news & politics:discussion

[steviewevie]

26 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I want him to acknowledge what the "bad apples" phrase is in full when talking about police failings. Something along the lines of "to help restore trust in our many great police officers, we will launch an investigation and an independent complaints commission to ensure that whistle blowing on bad practices feels safe again". 

I mean, I'd love it if he actually said fuck the police, but I wanted him to acknowledge they're fallible, and couch or in political language.

Maybe he will, he has to win an election first. 

[kaosmark2]

25 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Labour policies. There’s a lot of them these days. 

I'm not sure "we'll undo the shit Tories have done post Bojo" is detailed policy or just raw common sense.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

I'm not sure "well undo the shit Tories have done post Bojo" is detailed policy or just raw common sense.

This is yet more Labour policy, more onshore wind is a good thing and it’s great to see this be a defining Labour policy.

[kaosmark2]

39 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

This is yet more Labour policy, more onshore wind is a good thing and it’s great to see this be a defining Labour policy.

"The Tories banned onshore wind, we won't" is not a detailed policy other than "undo Tory". It's a good thing, but it's not feeling positive and inspirational.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

"The Tories banned onshore wind, we won't" is not a detailed policy other than "undo Tory". It's a good thing, but it's not feeling positive and inspirational.

It is clearly detailed policy considering the jobs it’ll create, progress it’ll make on the energy crises and tackling of nimbyism. It’s ok to say it’s a good idea and leave it there; you don’t have to search for a problem. 

[ian the worm]

Only one Truss* till Christmas 🎄 
 

*45 days

[kaosmark2]

47 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It is clearly detailed policy considering the jobs it’ll create, progress it’ll make on the energy crises and tackling of nimbyism. It’s ok to say it’s a good idea and leave it there; you don’t have to search for a problem. 

It's an underdeveloped policy. That article doesn't say how he's going to deincentivise NIMBYism, without creating resentment elsewhere, it doesn't name target locations.

It's a perfectly adequate policy for an opposition 18 months away from an election. It's not a detailed or elaborate policy, and it isn't well-defined enough to say that this is a mid/long-term solution for a problem that is getting worse now.

[steviewevie]

Some bullshit for you

 

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

It's an underdeveloped policy. That article doesn't say how he's going to deincentivise NIMBYism, without creating resentment elsewhere, it doesn't name target locations.

It's a perfectly adequate policy for an opposition 18 months away from an election. It's not a detailed or elaborate policy, and it isn't well-defined enough to say that this is a mid/long-term solution for a problem that is getting worse now.

It’s an article in an online newspaper going over 1 policy aspect it’s not going to be a thesis in cutting down emissions of greenhouse gases.

You were moaning earlier about Starmer not saying something specific about the Police after their actions against climate change protestors. Then when Starmer announces more renewable energy plans which would go some way to alleviate the climate change protestors issues you also moan. He can’t win. 

[kaosmark2]

9 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’s an article in an online newspaper going over 1 policy aspect it’s not going to be a thesis in cutting down emissions of greenhouse gases.

You were moaning earlier about Starmer not saying something specific about the Police after their actions against climate change protestors. Then when Starmer announces more renewable energy plans which would go some way to alleviate the climate change protestors issues you also moan. He can’t win. 

I know it's hard to get track of prime ministers nowadays, but I'm not who Starmer needs too win against.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I know it's hard to get track of prime ministers nowadays, but I'm not who Starmer needs too win against.

I dare say no matter what he does you wouldn’t be happy which is a shame as there’s some really good policies on climate change there. 

[kaosmark2]

12 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I dare say no matter what he does you wouldn’t be happy which is a shame as there’s some really good policies on climate change there. 

Actually, I was quite happy with him as recently as 2 months ago. I just don't like when he sides with abusive police or terfs.

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Actually, I was quite happy with him as recently as 2 months ago. I just don't like when he sides with abusive police or terfs.

Well the policies he’s announced for climate change will mean the police probably won’t be needed which takes away that aspect of your concerns so let’s be happy that he’s announced good policies. 

[steviewevie]

and into the recession we go...

[Guest]

Good job Tories!

[Neil]

14 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I want him to acknowledge what the "bad apples" phrase is in full when talking about police failings. Something along the lines of "to help restore trust in our many great police officers, we will launch an investigation and an independent complaints commission to ensure that whistle blowing on bad practices feels safe again". 

I mean, I'd love it if he actually said fuck the police, but I wanted him to acknowledge they're fallible, and couch or in political language.

they keep changing the independent investigation of police, problem is its never independent. and its always shit.

[Guest]

Where are these ‘sunlit uplands’ we were promised?

[kaosmark2]

10 hours ago, Ozanne said:

Well the policies he’s announced for climate change will mean the police probably won’t be needed which takes away that aspect of your concerns so let’s be happy that he’s announced good policies. 

I love the idea of the police not being needed except for dealing with climate protestors. Such a wonderful world.

[kaosmark2]

59 minutes ago, Neil said:

they keep changing the independent investigation of police, problem is its never independent. and its always shit.

Yup. Always. Because it's never independent.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I love the idea of the police not being needed except for dealing with climate protestors. Such a wonderful world.

So do you not like the idea of more onshore wind?

[kaosmark2]

22 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

So do you not like the idea of more onshore wind?

It's one of many necessary steps that are needed.

Starmer backing police is a very separate issue.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

It's one of many necessary steps that are needed.

Starmer backing police is a very separate issue.

If you like the idea of onshore wind then last night Starmer announced a Labour policy of increasing more onshore wind which you should check out, I’m sure you’ll be positive about it. 

[steviewevie]

Starmer obviously targetting voters in some of those swing seats in red wall and elsewhere that labour need to win back from the tories. To many on left some of it may sound abhorrent, but that is the tactic. You could argue it is a bad tactic as may lose left/liberal votes elsewhere, but I'm sure they take all this into account when they're number crunching and plotting strategies. People say that he worded it badly about the immigrants in NHS thing, but not sure it was a mistake at all.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Starmer obviously targetting voters in some of those swing seats in red wall and elsewhere that labour need to win back from the tories. To many on left some of it may sound abhorrent, but that is the tactic. You could argue it is a bad tactic as may lose left/liberal votes elsewhere, but I'm sure they take all this into account when they're number crunching and plotting strategies. People say that he worded it badly about the immigrants in NHS thing, but not sure it was a mistake at all.

Weirdly I just saw this which backs up what you are saying (I’m not saying you are this person 😂)

 

[lost]

some polling here: