news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

1 hour ago, cellar said:

Good for him, I hope he does well. He's already proven he's someone who gets things done so I imagine he will.

He's doing well at nailing the corrupt Freeport geezers in his area, not!

[steviewevie]

the bloke standing in Selby (who looks about 12) is also called Keir.

Coincidence?! I think not. 

 

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, hodgey123 said:

I understand the argument about wanting to get into power, I really do. But doing that at the moment does not require you to completely abandon all of your pledges and principles on the way. I will still vote Labour and encourage everyone I know to do so, but it is definitely getting to the stage where the differences between the parties are a lot fewer than I would like. It is also perhaps very trusting to believe Starmer will suddenly veer to the left once in power when he has not shown an ounce of left-leaning thinking in the run-up to power.

He has shown plenty of left leaning thinking, it may not be left enough for some on the left, but it’s what he can realistically offer to build the necessary coalition.

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

He has shown plenty of left leaning thinking, it may not be left enough for some on the left, but it’s what he can realistically offer to build the necessary coalition.

in like he thought it would be nice but would not be fiscally responsible or something?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

He has shown plenty of left leaning thinking, it may not be left enough for some on the left, but it’s what he can realistically offer to build the necessary coalition.

He built a coalition in my heart a long time ago. 

[steviewevie]

So...either Starmer is f**king sh*t....or he's pretending to be f**king sh*t in order to get elected nudge nudge wink wink say no more.

[lazyred]

3 hours ago, hodgey123 said:

I understand the argument about wanting to get into power, I really do. But doing that at the moment does not require you to completely abandon all of your pledges and principles on the way. I will still vote Labour and encourage everyone I know to do so, but it is definitely getting to the stage where the differences between the parties are a lot fewer than I would like. It is also perhaps very trusting to believe Starmer will suddenly veer to the left once in power when he has not shown an ounce of left-leaning thinking in the run-up to power.

I'd argue they are abandoning specific pledges but not principles. They have to reassure the electorate to achieve a record swing to gain a majority. I expect a Labour government to be biased toward things I'd like to see. The tories don't get in and make all thier changes on day 1. They make lots of small changes over 2 or 3 terms that move society in their favour. Blair got in with public finances in a better state than now but still kept the Tory spending plans in the first couple of years. After 3 terms there was a big improvement in public services and benefits.

 

 

[steviewevie]

10 minutes ago, lazyred said:

I'd argue they are abandoning specific pledges but not principles. They have to reassure the electorate to achieve a record swing to gain a majority. I expect a Labour government to be biased toward things I'd like to see. The tories don't get in and make all thier changes on day 1. They make lots of small changes over 2 or 3 terms that move society in their favour. Blair got in with public finances in a better state than now but still kept the Tory spending plans in the first couple of years. After 3 terms there was a big improvement in public services and benefits.

 

 

Blair came in on a high...got an extra boost with his looking sad people princess thing...and then got more and more disappointing until he ended up as the antichrist.

Starmer won't be that high to start with.

And Blair actually inherited a growing economy...Starmer is inheriting a right sh*t show.

[Guest]

Starmer would argue that the overriding pledge was making the Labour Party electable again, if you go by polling and the locals he has done that.

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Starmer would argue that the overriding pledge was making the Labour Party electable again, if you go by polling and the locals he has done that.

by making them just like that party that keeps winning?

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

by making them just like that party that keeps winning?

No, he’s brought them closer to the electorate and addressed anti-semitism. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

No, he’s brought them closer to the electorate and addressed anti-semitism. 

ok. Fair enough. Just hope Labour can lead and not follow when in power.

[Guest]

Just now, steviewevie said:

ok. Fair enough. Just hope Labour can lead and not follow when in power.

By definition of being in government they will do. But yes judge them when they are in power not what they say to get power. 

[Crazyfool01]

wow ... bit of blue on blue 

 

[Neil]

27 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

ok. Fair enough. Just hope Labour can lead and not follow when in power.

all govt have to follow the electorate if they want to stay in power, that doesn't mean follow every whim, it means listen to  their thoughts.

[fraybentos1]

5 hours ago, Neil said:

it needs something else in order to happen. do you have a full policy or just a wish?

so if its going to be paid for how's it being paid for?what are you going to cut to pay for it?

Christ alive. An ostensibly left wing guy here saying I need to justify and fully cost the reversal of a policy that would lift 250,000 children out of poverty for a mere 1.3 billion, that is no amount of money in the grand scheme of things

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Neil said:

all govt have to follow the electorate if they want to stay in power, that doesn't mean follow every whim, it means listen to  their thoughts.

It’s traditionally how parties win power especially for the first term. It’s partly why Labour winning a 2nd term in 2001 was such a big deal.

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, Neil said:

all govt have to follow the electorate if they want to stay in power, that doesn't mean follow every whim, it means listen to  their thoughts.

they also need to lead and persuade....can't keep pandering to some majority.

[steviewevie]

although I guess that what "For the many not the few" was all about!

 🙂

[Neil]

8 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Christ alive. An ostensibly left wing guy here saying I need to justify and fully cost the reversal of a policy that would lift 250,000 children out of poverty for a mere 1.3 billion, that is no amount of money in the grand scheme of things

its a big amount of money for the facility that will lose it. and would it lift all those kids oot of poverty? - there's more than a single factor for their poverty.

so lets cut a mere £1.3bn from the NHS. AS LABOUR LEADER WOULD YOU ADVOCATE THAT??

[Neil]

7 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

they also need to lead and persuade....can't keep pandering to some majority.

no, but they do need to hear the electorate, the electorate demands financial competence, and not a truss-f**k-up?

[Guest]

Just now, Neil said:

its a big amount of money for the facility that will lose it. and would it lift all those kids oot of poverty? - there's more than a single factor for their poverty.

so lets cut a mere £1.3bn from the NHS. AS LABOUR LEADER WOULD YOU ADVOCATE THAT??

Labour are coming up with their own plan that will revamp UC and address the concerns about the cap. They are going to do something to address the poverty issue.

Notice this is all about Labour, no comment at all about the Tories that have actually implemented this policy though. 

[Neil]

Just now, Ozanne said:

Labour are coming up with their own plan that will revamp UC and address the concerns about the cap. They are going to do something to address the poverty issue.

Notice this is all about Labour, no comment at all about the Tories that have actually implemented this policy though. 

the two child thing started with child benefit, and then was extended to UC.

[Ryan1984]

Twitter is calling Sir Keir Starmer Sir Kid Starmer. Pretty impressive to get that from your opposition’s policy. Meanwhile, Rishi is getting away with destroying people’s university dreams because he has a petty agenda:

https://twitter.com/gavinmuellerphd/status/1680909287663468546?s=46&t=0L-HQje0RJTtiVIvA-C-dQ

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

the two child thing started with child benefit, and then was extended to UC.

Yeah indeed and Jon Ashworth is finalising a plan to revamp the system which as I shared earlier will target help to families that need it. Will it be better than scrapping the cap? No idea because it hasn’t been announced and we have no manifestos yet but there is at least work being done on it.

That’s what real parties do that are serious about governing they don’t just go around rescinding every poor policy, they use the opportunity to make the entire system better.

Again, it’s odd how there’s zero benefit of the doubt or patience given to Labour yet the Tories get none of this.