Forum menu
adopting policies which Labour would rather not have to adopt?
I’m not speaking for Labour. But about the need to compromise my/your/our own personal political wants to best effect a change of government. It’s for Labour to decide what they can do, and how to persuade the public to give them a chance.
Some policies I want the UK to have that Labour aren’t likely to be offering at the next election?
Universal Basic Income, EU Membership, end charging for Education, public ownership of key infrastructure.
Will I let that stop me seeing that returning a Labour MP instead of Tory MP in this seat would be better for us here and the UK as a whole? No.
Libdem or Greens for me. That'll see us right. 👍
*pops head around the door*
I see the revolution is going well then….
Carry on….
Universal Basic Income, EU Membership, end charging for Education, public ownership of key infrastructure.
Well it's a bit of a negative stance to focus on what Labour aren't offering but yeah, that brings them in line with what the Tories are also not offering.
My point about compromise being just another way of saying adopting Tory policies still stands.
In the case of not abolishing tuition fees and not nationalising gas, water, and electricity, which brings them in line with the Tories, these aren't even vote losing policies so there is clearly no need for "compromise" on those issues to win the next general election.
The U-turn on tuition fees is an interesting one as Starmer has broken convention and decided to do a U-turn on the issue before even winning the general election.
Admittedly Starmer is still apparently committed to nationalisation the railways but that is also interesting as the Tories are currently doing precisely that - nationalising the railways. Despite desperately trying for decades keeping the railways privately owned isn't feasible, so again that more or else brings Starmer in line with the Tories.
Is the next general election really going to be just down to who is the more competent Tory?
*pops head around the door*
LOL! "Pops" ..... who are you kidding binners?!? It has long been obvious that you closely follow this thread! You are however quite incapable of contributing anything to political threads beyond hyperbolic rants, which isn't really appropriate for you when the subject matter is Starmer.
It is different when the subject matter is Sunak, or Johnson, or Braverman, or Truss, then you can rant to your heart's content.
On the Starmer thread you are reduced to pretending that you aren't interested and posting the occasional picture 😃
In the case of not abolishing tuition fees and not nationalising gas, water, and electricity, which brings them in line with the Tories, these aren’t even vote losing policies so there is clearly no need for “compromise” on those issues to win the next general election.
When asked about any individual nationalisation, the public say they want them. Offer them all up, and what happens?
Your sticky position is that Labour have moved their policies since 2019 and have (apparently) gained the support of more voters. Especially in the seats they need to win off the Tories. You believe that moving some major policies back wouldn’t result in a change of polling/voting fortunes. You might be right. But that’s a big gamble for those tasked with getting Labour out of opposition (rather than just chewing the fat on the internet).
Yes, much of the public are sick of the results of privatisation. And yet keep voting in the Tories. 🤷🏻♂️
When asked about any individual nationalisation, the public say they want them. Offer them all up, and what happens?
They still want it, that's what happens. Even the Daily Mail can't ignore that fact:
To nationalise or not to nationalise might be the most important issue on people's minds but there is no evidence at all that nationalisation of the utilities is unpopular with voters.
In fact the reverse is true - there is significant evidence that nationalisation of the utilities is very popular with voters.
You miss the point. Ask the public if they support nationalisation of any key infrastructure, and they say yes. Offer them a programme of mass nationalisation and they turn out to vote Tory and stop it.
Labour can still lose this. A believable (by people not on the Left) policy platform is essential to not being on the opposition benches, yet again, watching the UK burn.
Remember '92 - untold years of Tory rule, Major scraping a majority, despite the 'bastards'?
If Blair is going to be held up as a failure - let it be judged against what came before.
If nothing else, the political structure of the Labour Party is inherently more democratic - our more hardened brethren ^above have obviously lost their faith, but Keir can't become a Man of Steel overnight.
Well I think it is you that is missing the point Kelvin. There is no evidence at all that people vote Tory to specifically stop nationalisation, just some evidence that it might not be the most important issue on most voters minds.
