UK Politics

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

Who could labour pick who would be really popular with the electorate? Maybe a flip  flopper like Burnham who flips left to centre when ever it suits him, then what happens when he is on power and he has to let people down.

I don’t see Starmer as popular or unpopular, people (in general) are not actively voting against him like they did with Jez. Instead of promising the earth (and letting everyone down) his approach seems to be to give him the opportunity and he will show what he can do in power.

Yeah, approach seems to be under promise and win election on back of Tories being total shite...which will likely mean a low turnout.

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

At this point the Tories look f**ked. The one thing they can hold onto is the don't knows in polls and low turnouts in these by-elections.

You're a betting man, how many seats will the Tories end up on (range of 10)?

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

There is an element of luck but you have to have that to win in politics but yeah I agree it's not all luck. He has done wonders to get the Labour to the position it is in.

 

Some polls show he is moderately popular but yeah he isn't the most popular politician ever but you don't need to be you just need to beat the person/party in front of you.

We've had our populist, that was Johnson and didn't work out very well.

doesn't need to be popular, just needs to look like he's up to the job.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

doesn't need to be popular, just needs to look like he's up to the job.

Yeah exactly, you'd think the potential end of Tory rule would be a happy thing but I guess not for some.

[steviewevie]

33 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

You're a betting man, how many seats will the Tories end up on (range of 10)?

203

[Neil]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Yeah, approach seems to be under promise

better than overpromising and being unable to deliver (sunak).

[pink_triangle]

13 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Who said anything about pro Corbyn voters? Not me.

Many who were interviewed were far from left wing Corbynites

Who were they then, what will these people do in a general election? At the end of the day if they live in the majority of constituencies in the country it won’t matter if they don’t vote, unfortunately that is the way our political system works.

Out of interest if your not a fan of Starmer, who do you think would be doing a better job?

 

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:

So you still ignore the watering down or scrapping policies part and instead try a childish little jibe.

Get your head out the sand and stop blindly supporting a party that are now so like the Tories under Cameron we might as well have Cameron back. Labour ceased to be Labour when Labour became too scared to have any opinions or ideas that some in the media might attack.
 

Fight me!

Edited February 17, 2024 by kaosmark2
removed quoted snark

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

So you still ignore the watering down or scrapping policies part and instead try a childish little jibe.

Get your head out the sand and stop blindly supporting a party that are now so like the Tories under Cameron we might as well have Cameron back. Labour ceased to be Labour when Labour became too scared to have any opinions or ideas that some in the media might attack.

Isn't it about time for another one of your 'I put people on ignore' posts LOL

I take it the lack of any further mention about by-elections votes means you realise you continue that nonsense anymore  

You’re the one that pretty much said a few months that you would vote Green even if it meant getting the Tories back in all because you don’t like Starmer. You would risk the Tories back in over a party that will actively change this country for the better. In my mind you are a Tory enabler. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Going back to the original post you shared - perhaps once in awhile you might like to fact check what you post.

Since Starmer has been Labour Leader there have been 21 by-elections.

Labour won 12 and lost 9

Still, don't let facts get in the way of your Starmer love fest

Sorry but Starmer is the most successful by-election Labour leader and much as that might annoy you!

Edited February 17, 2024 by Ozanne

[steviewevie]

28 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Going back to the original post you shared - perhaps once in awhile you might like to fact check what you post.

Since Starmer has been Labour Leader there have been 21 by-elections.

Labour won 12 and lost 9

Still, don't let facts get in the way of your Starmer love fest

the numbers in that tweet are gains/losses.

[kaosmark2]

Locking the thread for one hour so people will cool down. 

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:

I am not a fan of Labour or the Tories - 75 years of abject failure more or less between them. So as for who leads Labour, I really do not care as the party has lost it's way and is simply becoming a party simialr to Cameron's Tories.

The UK needs change, real change, and not just more years of the same policies that have failed being revamped and retried and failing again.

If I could have my perfect world then the Greens in power but as that will not happen in what is left of my lifetime I hope for a hung parliament so we can get lots of parties workig  together for the UK and not working for their party and it's backers.

