expect 15k of those Labour voters to come back almost by default. There's definite potential to misjudge that and take it for granted, but a huge amount of Starmer's rhetoric has gone towards reassuring what he thinks those voters want. Time will tell but I think Corbyn, Bojo, and Brexit all created some quite unique effects and the real swing to shift against is more like 2015/2017 than 2019.

Maybe part of holding on for a winter election is Tories thinking that will advantage them, but between it being easier for students to vote than May/June (no exams and known living location), and disillusionment with Sunak from both ends of the Tory base, I think it's electoral suicide and they're just waiting for some international Deus Ex Machina to save them.

Maybe they're also waiting for things to improve, inflation to reduce further, interest rates to start coming down, NHS waiting times to reduce...and then they'll say yes it's been tough but we've turned a corner and things are on the up...don't let this labour lot ruin it with reckless borrowing etc.

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Maybe they're also waiting for things to improve, inflation to reduce further, interest rates to start coming down, NHS waiting times to reduce...and then they'll say yes it's been tough but we've turned a corner and things are on the up...don't let this labour lot ruin it with reckless borrowing etc.

There's a  pretty easy reply to that though . They cant claim to be competent at anything now 

[Skip997]

11 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

There's a  pretty easy reply to that though . They cant claim to be competent at anything now 

They're incredibly competent at what they're aiming for.

Make no mistake, it's very difficult to become an M.P. without being intelligent.

Edited January 22, 2024 by Skip997

[kaosmark2]

8 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

They're incredibly competent at what they're aiming for.

Make no mistake, it's very difficult to become an M.P. without being intelligent.

[kaosmark2]

24 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Maybe they're also waiting for things to improve, inflation to reduce further, interest rates to start coming down, NHS waiting times to reduce...and then they'll say yes it's been tough but we've turned a corner and things are on the up...don't let this labour lot ruin it with reckless borrowing etc.

NHS waiting times won't reduce though, the rest of it might happen a little, but even some inflation still feels like higher prices and is hurting.

I think part of what they're waiting for is the impact of some tax cuts to actually hit people's paycheck post-budget, but I can't see that being enough. Maybe it saves them a few seats.

[Guest]

 

[steviewevie]

14 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

NHS waiting times won't reduce though, the rest of it might happen a little, but even some inflation still feels like higher prices and is hurting.

I think part of what they're waiting for is the impact of some tax cuts to actually hit people's paycheck post-budget, but I can't see that being enough. Maybe it saves them a few seats.

I thought waiting times are already coming down?

They also might get a flight off to Rwanda...and you never know the number of small boats my reduce...

All massive unlikely hypotheticals of course...but this will be what they are hoping for before next election.

[Guest]

The Tories are in a worse position in the polls now then they were at the start of 1997. 

[Crazyfool01]

1 hour ago, Skip997 said:

They're incredibly competent at what they're aiming for.

Make no mistake, it's very difficult to become an M.P. without being intelligent.

disagree , the tory party are mostly dimwits . Not always a fan of Labour but they do at least seem to posses brains and Starmer pretty intelligent 

[steviewevie]

you definitely need certain skills to be an MP... no way I could do it, and I am ridiculously intelligent.

[steviewevie]

 

[Neil]

5 hours ago, steviewevie said:

never was something so misnamed.

[mattiloy]

6 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

People talk about Tory voters staying at home, but a huge amount of the red wall was Labour voters staying at home because they couldn't stomach Corbyn. A lot of those seats went from 35k Labour 15k Tory, to 20k Tory 18k Labour. Yes it was a 22k swing, but you'd expect 15k of those Labour voters to come back almost by default. There's definite potential to misjudge that and take it for granted, but a huge amount of Starmer's rhetoric has gone towards reassuring what he thinks those voters want. Time will tell but I think Corbyn, Bojo, and Brexit all created some quite unique effects and the real swing to shift against is more like 2015/2017 than 2019.

Maybe part of holding on for a winter election is Tories thinking that will advantage them, but between it being easier for students to vote than May/June (no exams and known living location), and disillusionment with Sunak from both ends of the Tory base, I think it's electoral suicide and they're just waiting for some international Deus Ex Machina to save them.

You’re right, but only because Corbyn overperformed in 2017. Corbyn’s red wall vote in 2019 tracked in most places with the Labour vote in 2015. A return to trend.