Do you even hear yourself?
There is no evidence at all that people eat honey to specifically become bees, just some evidence that it tastes good on voters tongues.
When talking specifically about policy and high level approaches, not mentioning political party, most people I have ever talked to about it are on the side of fairness and those that aren't even seem to realise themselves that they are selfish. Those fair policies tend to be traditionally left rather than right.
Corbyn was on right track and was popular at first but he clearly was not the right person and that is one thing that ruined it. Another was that when you offer people big change (even for the better) they don't believe it and think something is up. It is like a mass brainwashing over 40 years and fighting against that is almost impossible.
Probably start with 1 or 2 really big things that you can repeat and are simple to explain for the next 12 months. What are Starmers 1 or 2 big positive changes?
Universal Basic Income, EU Membership, end charging for Education, public ownership of key infrastructure.
And all of those have obvious compromise options between the level you want and the tory approach.
Your sticky position is that Labour have moved their policies since 2019 and have (apparently) gained the support of more voters.
Correlation doesnt mean causation. I would be rather surprised if you could show a strong link between Starmer throw away policy of the day and a shift in the polls. As opposed to tories doing something even more insane.
That Starmer doesnt get the same individual lead over Sunak as Labour does over the tories suggests it isnt overly down to his policies.
You might be right. But that’s a big gamble for those tasked with getting Labour out of opposition
And its also a major gamble to assume that if you pitch your policies to the tories then nontories will continue to vote for you.
Probably start with 1 or 2 really big things that you can repeat and are simple to explain for the next 12 months. What are Starmers 1 or 2 big positive changes?
I agree with this, for two reasons.
First, the Corbyn campaign suffered from presenting a cavalcade of increasingly ambitious and less-considered policies to the point of it being seen as magical assortment of implausible promises. The Tories otoh have always been good with banging over and over with 1 or 3 policies (or even just slogans). This is entirely a question of presentation.
Second, Starmer just hasn't put out a graspable vision of how Labour will radically improve ordinary people's lives. This is partly presentation and partly substance...
It's a bit surprising that people are still banging on about Corbyn's radicalism. In European terms his policies were middle of the road and fully costed but he was sunk by militant supporters of apartheid.
Anyway, all this rightward drift jockeying for privilege and power will make little difference, maybe different colour ties, maybe not. Change will only come from organised labour like the doctors, teachers, nurses, posties, Amazon workers etc. If you are disappointed with Starmer U-turning now, just wait till he's in No. 10.
Second, Starmer just hasn’t put out a graspable vision of how Labour will radically improve ordinary people’s lives. This is partly presentation and partly substance…
I think its on purpose. I think, unless you're exposed to them, it's hard to overstate just how pilloried Labour are in the tabloids every single day of the week, and have to put with "Where's the money coming from for that?" in a daily way that the Tories never ever have to do. I mean, I read only last week in a Red Top use of the "There's no money left, sorry" joke note as an explanation for why inflation is so high.
Plus also all the things that'll need fixing (That Labour will have to fix, naturally, otherwise the Tabloids and the Tories won't ever STFU about it) will cost so much money I can see the headline that'll accuse Labour of outright failure and wasteful with Mrs Miggins hard earned taxes if we're only shin deep in shit on the beach rather than the knee deep it would've been had the Tories stayed in power. repeat that over and over again for Railways, the NHS, Education...Plus of course; Brexit. any teeny hint that Labour might reverse, hell, just even relaxing anything to do with Brexit will just be months of screaming "Betrayal" headlines, and non-stop shite from the Tories at PMQ for the next 3-4 years.
Yeah, I can see why if you're Starmer, keeping your mouth shut while you're so far ahead in the polls feels like a great strategy
*pops head around the door*
FFS man, a rare outbreak of actual discussion and here you are posting pictures. Can you remember at school how there was always that one annoying idiot disrupting the lessons and calling people swots etc? Well on this thread that's you. Have a think?
