He's seems pretty mild in his Israel position, tbh, but then anything less than rabid denunciations of Israel at every opportunity is too "zionist" for many.
Refusing to denounce a genocide is certainly too "zionist". Hard to see how he could be much weaker.
What matters, obviously, are his policies for the UK.
What are his policies on locking up grannies and secretly trying activists as terrorists?
This is going to come as a shock to some people, so brace yourselves and you may want to sit down with a perfumed handkerchief, but…
There are some voters who place other issues slightly above what’s happening in Gaza and Tel Aviv
I know… mad isn’t it, but there you go. What a world we live in today
😘 love to binners
I feel a lot of folk are projecting onto Burnham. Easy to do given his willingness to be everything to everyone and to adopt whatever policy positions he thinks his audience want even if it contradicts a previous position
We will find out of course but my bet is none of his slightly radical positions will happen. No nationalisation other than failing companies. "we can't afford it" No significant devolution, No PR for Westminster, No change to the Lords, No significant investment / stimulus to the economy
I do hope that my usual political predictions accuracy is kept up and as is common I am wrong 🙂
Of course no-one is obliged to join the Euro, that's just a favourite bogeyman of the inactivists.
New members are obliged to think about joining in the fullness of time after convergence has been achieved and they bother to get round to it. Just look at Sweden, 30 years membership and somehow they haven't got round to it yet. What do you think happened to their "have to join the euro" and how come they actually *haven't* joined the euro and show no signs of even considering it?
Burnham has made it clear he is going to follow the same redlines on the EU. No 4 freedoms but pretend we can get round that and have frictionless trade and travel
We will find out of course but my bet is none of his slightly radical positions will happen
Given who he has appointed as chief of staff and who gave up their seat for him I am a tad cynical.
Maybe he will pull a Starmer leadership contest approach and **** them over but we will see.
We will find out of course but my bet is none of his slightly radical positions will happen
Given who he has appointed as chief of staff and who gave up their seat for him I am a tad cynical.
Maybe he will pull a Starmer leadership contest approach and **** them over but we will see.
Yeah, It reeks of how Starmer was carefully managed into the leadership position, I hope I’m wrong and suffer righteous ridicule on here for my side eye opinion of him
There are some voters who place other issues slightly above what’s happening in Gaza and Tel Aviv
I'm not sure what point you're attempting to make - I suppose I should be grateful we've been spared a Monty Python meme. Are we just discussing whether Burnham will be popular with the man on the (nationalised) Clapham omnibus? Or whether he would make a "good" prime minister, according to a variety of metrics? Worth noting that Labour support among Muslim voters has gone off a cliff, and the support among other left-leaning segments of the population has also suffered, so some voters at least are concerned about what happens in Gaza, and indeed in Trafalgar Square and in the British courts.
so some voters at least are concerned about what happens in Gaza
No where near enough to make it a key policy area for a potential PM. For the large majority of voters in this country it only ranks slightly above Myanmar and the Uyghurs in China. Both equally repugnant persecutions of minorities, maybe Burnham should be denouncing these regimes every minute of the day as well. Wont leave him much time for issues UK voters really care about but at least he'd have the moral highground.
I would imagine that your typical voter couldn't point to Gaza on a map, using a map. STW is not a representative demographic.
Labours stance on Gaza has cost them a lot of votes. This is a fact. Its a signifi9cant part of the reason from the drop from 40% to 34%
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9e9ydj215yo
some voters at least are concerned about what happens in Gaza
I would imagine that your typical voter couldn't point to Gaza on a map, using a map. STW is not a representative demographic.
There's not that much interest/concern on this mostly middle class forum for Gaza/Palestinians though is there?.