I don’t see what you think we would get from a hung parliament. It would probably be working with Lib Dem’s and SNP. I don’t think they would move things in the policy direction you would hope 

[fraybentos1]

4 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I don’t see what you think we would get from a hung parliament. It would probably be working with Lib Dem’s and SNP. I don’t think they would move things in the policy direction you would hope 

vague hope of PR which defo won't happen with a labour majority

[Neil]

3 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I hope for a hung parliament so we can get lots of parties workig  together for the UK and not working for their party and it's backers.

all will work for their party and try to achieve their manifesto promises, and not have them watered down by other parties.its a bad solution cos no one gets what they voted for, and the arsehole parties will continue to be those arseholes9as happened with 2010 coalition)

[Neil]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

vague hope of PR which defo won't happen with a labour majority

we need a full programme of electoral reform, not bits and pieces forced by circumstance(we'd end up with a fudge).

[fraybentos1]

6 minutes ago, Neil said:

we need a full programme of electoral reform, not bits and pieces forced by circumstance(we'd end up with a fudge).

well Labour are never gonna offer it so the only way it would hypothetically happen is if it was forced by circumstances. Labour were recently talking about proper Lords reform (another thing they have back tracked on) so I am sure that could be included in some sort of package.

Changing to STV doesn't even change much in terms of number of MPs etc, it isn't that hard to switch- other countries have done it. Think NZ did a while back.

[kaosmark2]

23 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I don’t see what you think we would get from a hung parliament. It would probably be working with Lib Dem’s and SNP. I don’t think they would move things in the policy direction you would hope 

How do you think people should apply pressure to Labour to actually stand for something though? I see Starmer as about as left/right as Cameron, albeit he won't have a chancellor that's anywhere near as right-wing as Gideon. But I see Starmer enabling, whether passively or actively, abuse against minorities that includes myself and my loved ones, while also having a general set of policies that to me reads as right-of Blair.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Firstly I refer you to my other post about by elections that proves I did not ignore it - oh dear, don't you look silly.

Also I never said that about the Greens - in fact it was you who said it accusing me and others of backing  the Tories by voting Green.

And there you go alienating the very people Labour needs to vote for them by pathetic childish acusations of being Tory Enablers.

There is one person on here who does more harm to the Labour cause and that is you. It is you as you refuse to accept anything other than they are perfect and use selective statistics that 'prove' your point.

This forum became the Ozanne and Stevie thread and any newcomers get attacked - since I limited my posts I watched and saw you do it to others.

You are nasty little bullies who think this place is theirs and only their views count and when anyone dares to stand up to you the insults fly.

You and the Fish man really are no different - but you cannot see that.
 

Sorry for earlier on, I got a bit carried away. 

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Neil said:

we need a full programme of electoral reform, not bits and pieces forced by circumstance(we'd end up with a fudge).

I think we might get some of PR at the end of Labours 2nd term if they get a majority at the next election. It would bring some of the green voters on side and then protect against a Tory majority. 

[mattiloy]

29 minutes ago, Neil said:

all will work for their party and try to achieve their manifesto promises, and not have them watered down by other parties.its a bad solution cos no one gets what they voted for, and the arsehole parties will continue to be those arseholes9as happened with 2010 coalition)

Nobody gets what they vote for now.

The extreme apathy is largely caused by fptp.

Voters are expected to make all the compromise and vote for either one of the major parties that they hate least.

So you end up with low turnout where a unified fringe can end up dominating the agenda. As happens now.

Brexit would not have happened under PR.

[mattiloy]

14 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I think we might get some of PR at the end of Labours 2nd term if they get a majority at the next election. It would bring some of the green voters on side and then protect against a Tory majority. 

This wont happen. Starmer is a right wing authoritarian, he has no interest in advancing democracy or progressive politics.

[fraybentos1]

23 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I think we might get some of PR at the end of Labours 2nd term if they get a majority at the next election. It would bring some of the green voters on side and then protect against a Tory majority. 

This is just naivety tbh. Labour are always gonna flirt with it when the tories have been in power for a decade then the will abandon it as soon as they win a majority. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

This wont happen. Starmer is a right wing authoritarian, he has no interest in advancing democracy or progressive politics.

It probably won’t, history indicates it won’t but if he feels he needs those votes for the following election then it’s a possibility. 

[Guest]

A hung-Parliament runs the risk of the government collapsing and allowing the Tories back in any following election. The best thing for the country would be for Labour to win a majority, sort the issues facing the country and then at the end of the 2nd term enact PR. We can’t run the risk of the Tories getting back in considering how they’ve gutted the country.