First, the Corbyn campaign suffered from presenting a cavalcade of increasingly ambitious and less-considered policies to the point of it being seen as magical assortment of implausible promises.
The thing is, if you paid attention to the timescales and qualification around those policies, they made a lot of sense. But all the public heard was a form of "everything, everywhere, all at once", ignoring that many of the announcements were about things that either wouldn't start 'till a second or third term, or would start very small and build up. And here is the problem... you can talk about the big long term progress needed, but come an election many voters can only see as far as the end of their nose. This is where Labour's decarbonisation policies will come under attack and risk losing the voters come an election... it's going to be a hard sell, despite all the evidence around us about the damaging effects of the status quo. The election isn't going to be the plain sailing the polls suggest. And Labour won't be offering the same as the Tories, even if that is the claim that some people have been repeating repeatedly in this thread for years now. Defending the changes proposed, and the cost of them, is going to be hard.
And its also a major gamble to assume that if you pitch your policies to the tories then nontories will continue to vote for you.
Absolutely true. But remember, Labour have to win seats, not just weigh votes, to form a government. Gaining support in the small towns and surrounding areas of England might not even be possible without losing some support in the cities. Demographics play a big role here. Remember who Labour need to not frighten off if they are to win seats outside London, Manchester etc.
FFS man, a rare outbreak of actual discussion and here you are posting pictures. Can you remember at school how there was always that one annoying idiot disrupting the lessons and calling people swots etc? Well on this thread that’s you. Have a think?
Busy policing everyone else to think like he does. It's telling that he has nothing useful to say about Starmer.
Also - the general theme of 'compromise' ? WTF - The Tories never compromise, so how weak are the 'left' these days that they have no values or direction. At worst inheriting Tory economic 'purity' that the private sector funds the public sector.
You'd think that with the shit slinging in the Tory threads that being of the left might be an obvious solution full of obvious answers. But not this lot who will do whatever they can to defend the ground Starmer walks on.
The current Labour party have low standards and aspirations. Tories don't - they at least have the balls to do what they want to. No one calls them out for being ideologically pure or impure.
Absolutely true. But remember, Labour have to win seats, not just weigh votes, to form a government. Gaining support in the small towns and surrounding areas of England might not even be possible without losing some support in the cities. Demographics play a big role here. Remember who Labour need to not frighten off if they are to win seats outside London, Manchester etc.
Is it really not in the electorate's voting interest for the Labour to have and sell policies to the dysfunctional state of the UK?
Second, Starmer just hasn’t put out a graspable vision of how Labour will radically improve ordinary people’s lives. This is partly presentation and partly substance…
Well exactly. He doesn't have any - he's a coward too scared to change things.
Oh ****ing hell - daft cow Kate Andrew's on QT tonight. The BBC, and her terrible ill-informed Wall Street analysis of the UK's problems seem to be a match made in heaven these days. Starmer had her would get on a treat.
Early bed then.
<p style="text-align: left;">I bet Starmer and Reeve are dead chuffed with themselves being invited to Murdoch's parties. They would see that as rite de passage to power.</p>
A Murdoch-schmoozing, cowardly, u-turning, Tory liar?
I'm super glad I'm not voting Labour this time around.
But they wouldn't be seen dead on a nurses' picket line.
The idealogical pure label doesn’t really apply to centerists, by their very nature they are compromisers, you also cant appply it to the current right wing Tory loons unless naked personal greed and ego stroking is an idealogy.
Centristism is whatever the right-wing media supports.
And that's an utterly uncompromising form of British nationalism.
The lack of compromise was demonstrated by their response to Corbyn and some mild, vaguely socialist, policies.
Like the media; centrists love business, Thatercherite individualism, the military, monarchy, Israel, and anything with a union jack - as long as it's not too obviously racist.
It's instinctively right-wing and conservative.
This will be the next UK Government, irrespective of party.
Clap for the NHS when it is all superficial, but run away and hide when that support needs to become something more, something real and practical.
