Forum menu
It was made up in 2019, as I said, which is why you didn’t hear about it “being lost” before then.
https://twitter.com/JamesKanag/status/1161639307536457730
I believe this is it's first use as a description of particular seats..
It was made up in 2019, as I said, which is why you didn’t hear about it “being lost” before then.
So you don't agree with grum's suggestion that it's a now commonly used shortcut for traditionally safe Labour seats in the north of England?
Or are you suggesting that pre-2019 everyone was talking about the losses in traditional safe Labour seats in the North of England?
Is it a new phenomena or not?
I have no idea what “everyone” was talking about, but what constitutes a “safe” Labour seat has been changing constantly since Thatcher. I agree with those that think it can get worse still outside the cities for Labour. Little dots of red on the map could well become the norm now, I wouldn’t assume either a bounce back or the avoidance of a further drop in Labour support in the big seats the Conservatives have been winning off them since 2010.
Also, yes, of course it is now a commonly used term, exactly as grum describes it. But the reason you didn’t hear about “Red Wall” loses before 2019 is because the term hadn’t been coined before then.
But the reason you didn’t hear about “Red Wall” loses before 2019 is because the term hadn’t been coined before then.
If that is the only reason then obviously we were all hearing about Labour losing traditionally safe Labour seats in the north of England.
Got any links? I would be interested in seeing the scale of these losses.
I believe this is it’s first use as a description of particular seats..
Thank you mefty. I had never heard of James Kangasoorium before. I can't find much about him - there doesn't seem to be a Wikipedia page on him.
But I did find this interesting article by him dated 6 December 2019.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-margin-between-a-tory-landslide-and-defeat-is-tiny
I think binners would particularly interested in some of the stuff he wrote:
Firstly, it's worth remembering that Corbynomics is popular. YouGov generically polled Labour policies and they were popular. But being likeable or popular is different to being credible or possible. Corbynomics has been partially neutralised by the Tories shifting sharply to the left on economics.
So according to him Corbyn forced the Tories to shift sharply to the left. I wonder how much Starmer has managed to do that also?
This is also quite interesting :
Finally, let's remember that the gap between a hung parliament and a landslide is very, very small. I think this is now appreciated.
It's a bit like the point I made about the difference between the Tory vote of 2017 which gave them no majority and the 2019 Tory vote which gave them a landslide only being 1.2%
It’s just a now-commonly used shortcut for ‘traditionally safe Labour seats in the north of England’ isn’t it? And there have been warnings that people in those areas have been taken for granted for years by Labour eg the discussion around Mandelson saying they had ‘nowhere else to go’.
Like Scotland. They didn't learn from that lesson either.
I’m talking about something like has happened in Scotland, leaving them with with a few tens of MPs rather than a couple of hundred.
That's a rather optimistic appraisal. 22 seats for Scottish government and one, single , solitary seat at UK level.
Are they both just reading over Sturgeon’s shoulder?
Probably but the remains of Scottish Labour will still vote against it.
Got any links? I would be interested in seeing the scale of these losses.
As I pointed out earlier, in 2017 GE
NE Derbyshire,
Walsall North,
Mansfield,
Stoke-on-Trent South,
Middlesbrough South
East Cleveland and Copeland
All went Toey after a century of voting Labour
Labour heartlands was the preferred tag back then
70% of Labour members and an overwhelming majority of Labour voters were all remain.
but but but didnt you keep you whining on about how its the wider voters who count more not just the members? Certainly a large number of the anti corbyn centrist fanatics regurgitated it frequently.
so he went AWOL for the duration of the referendum campaign instead
Its awful isnt it? I hope he has looked at the great performance of Starmer and realises what he has done wrong.
Or just possibly its more complicated than your primary school politics.
So according to him Corbyn forced the Tories to shift sharply to the left. I wonder how much Starmer has managed to do that also?