Examining the 2015 vote in my home constituency (red wall, labour) and those around it - it seems that Miliband was lucky then that ukip split the tory vote. Otherwise the tumbling of the red wall would have happened then.

Theres also a pattern of Lib dem going from a consistent 10-15% in the 2000s to being virtually non existent after the coalition.

I guess that lib dem vote got divided between labour and tories in 2015. Then probs in 2017 they got behind Corbyn a bit more and the ukip lot stayed at home, then in 2019 the lib dems stayed at home and the ukip lot swung behind Boris.

I’d guess that the morale amongst the Brexit mob and the stomach for another fight has to be on the wane after almost a decade of it, whilst the liberals have been pissing their knickers over brexit and boris and all that for years now and will come out in force.

So my prediction is that Labour’s vote in terms of numbers stays pretty static (2019 + liberals - left wing folk who stay at home) but then the tories’ numbers will fall off a cliff. So who knows in terms of swing - that depends on the turnout and the performance of the minor parties. But quite big.

Its as in the bag as anything has ever been in the bag. It would take a phenomenal f**k up to lose it from here… 😁

[Ryan1984]

https://x.com/kayburley/status/1749345716999536950?s=46&t=0L-HQje0RJTtiVIvA-C-dQ

[Guest]

Corbyn underperformed in 2017, considering his Labour were up against a truly dreadful campaigner in May, they really should have done better. I think most other Labour leaders at that stage would’ve ended up Labour as the largest party at least. Corbyn was probably as popular as he was gonna get yet still couldn’t beat Theresa May. 

[Neil]

22 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

You’re right, but only because Corbyn overperformed in 2017. Corbyn’s red wall vote in 2019 tracked in most places with the Labour vote in 2015. A return to trend.

Examining the 2015 vote in my home constituency (red wall, labour) and those around it - it seems that Miliband was lucky then that ukip split the tory vote. Otherwise the tumbling of the red wall would have happened then.

Theres also a pattern of Lib dem going from a consistent 10-15% in the 2000s to being virtually non existent after the coalition.

I guess that lib dem vote got divided between labour and tories in 2015. Then probs in 2017 they got behind Corbyn a bit more and the ukip lot stayed at home, then in 2019 the lib dems stayed at home and the ukip lot swung behind Boris.

I’d guess that the morale amongst the Brexit mob and the stomach for another fight has to be on the wane after almost a decade of it, whilst the liberals have been pissing their knickers over brexit and boris and all that for years now and will come out in force.

So my prediction is that Labour’s vote in terms of numbers stays pretty static (2019 + liberals - left wing folk who stay at home) but then the tories’ numbers will fall off a cliff. So who knows in terms of swing - that depends on the turnout and the performance of the minor parties. But quite big.

Its as in the bag as anything has ever been in the bag. It would take a phenomenal f**k up to lose it from here… 😁

you need to stop talking about the greens winning Bristol north cos it won't exist at the next election: i think  it becomes Bristol central.

[mattiloy]

Starmer is in many ways Labour’s Theresa May.

[Neil]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

Starmer is in many ways Labour’s Theresa May.

he's got a better idea of how to win! don't think we'll see him dancing!

[steviewevie]

8 hours ago, mattiloy said:

Starmer is in many ways Labour’s Theresa May.

he's Labour's Cameron (if he wins).

Corbyn was Labour's Michael Howard.

[steviewevie]

More room for big tax cuts.

[steviewevie]

everyone wants a two state solution except the actual people in charge.

[lost]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

everyone wants a two state solution except the actual people in charge.

No need for states after the apocalypse I guess:

 

[steviewevie]

 

[mattiloy]

Idiot Streeting.

1) so the solution is presumably to spend a roughly equivalent amount on care in the community - 0bn saved

2) the solution is presumably to spend a lot more on training new staff (whilst also paying recruitment agencies in the meantime) - an initial 0bn saved (savings possible perhaps after the length of the labour parliament)

3) agree that outsourcing is more expensive and less effective than insourcing but spend will probs be roughly equivalent for the first years during transition before dropping a bit, maybe to 60% of the quoted sum. In any case - an initial 0bn saved

4) 32mil - fair enough.

5) Centralising supply of equipment a fine Idea but likely to end up in the middle, rather than at the bottom of the price range so if they’re quoting 1bn in savings, halve it.

 

I think all of this is worth doing, but its not going to free up much money in the immediate term when the NHS is in fairly acute need. Get the chequebook out Wesley!!!