I'm on a music production forum - it's one of the their main talking points that utterly dwarves stw interest in the matter, I'm on a uk hifi forum (mostly aged 50+) that you wouldn't expect to be a hotbed of interest for Gaza but it again dwarves what's on here, I'm on an electronics and design forum and similar there, same for forums such as Drowned in Sound (music forum) but I do agree with the fact that stw is an insignificant demographic
Wont leave him much time for issues UK voters really care about but at least he'd have the moral highground.
I believe, according to the sixth form, we have to refer to it as ‘winning the argument’
Wont win owt else, especially not an election, but never underestimate just how comforting it is to bask in the warm glow of your own righteousness from the opposition benches.
is Your Party still going, by the way? I lose track amongst all the Peoples Front of Judea/Judean Peoples Front infighting. I know they definitely care about Gaza though, so they should be nailed on to win the next General Election. Finger on the nations pulse and all that
For the large majority of voters in this country it only ranks slightly above Myanmar and the Uyghurs in China. Both equally repugnant persecutions of minorities, maybe Burnham should be denouncing these regimes every minute of the day as well.
I wasn't aware that such issues/conflicts were from an ally of ours that we support with arm sales and diplomatic ties/uk funding through suspect charitable donations etc but your poor attempt at equivalence is suitably noted and filed
PS - Thank god we have such a forum freeloader luminary as binners to highlight the splitters amongst us.......solidarity to you brother binners.
Anyway… away from the Middle East and back in the UK (apologies comrades), this seems like a great idea…
Labours stance on Gaza has cost them a lot of votes. This is a fact. Its a signifi9cant part of the reason from the drop from 40% to 34%
That report cites areas with a high Muslim population. I didn't say "all voters" now did I, deliberately, I said "typical voters" and 6% of anything is not typical.
If I walked into Burnley town centre - an area hardly bereft of Muslims itself - tomorrow with a clipboard and asked the first 100 people I met what their views were on Palestine, what do you suppose the percentage of responses which weren't variants on "huh?" would be?
There are three types of people who care about this. Those with skin in the game who are directly or indirectly affected; those who are politically aware, reasonably intelligent and have put some effort into understanding these things (probably most people on this thread); and those who have been told they can weaponize it as an argument against people/parties they don't like. The rest of the population couldn't give a shit, they're more concerned about potholes in the roads and dogshit on pavements.
Politicians who are bringing it up right now are using it for political gain.
Somafunk, I'm one of those on this forum who goes very light on Palestine threads because the number of closed threads, warnings and deleted posts tells me the management don't like us discussing it openly and honestly, so I don't. Same with anything on religion in general, remember Woppit. I started a thread about Tony Blair's hat once and got in a word about Starmer the other day. All this to say Burnham's first appointment displeases me.
Somafunk, I'm one of those on this forum who goes very light on Palestine threads because the number of closed threads, warnings and deleted posts tells me the management don't like us discussing it openly and honestly, so I don't. Same with anything on religion in general, remember Woppit.
I don't think that's fair.
"The management" created a thread to discuss Palestine etc, the reasoning was explained by Mark a long opening post but the TLDR was that it was to keep all the heated discussion in one place. It's not a verboten subject, rather people proved unwilling to be civil. IIRC anyway, I may be wrong.
Woppit wasn't banned for discussing religion, he was banned for being aggressive and offensive about it and refusing to tone it down when told to. Which is usually how bans come about, if the Moderators repeatedly ask people to self-moderate and folk refuse then they're left with no other choice.
I believe, according to the sixth form, we have to refer to it as ‘winning the argument’
I believe anytime someone is so retarded to announce the "sixth form" they admit to the fact they arent capable at debating at such an elite level and are happier with primary school levels of debate including drawings.
Salt of the earth and all that.
Elite level?
*swoons*
Politicians who are bringing it up right now are using it for political gain.
And yet you announce "what do you suppose the percentage of responses which weren't variants on "huh?" would be?"
Logically therefore where is the political gain if no one notices?
As a bonus question you can answer why if there is no political gain why do the {party} Friends of Israel exist?