You'd think with Boris doing a good impression of a 1970s tax and spend socialist Starmer might use the opportunity to propose some more radical progressive policies which might energise his party. Instead he complains about how unfair it is without any hint of what he would do instead. It's extremely illustrative of how irrelevant labour have become that when journalists on the news talk about 'opposition', they're referring to backbench tory MPs and cabinet rebels.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1435301943732232201?s=20
Yep that tweet says nothing.
Its not saying we would tax the landlords and it's not saying we wouldn't tax the lower paid. You'd like him to be more definitive.
All went Toey after a century of voting Labour
Labour heartlands was the preferred tag back then
Oh come on Kimbers, I know you want to win the point but you know as well as I do that seats changing political character can reflect nothing more than changing demographics.
It happens all the time across the country and affects all political parties.
So you found six seats which in 2017 went from Labour to Tory, no one was talking about "the crumbling Labour Heartlands".
Also in 2017, off the top of my head, Canterbury, which had elected a Tory MP in every general election since it was founded in the 19th century, switched to Labour.
It wasn't the only former solid Tory seat to switch to Labour in 2017, if I could be arsed I could no doubt find another 5 to match your 6, Labour did after all win an extra 30 seats in that election.
But despite that no one was talking about the crumbling Tory Heartlands/Blue Wall in 2017.
I don't deny for a minute that Labour has been losing support for years. In fact Labour has been losing votes in every general election since 1997 with the sole exception of 2017 when it temporarily reversed that trend and increased its vote by a third.
The whole red wall bollocks theory appears to be nothing more than some interesting geographical observation by someone which has been highjacked by the Tories and people like binners who want to rant about "red wall racists".
"Traditional Labour voters in the Labour Heartlands racists" doesn't sound quite as catchy as "Red Wall racists".
I'm disappointed in Keir's opposition play, anyway, this discussion remined me of this =
The right are sitting back and laughing, sweeping up every election. Blyth Valley up here went Tory. It’s a shipbuilding town. That’s insanity. Working-class people up here think the Tories are on their side – which shows how completely the left have ****ed themselves. I’ve had arguments with people who say Jeremy Corbyn’s a ****, regurgitating Daily Mail headlines that he’s a terrorist sympathiser. I’m like: how? Tell me in your own words. And they go, “Ah you’re just one of them lefties”. “Leftie” is now a slur in working-class towns – what happened there? It upsets me that we’re in a place where the media have so much control over these blokes who have grafted all their life in a system that would benefit them if someone like Corbyn was in.
From =
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/aug/25/sam-fender-interview-leftie-slur-working-class-towns
Meanwhile this is what Starmer seems to be concentrating on. It's like the party have been taken over by a bunch of HR managers who've been on a business jargon course. And they wonder why they can't connect with normal working people?
https://twitter.com/Direthoughts/status/1432673922021986304?s=20
To be fair I don't think the job vacancy is an attempt to connect with normal working people, most normal working people are unlikely to donate £10000-£100000 to the Labour Party.
It is presumably to stop the party going skint due to Starmer driving lefties out of the party. Falling membership was one of the reasons giving by David Evans for the party's financial crisis.
Better to have wealthy donors contributing to Labour's coffers than a whole lot of not particularly wealthy members who seem to have a problem with the Tories.
And certainly if I was making a donation of tens of thousands of pounds to the Labour Party I would be expecting a bespoke and meaningful journey, ideally to Starmer's ear.
To be fair I don’t think the job vacancy is an attempt to connect with normal working people
My comment was more about the fact that any organisation which uses the phrase 'bespoke and meaningful supporter journies' is going to struggle to connect with normal people. It reminds me of the whole Ed Miliband 'changing the narrative' bollocks, and Cooper's ill-fated attempt to create a 'party of aspiration'. You don't hear the tories spouting this nonsense, at least not in public.
bespoke and meaningful journey
Cash for honours again?
Cash for access surely, but that's controversial......
