Jump to content

news & politics:discussion

zahidf

By zahidf,
in Discussions

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Neil

    4946

  • steviewevie

    13383

  • Crazyfool01

    2320

  • fraybentos1

    1312

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Kurosagi
Kurosagi

Don't post on here often, but read it every day. Can't sit by and watch @Ozanne getting picked on for doing little other than make a polite 'point of order' request without my saying something. F

Justiceforcedave
Justiceforcedave

I made a playlist.

maelzoid
maelzoid

Obviously horrible news. But I think pointing the finger at Rayner is not only unfair to her, but also serves to help silence critics of the Tories. Don't forget that over the years, BJ's words h

Posted Images

mattiloy Mentor

mattiloy

Posted
Posted
On 6/11/2023 at 7:39 PM, Ozanne said:

https://electionreview.labourtogether.uk/chapters/the-scale-of-the-challenge#:~:text=over recent elections.-,To win a parliamentary majority of one at the next,123 seats across the UK
 

‘Labour faces a substantial challenge at the next election. To be the largest Party we would need a swing to Labour of 1997 proportions. To win a majority of 1 we would need to increase our number of MPs by 60 per-cent up by 123 seats, something no major Party has ever done.’

It not as simple as just putting a cross in a box, if you need a large swing to win then it means you have to convince many more people to change how they voted last time round which can be hard and it’s partly why swings of the scale needed aren’t common. 


Or maybe a swing even larger than 1997, maybe a swing of say 2017 proportions.

Or maybe a swing like the SNP achieved in 2015 in Scotland.

Democracy and the climate have a lot in common suffering from decades and decades of unrelenting consumer capitalism, the patterns, as with the weather so too in voting, are bound to become less predictable as the system comes under more stress.

The Labour right eternally LARPing some weird battlefield reenactment of the 90s and therefore being completely unable to engage with voters in 2023 is what will cost them their majority.

IMG_0200.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fraybentos1 Grand Master

fraybentos1

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, mattiloy said:


Or maybe a swing even larger than 1997, maybe a swing of say 2017 proportions.

Or maybe a swing like the SNP achieved in 2015 in Scotland.

Democracy and the climate have a lot in common suffering from decades and decades of unrelenting consumer capitalism, the patterns, as with the weather so too in voting, are bound to become less predictable as the system comes under more stress.

The Labour right eternally LARPing some weird battlefield reenactment of the 90s and therefore being completely unable to engage with voters in 2023 is what will cost them their majority.

IMG_0200.jpeg

Yeah and May still beat him. No idea what point you're trying to make? Lot's of people voted for Corbyn- is that it? If that's evidence of him being amazing, then what does that make Theresa May who got more votes and seats. You know, the actual thing that decides elections..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LJS Proficient

LJS

Posted
Posted
On 6/12/2023 at 9:44 PM, Rufus Gwertigan said:

Should that not be "Story by @pippacrerar and I"?

f**king sloppy journalism.

You are wrong. "Story by @pippacrerar and me" is grammatically correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewevie Grand Master

steviewevie

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, mattiloy said:


Or maybe a swing even larger than 1997, maybe a swing of say 2017 proportions.

Or maybe a swing like the SNP achieved in 2015 in Scotland.

Democracy and the climate have a lot in common suffering from decades and decades of unrelenting consumer capitalism, the patterns, as with the weather so too in voting, are bound to become less predictable as the system comes under more stress.

The Labour right eternally LARPing some weird battlefield reenactment of the 90s and therefore being completely unable to engage with voters in 2023 is what will cost them their majority.

IMG_0200.jpeg

yes, Labour won an enormous victory in 2017.

Actually...no one really talks much about that result. There was a lot in it, May's disastrous election campaign and her dementia tax (actually a wealth tax to pay for social care), the whole brexit thing where no side was talking about stopping it back then, the fact that no one thought labour had a chance of winning...but also that maybe a lot of people actually liked Labour's manifesto?

And we can argue about it to the end of time...whether Labour's lead would have kept increasing, whether another leader would have done better or worse, if less labour infighting,  if no Maybot and dementia tax uturn...but all hypothetical, we'll never know..

Edited by steviewevie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes, Labour won an enormous victory in 2017.

Actually...no one really talks much about that result. There was a lot in it, May's disastrous election campaign and her dementia tax (actually a wealth tax to pay for social care), the whole brexit thing where no side was talking about stopping it back, the fact that no one thought labour had a chance of winning...but also that maybe a lot of people actually liked Labour's manifesto?

And we can argue about it to the end of time...whether Labour's lead would have kept increasing, whether another leader would have done better or worse, less labour infighting,  no Maybot and dementia tax uturn...but all hypothetical, we'll never know..

After all that Corbyn still couldn’t win the election. Labour lost in 2017, it’s that simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...