Logically therefore where is the political gain if no one notices?
Because a) it's a potential gain within the circus we call Parliament where it's all a game, and b) the narrative spin presented to the great unwashed is "he supports the bad guys."
There are some voters who place other issues slightly above what’s happening in Gaza and Tel Aviv
I'd say it's possible to be on the right side of both fixing our country and not supporting the destruction of Gaza.
Remember how the 🤡 used solid 'fix the county' left-wing pledges to gain power and then went all brainless and lost the electorate with his flip-floppery, lies and right-wingy 'pragamatism?'
Let's be having none of that again.
I'm very much willing to give Burnham the benefit of the doubt and see what he actually does.
If I walked into Burnley town centre - an area hardly bereft of Muslims itself - tomorrow with a clipboard and asked the first 100 people I met what their views were on Palestine, what do you suppose the percentage of responses which weren't variants on "huh?" would be?
So should Burnham act according to the version of reality pushed by the Mail, or whatever other purveyors of pish the folk of Burnley subscribe to? If so, we really are royally screwed. Then again, if they really are so ignorant, he could say whatever his conscience tells him is right on Gaza with no risk from the man in the Burnley street, while winning over the Novara-reading STW forumite. Win-win.
Labours stance on Gaza has cost them a lot of votes.
Needs much more unpicking. In broadly Muslim ares where they are trad Labour voters it has dropped by up to 25%, This was true in some bits of Gorton that I helped canvas, but much of the Greens victory wasn't a Muslim specific vote - there's more students there. Lots of the seats they did loose in the GE have gone to single issue pro-Gaza candidates, 5 (I think) in Birmingham for instance, so it's not like the Greens or other left(er) leaning parties benefited.
Corbyn will tell anyone who'll listen that Gaza was the reason he defeated the official Labour candidate, but as per usual, he's probs talking bollocks - name recognition counts more than anything else in elections. In other safe seats the drop was much less significant, maybe 6-7%. Wes Streeting nearly lost his seat because of it though (again; a function of where it is)
After action reports that I've seen after local elections in May, of the 50% or so of folks that 'may' have voted for Labour usually but didn't, about 50 % of them said it was because of Gaza, but not all of them went ahead and voted for a party that had made Gaza central to their offer. So the picture's hazy.
It has cost a lot in some places - Students, Muslim areas, other places much less so, Few mainstream parties have benefited from it.
EDIT: Forgot the other side to this.
Above the Gaza issue, the main issue (from the May local elections) for lots of voters was making sure Reform don't get in. Folks wanted to punish Labour (for a variety of reasons) but voting tactically to stop Reform meant that there are a few more Labour councillors who retained their seats than otherwise they might have.
ignore
Needs much more unpicking.
So, in short they lost a lot of votes due to Gaza. How many did they pick up by supporting the folk who shoot babies with drones? I don't want or intend to rehash the Gaza thread here, but the point is - is Burnham any different on this issue? Or is he just Starmer 2.0. And if so - why? Is it just to get his snout in the LFI trough?
The point is that this kind of politics is best left to fringe parties trying to win a seats on a single issue. For the incoming leader of the incumbents, it's difficult to see how coming out batting strongly for one side or the other could help.
First, it's an issue overseas where we don't have much influence beyond performative gestures. Second, it's an issue where the electorate are either strongly polarised or entirely indifferent. Picking one side means Labour risks losing the votes of the other side plus the votes of those who'd like Labour to focus on the place they were elected to look after.
Much as I want him to support my side, I'd actually be happier if he fudges it and quickly moves on to education, housing, the NHS, and the economy - all that boring stuff where you don't get to wave flags and feel righteous.
Needs much more unpicking.
Probably doesn’t. In Muslim areas labour will obviously lose votes. Everywhere else no one else gives a shit. In fact in place like where I live which are mostly leftish, many people who are otherwise supportive of the Gaza/Palestine issue are a bit sick of having it shoved down their throat at every opportunity. Any Labour leader wanting to win the next election would be an idiot to even mention it.