Well since the journey will be bespoke I expect it will depend on what the valued donor would prefer......a little walk to the Leader of the Opposition's office or maybe a more substantial journey to the House of Lords?
I guess the size of the donation might influence how "meaningful" the journey might be.
Obviously Starmer wasn't kidding when a few weeks ago, in rare declaration of intent, he claimed that Labour should embrace Tony Blair's legacy.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/nov/27/labour.uk3
Yet again I see the hand of Peter Mandelson behind all of this.
There's more serious criticism of the NI hike coming from within the Tory party than from Labour, it's bizarre.
As for the funding thing... TBH it just seems like the usual double standards to me, it's absolutely a given that you can pay Tories for access and for preferential treatment and get handed contracts for PPE you don't have. But Labour even seeks donations and people clutch their pearls.
It'll be kind of interesting to watch, though, because it's obviously pretty close to one of Miliband's defining disasters over union funding.
It’ll be kind of interesting to watch, though, because it’s obviously pretty close to one of Miliband’s defining disasters over union funding.
Another issue where Labour were too apologetic and allowed the tory narrative to take root. Union funding might not be ideal but it's so much more democratic and transparent than the dark money the tories/Vote Leave take/took - but rather than pointing this out (maybe because they are too entrenched in the same system) they go 'oh sorry yes we are beholden to the unions aren't we, we'll sort that out, sorry, sorry'.
100% agree Grum that whole thing was ridiculous. Union funding should be a positive.
Yet again I see the hand of Peter Mandelson behind all of this.
I'm sure you see the hand of Peter Mandelson when you drop the toast butter side down....... 😉
No luckily I am not personally haunted by Mandelson.
But there is a reason why he is called the Prince of Darkness..... the man who is famous for grovelling to the super-rich, has a penchant for the yachts of the Russian oligarchy, and has resigned not just once but twice from the Cabinet as a result of totally unacceptable dodgy dealings.
The whole "major donor officer" and talk of "bespoke journeys" is right up his street.
It is clear that Mandelson is a major influence on Starmer. Indeed Starmer openly admits to turning to Mandelson. Sadly the great forensic lawyer needs someone to tell him what to think and say, he's chosen Mandelson for that role.
And Mandelson's influence can now be seen everywhere, whether it's the courting of wealthy donors or urging the party to embrace Tony Blair's legacy.
Whilst Mandelson will tell Starmer what to think and say David Evans will tell him what to do.
Starmer doesn't just look like a Thunderbird puppet he also needs someone to pull his strings for him.
They say that Johnson acts on instinct I don't think Starmer will ever be accused of that.
Is Mandelson definitely advising Starmer? It was announced that he was going to but then never actually confirmed, as far as I can tell.
I’m sure you see the hand of Peter Mandelson when you drop the toast butter side down……. 😉
That actually is Peter Mandleson. He told me he’s got a set of keys cut for Ernie’s house and he pops in to move things around when he’s at work. He mixes all the knives and forks up in the cutlery drawer and switches his telly on to GB News, so He’s definitely sabotaged the bread so it lands butter side down
It more fighting fire with fire. If you have to find questionable ways to get donations to allow the party to have a chance of beating another party who happily uses questionable donations then so be it. The goal here is to become the government using whatever means possible.
The party is up for sale. Starmsky wants to replace funding from the unions with funding from plutocrats and get rid of tricky activist members and get 'his' message across via the friendlier MSM and chums in the advertising industry. He would be quite happy with a slimmed down party which can appoint its candidates from the centre, just like the tories.
> yawn <
Anyway, posting this just for binners…
https://twitter.com/chargreenldr/status/1435609209995993091?s=21
which can appoint its candidates from the centre, just like the tories.
Except they don't....
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1435670102100398085
Making some good points but as usual sounding entirely stuffy and unconvincing, and failing to say what he would do instead.
Except they don’t….
Well I don't know how the Conservative Party 'assessors' and 'candidates team' spend their time then.
Well I don’t know how the Conservative Party ‘assessors’ and ‘candidates team’ spend their time then.
They create a selection candidate list and sift out the Jared O'Mara's
All the main parties do it including Labour
Is Mandelson definitely advising Starmer?
I'm afraid it's a left-wing source, I know some people prefer their sources to be less left-wing, like the Guardian.
Apparently it somehow makes it more believable.
For his ‘day job’, Mandelson owns and runs a company that takes Michael Gove to dinner and hires former Tory Ministers; as a hobby, he tells Keir Starmer what to do.
Peter Mandelson was brought back as an ‘informal’ adviser this February by Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff
I think it's probably fair to say that Mandelson is now de facto Leader of the Labour Party.
I think it’s probably fair to say that Mandelson is now de facto Leader of the Labour Party.
I think its fair to say that isn't so much a leap as ballistic rocketry.
I think it’s probably fair to say that Mandelson is now de facto Leader of the Labour Party.
Really?
Peter Mandelson was brought back as an ‘informal’ adviser this February by Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff
Does this mean anything more than a regular lunch meeting?
Well it depends whether you accept that "as a hobby he tells Keir Starmer what to do" BnD.
Would you prefer Prince Regent to de facto Leader? It would certainly fit in better with his Prince of Darkness image.
I didn't think you read my posts squirrel, something about not giving a toss and my opinions?
Well it depends whether you accept that “as a hobby he tells Keir Starmer what to do”
It's a stretch, he's probably telling KS what he would do, a world of difference from what actually is being done
To turn it around, I would be surprised if he didn't talk to people who got labour into office. They have been successful. You don't have to do everything they say but not having the input would be daft. Labour's issue is the internal fighting and hatred of the various parts of the coalition that comprises the party.
I think it’s probably fair to say that Mandelson is now de facto Leader of the Labour Party.
That’s Marcus Rashford, surely?
hyperbole
/hʌɪˈpəːbəli/
Learn to pronounce
noun
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
For those who seem confused.
Very few people think that Mandelson having his finger in the pie is good for Labour.
Part of Labour's problem today is that Starmer has turned to Mandelson for help in dealing with a job that he is clearly not up to.
IMO it is fair to point out this obvious error, if you are going to discuss what is wrong with Labour ATM.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1392178088818233344
Obviously I wouldn't put it past Mandelson to be lying, but it's interesting if it is happening but being kept quiet. I say interesting, more shameful really...
There’s not the remotest possibility that maybe it’s just tinfoil-helmeted conspiracy-theory nonsense, cooked up on lefty Twitter echo chambers then?
Maybe it was Mossad?
Yeah I did read about it in the Morning Star Spectator so you could be right binners
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/mandelson-s-return-is-a-sign-of-labour-s-problems
It was widely reported at the time.
That’s actually a pretty interesting article/column, but the speculation about Mandy is just that… speculation.
Having a quick google it would appear that the ‘news’ on the issue just appears to be more speculation and rumour, going back a good while, followed by the usual hysterical outrage at the idea of listening to anyone with a record of actually winning elections.
We know that anyone associated with Nu Labour will never be forgiven for that
I’m no fan of Mandy, but what he does he tends to do very publicly. If he was back in the fold at the top of the Labour Party we’d know about it because he’d have called a press conference to announce it, probably followed by an elaborate party at an exclusive London eatery featuring a very dubious guest list 😉
When stuff is reported widely and confidently across lots of papers it's usually more than just rumour. Or at least very well-sourced rumour.
Not always of course..
I would have thought we'd have heard more about it by now if it was a big thing.
We know that anyone associated with Nu Labour will never be forgiven for that
Mandelson is a very good example of someone tainted by his close connections to creepy billionaires, dodgy logging companies in Asia, Russian mega corporations etc - never mind that he actually helped pass legislation to make them even more money. He's the exact opposite of the kind of person the Labour party should be listening to.