All Burnham has to say on Gaza is that it’s a major issue that the international community needs to sort out and the UK will play its largely insignificant part.
All Burnham has to say on Gaza is that it’s a major issue that the international community needs to sort out and the UK will play its largely insignificant part.
So your advice would be that Burnham continues the Starmer policy of supporting Israel diplomatically, supplying weapons and intelligence, turning a blind eye to sale of Palestinian land in London (you know what I mean) and locking up people who protest. Probably you're right, in the short term. How did we end up here?
*nips into thread to see if, like every other political thread, it’s now just the usual suspects endlessly rattling on about Israel and Palestine, yet again*
Yep.
it’s now just the usual suspects endlessly rattling on about Israel and Palestine, yet again*
Afraid so and TJ seems to have spent too long in the sun.
*nips into thread to see if, like every other political thread, it’s now just the usual suspects endlessly rattling on about Israel and Palestine, yet again*
Yep.
Perhaps talk and discourse may change when/if he gets crowned and lays out his vision for the country, until that happens, what exactly would you like to talk about regarding Andy?, I’ve never been to Manchester in my life so it may be good to hear from folks experiences of his policies as mayor.
So your advice would be that Burnham continues the Starmer policy of supporting Israel diplomatically
No my advice is to ignore the issue altogether and never mention it. I’m afraid on this issue the vast majority of voters take the ‘why worry about something we can’t change’ view. We have very little skin in the game so it simply doesn’t make sense to keep beating ourselves up about it.
I’ve never been to Manchester in my life so it may be good to hear from folks experiences of his policies as mayor.
Well if he can do the same for trains nationally as he has with buses in manc that would be a very welcome start.
Same goes for utility bills.
on this issue the vast majority of voters take the ‘why worry about something we can’t change’ view.
I'm going to take issue with that and suggest that the vast majority of voters don't give a toss about it at all, but then agree that those that do have a view have also accepted that there's little we can do about it.
I’ve never been to Manchester in my life so it may be good to hear from folks experiences of his policies as mayor.
All you need to know is summed up in the numbers. At the last Mayoral election, he got 65% of the vote. Have a think about that… he got that vote share when running for his third term in office. The Conservative candidate chucked the towel in a week before the election as he said he was wasting his time.
He has a cross-party appeal few politicians have managed, because he’s done loads of stuff that actually makes a difference to peoples day-to-day lives and just doesn’t really come across as being a politician, as most people think of them. It’s going to be interesting to see if that translates to a national level
Taking all the transport back under public control and getting it working properly being a prime example. He’s overseen serious year-on-year economic growth in the City region in every year he’s held the post.
He's effectively maximized the devolved powers available to him at every turn to benefit the region, in marked contrast to other devolved administrations.
From an optics point of view, he won a lot of people over when he took Boris on about lock downs because pretty much everyone in Greater Manchester agreed that we were being totally ****ed about by clueless nobheads in Westminster, so Andy stood up and slightly more diplomatically said so
I’ve never been to Manchester in my life so it may be good to hear from folks experiences of his policies as mayor.
Central Manchester looks great, is built largely from Blairite-a-like foreign investment. You don't have to go too far out to see how far the 'regeneration' extends frankly. Places like Bury, Oldham, Rochdale, Tameside, Stockport still look pretty second hand if we're being honest.
but then agree that those that do have a view have also accepted that there's little we can do about it.
Not in my view, my last comment as i realise it’s unwelcome.
I imagine a similar argument was made for apartheid South Africa
Boycott Israeli goods, sanction all Israeli settlements and produce, approximately 1000 uk citizens went to fight for the IDF…investigate them for potential war crimes, remove export licenses for weapon manufacturing in this country….I could go on but nah, I’m out till Burnham shows us what his vision of governance will entail