From that article and previous discussions though, maybe Labour should get Cummings on board!
There’s not the remotest possibility that maybe it’s just tinfoil-helmeted conspiracy-theory nonsense, cooked up on lefty Twitter echo chambers then?
Of course there is binners. Even the Guardian, the bible and the source of all truth, was in on it.
In fact all the media were in on the tinfoil-helmeted conspiracy-theory lefty nonsense.
The idea that Mandelson, a man who is famous for being attracted to power and influence in the way that flies are to shit, has not picked up the phone and spoken to Starmer since he became Labour Party leader is ridiculous.
Unless of course as a master of the dark arts Mandelson has been using telepathy to communicate with Starmer, he is after all the Prince of Darkness.
Perhaps poor telepathic signal is the reason Starmer doesn't seem to be able to offer a constructive alternative to his criticisms of Johnson?
It’s not good, but it’s better than claiming it isn’t an antisemitic trope, repeating it again again, and claiming anyone pointing out that it is a trope just has some kind of weird personal vendetta against you.
Wow; still with this deluded fantasy? It's almost as though you've got a personal vendetta against someone...
the speculation about Mandy is just that… speculation.
It's not speculation. It's been common knowledge for months now.
Keep your head in the sand though; you'll avoid a lot of uncomfortable truths that way.
Just a reminder of the kind of person Mandelson is:
Happy to consort with someone who had been arrested (and then and was subsequently convicted) on child sex offences, in order to further his own career. You are judged by the company you keep...
The fact Labour are now openly courting those with money, in order to have access and influence to politics, comes as no surprise at all. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which...
That’s Marcus Rashford, surely?
Here he is.
Lol! That was shocking. That the mainstream media channels aren't a over what is clearly ****ing racist ignorance (mention it once, then bury it) by a senior government minister, the secretary for education for ****s sake, just shows how little they actually give a ****. That certain elements on here who are more than happy to scream 'anti-Semitism' at the left, thus doing the work of the Right, is also quite telling. Either you're against racism, or you're not.
That certain elements on here who are more than happy to scream ‘anti-Semitism’ at the left
Tbh bridges when I saw you highlighting 3 posts ago the close association between one Jewish lord who has been forced to resign twice from high office in disgrace, and a Jewish convicted nonce, I thought "well there's a thinly veiled antisemitic attack".
Tbh bridges when I saw you highlighting 3 posts ago the close association between one Jewish lord who has been forced to resign twice from high office in disgrace and a Jewish convicted nonce, I thought “well there’s a thinly veiled antisemitic attack”.
Edit. I guess you're just taking the piss? 😉
Ernie, I think being convinced that Peter Mandelson 'The Dark Lord' is secretly in charge of the Labour Party (with very little evidence) might well be seen as an AS conspiracy theory by some.
I'm practically a Nazi.
Don't get me going about Marx and his quest for world domination.
Or Jesus Christ for that matter.
What is it about these Jews, eh?
Ernie, I think being convinced that Peter Mandelson ‘The Dark Lord’ is secretly in charge of the Labour Party (with very little evidence) might well be seen as an AS conspiracy theory by some.
But do we really need to pay any attention to such idiots? Mandelson's influence over the Labour party has got absolutely **** all to do with him being of Jewish heritage. Same as how being Jewish had nothing to do with Epstein being a peadophile. I place those who make spurious and totally unfounded claims about anti-Semitism, in the same basket of ****s who might actually try to conflate the ****ishness of the likes of Mandelson and Epstein, with Judaism. IE; filed under 'ignore these idiots'.
What is it about these Jews, eh?
I blame Moshe and his ten commandments. Decimalising bastard. Ten? Why can't it be a decent British number, like 12, 14 or 16?
Einstein is another one. What gave him the right to decide that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared ffs?
The world is not enough for them, now they want to dominate the universal laws of physics.
But yeah, very little evidence that Mandelson is pulling Starmer's strings, apart from all the stuff reported across the media. And cosying up to wealthy donors doesn't sound like Mandelson at all.
Mind you I have referred to him as the Prince of Darkness, and there's very little evidence that he's even a prince. It's just something a read in the Times, or the Guardian, or somewhere.
I've only just realised Epstein is Jewish thanks to this thread! Seems obvious now with that name.
Nah I think Mandelson is undoubtedly highly devious, amoral, and stinking rich - but some of the ways he is characterised are dangerously close to anti Semitic tropes. Tricky one!
Admittedly it was widely reported re Starmer and Mandelson but then has gone quiet - seems odd.
Yawn. Just park all the Jewish jokes chaps it's all a bit yuck.
The world is not enough for them, now they want to dominate the universal laws of physics.
Film, Theatre, Art, Music, Comedy, Architecture, Design, Mathematics, Fashion; the list is endless. Anyone who doesn't think it's a conspiracy is most definitely a fool...
Film, Theatre, Art, Music, Comedy,
All that rolled into one man.......Mel Brooks.
Genius
The “puppet masters” stuff is an anti-Semitic trope. Those having fun using it again and again in this thread aren’t anti-Semitic (how can they be, they say they aren’t) but absolutely should know, and should behave, better. Just because we are on the Left doesn’t mean we are any better than those on the Right if we keep these tropes alive and mainstream. Be better than that.
Continuing to use unfounded and ignorant insinuation, as a way of launching ad homninem attacks on those with whom you disagree, knowing full well the context in which certain words/language were used, and knowing full well that there was no anti-Semitism whatsoever, is incredibly offensive and insulting to the memory of those who suffered and died at the hands of the Nazis. You don't get to dictate what language and words someone else can and cannot use; you've been challenged numerous times to desist from continuing with your extremely offensive behaviour, yet you choose to continue. All you are doing is undermining the genuine fight against anti-Semitism, and racism everywhere, by acting in such a cowardly and pathetic manner. Shame on you. If you had an ounce of humility and self-awareness, you'd have shut up a long time ago. Others have apologised for their mistake, yet you continue to be offensive. I genuinely feel sorry for you.
All that rolled into one man…….Mel Brooks.
Genius
His influence on the likes of Larry David, Jerry Seinfeld, Ben Stiller, Sascha Baron Cohen ands many others, is just incredible. Genius is spot on.
Lighten up mate.
I know that screaming antisemitism helped to elect a Tory government, and consequently has left a lot of bitterness, but no need to take it so personally on a mtb forum.
Edit : with regards to the previous post.
I've reported Kelvin's post. Just so that's out in the open. For constantly breaking Rule No. 1.
Lighten up mate.
What we need is a bit of comedy...
What we specifically need is possibly the finest cinema scene ever committed film…
The only game in town for me - especially given the last few days with all the rubbish on both sides of the neolib tax and spend house.
www.ted.com/talks/stephanie_kelton_the_big_myth_of_government_deficits#t-826642
Super simple MMT primer - set in the backdrop of the pandemic.
US based but equallly applies to UK.
There’s a good article in today’s Guardian by Larry Elliot on MMT.
From that Guardian piece... this bit of nonsense made me laugh...
The good news for Starmer is that Johnson is doing this because the left has won the economic and political argument.
Tax the working poor. Reduce in work benefits. Lift more property owners out of inheritance tax. Protect the incomes and wealth of landlords at all costs. Funnel public funds to mates in the private sector. Make individuals pay for their education.
Yeah, that's what we on the left have been "arguing" for.
Utter nonsense.
Shift the tax burden towards those who earn and own more. Accept the need for rent controls. Pull more public services and infrastructure back into public ownership. Fund education and training for all... start with the nurses... immediately.
There truly is an open goal for Labour. Being kind to Starmer I will say he is timing his run, we'll see.
TBF to Starmer for a moment it is true that if he proposes anything, all the Tories need to do is start saying things about 'the trouble with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money' and 'there is no magic money tree' and 'politics of envy' or 'you want to tax hard-working people and give it all to foreigners and scroungers'.
And despite recent events people will lap it up.
For those who seem confused.
Ah, the Edinburgh Defence. Never gets old.
And despite recent events people will lap it up.
Binners article is claiming the opposite.
Although perhaps not agreeing with every single point made in the article I think there was a lot of very valid and important points made in it.
Unlike Kelvin who appears to think it was utter nonsense.
It certainly challenges concepts which most people take for granted.
But people are lazy and it's easier to believe that things are as they have always been.
Despite the obvious fact that they are not, and that we are living in strange unprecedented times.
Unlike Kelvin who appears to think it was utter nonsense.
I said that one line I quoted was nonsense, and said why I thought it was. I didn’t comment on the whole article (I agree with some of it), but as the set up was “the left have won the argument”, when in my opinion we are losing on every front (the poorer being made poorer, the rich made richer, the state abdicating responsibility for so much and paying the private sector over the odds and yet remaining the ultimate risk holder) it’s part of the agenda setting for Johnson… letting him claim to be progressive when he is regressive and attacks the less well off with his very instinct and his every action.
Binners article is claiming the opposite.
I think all that's happened is that the tories are good at taking the popular Labour policies and paying lip service to them, while proving they aren't a 'soft touch' by being horrible to migrants and provoking phoney patriotic culture wars about statues.
It's really left Labour in quite the pickle.
Speaking of creepy secret advisers (or not) - I wonder if BJ is still in touch with Steve Bannon?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/22/video-reveals-steve-bannon-links-to-boris-johnson
Yeah it's more than one line which you are disagreeing with Kelvin, you are disagreeing with the whole crux of the article.
If the Labour party is ever to return to power, it must stop repeating the line parroted by Keir Starmer at prime minister’s questions that this is the “same old Tory party”. This is lazy thinking. Boris Johnson’s government has tacked left on the economy, which is why he has taken stick from rightwing papers and strained the Tory party’s relationship with business.
Yes disproportionately hitting struggling young breadwinners is not progressive and not the best solution, but Johnson is still the least right-wing and most progressive Tory PM since before Thatcher, whatever his motives might be.
He isn't being attacked by the right-wing press and his own party for being too Tory.
Yeah it's more than one line which you are disagreeing with Kelvin, you are disagreeing with the whole crux of the article.
If the Labour party is ever to return to power, it must stop repeating the line parroted by Keir Starmer at prime minister’s questions that this is the “same old Tory party”. This is lazy thinking. Boris Johnson’s government has tacked left on the economy, which is why he has taken stick from rightwing papers and strained the Tory party’s relationship with business.
Yes disproportionately hitting struggling young breadwinners is not progressive and not the best solution, but Johnson is still the least right-wing and most progressive Tory PM since before Thatcher, whatever his motives might be.
He isn't being attacked by the right-wing press and his own party for being too Tory.
https://www.****/news/article-9963405/DAN-WOOTTON-Boriss-Corbyn-lite-agenda-proved-hes-Tory-Only.html "Under his leadership, the PM has overseen the complete demolition of Conservative policies and values, many under the guise of a global health emergency."
TBF Dan Wooton and many Mail readers see anyone left of Pinochet as a communist. But it's true that economically they've done quite a bit of non-tory stuff. Meanwhile they've gone hard right socially though - which makes it hard to call them progressive.
Rub your eyes… paying private companies more and more without any need for them to deliver value for money, while shifting the tax burden onto the renting and living pay cheque to pay cheque working poor and away from those with estates to pass on, does not mean he has moved away from right wing economics or politics one jot. Deliberately dumbed down journalism might paint that as a shift to the left, or claim some nonsense about the left having won the argument… but it’s the same old Tories… taking money from the poor and delivering it into the hands of the rich.