And I see saint Tony Blair popped his head above the parapet the other day to state that the solution for the NHS is more privatisation.
Tony Blair popped his head above the parapet the other day to state that the solution for the NHS is more privatisation.
The problem with a narcissist like Blair is that they can't accept when they have been proved wrong, they simply just double down.
Whether it is the folly of neocolonial wars or private finance initiatives.
This is the toxic legacy of a right-wing Labour leader taking a Tory policy and running with it:
This is the toxic legacy
The 22/23 budget of the NHS is £180bill, the cost to the NHS this year on ongoing PFI projects will be £2.1bil, or 1.16% of the overall budget.
You can be as hyperbolic about them as you like, but those are the facts. The ongoing costs of these projects are not a massive issue, the only time they're bought up is this sort of pointless point scoring nonsense, and would as likely not be just as much of a drag on the overall NHS budget if the projects had been financed any other way you care to come up with.
the solution for the NHS is more privatisation.
Once again, a reminder that the bits of the NHS that most folks touch most of the time; GP practices, Pharmacies, Opticians and Dentists are mostly privately owned for-profit business.
You can be as hyperbolic about them as you like, but those are the facts.
The "facts" are stated in the Guardian article, read it instead of dismissing it as hyperbole, I don't state any "facts" other that PFI has left the NHS with a toxic legacy.
It is a widely accepted fact which is now accepted by all main political parties, even ffs by the Tories who abandoned all further PFIs in 2018.
If you disagree and believe that PFI was a great idea then that's up to you, but don't blame me for articles in the Guardian and the Independent focusing on the toxic legacy of PFI
More "pointless point scoring nonsense" from the Independent?
And as for your apparent claim of the insignificance cost of PFI:
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/health/20621520.hospital-spending-pfi-debt-medical-supplies/
Nice bit of cringe.
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1676991400670273537?t=qIrl8aXgbaJuUenm-lCXCg&s=19
"I'm on the side of economic growth."
Bullshit on every level.
Let's not forget ' economic growth' sounds lovely jubbly but is a synonym for trickle down ie you might get a bit more when we get a lot more and not before.
Once again, a reminder that the bits of the NHS that most folks touch most of the time; GP practices, Pharmacies, Opticians and Dentists are mostly privately owned for-profit business.
Privatised GP Practices where it's incredibly difficult to actually get an appointment to be seen and then takes days after the appointment for the receptionist to send the prescription to the Pharmacy...?
Privatised Dentist practices where it's actually been *impossible* to get an nhs funded dentist appointment in my local area for the last 5 years...? None of the NHS dentists have any space and massive waiting lists.
Are those the "for profit privatised versions of the NHS" you wish to hold up as the epitome of success? I'd hate to see what you think failure is!
No funded school meals?
No water nationalisation?
No funded tertiary education?
Yes, I'll vote Labour as the best option, but my word, I despise this man.
I loved Corbyn's costed, carefully considered, moden, democratic socialist manifestos. I voted for him, because I believe in socialism.
Maybe, just maybe 'the whiff of the sixth form common room' would have been an acceptable price to pay.
Starmer scares me.
We're still living with the effects of Brown and Blair's compromises.
If we'd have stuck the cost of Hospitals built under PPI on a credit card we'd have paid them off by now.
'Things have changed'.
'We have to compromise'.
Bleatings from the weak.
Never forgive, never forget.
Time to fight.
Why does Owen Jones want five more years of Tory rule?
Yes, I’ll vote Labour as the best option, but my word, I despise this man.
Well just my opinion but if it is any consolation although Starmer will almost certainly be the next prime minister I doubt that he will remain PM for very long.
Starmer has been incredibly lucky and most people accept that Labour's current level of support is overwhelmingly down to nothing more than the huge unpopularity of a completely discredited Tory government which has run out of ideas and is frantically trying, unsuccessfully, to reinvent itself.
Once installed in Number 10 Starmer will not be able to count on a Tory government to shore up his support. He has been a remarkably poor leader of the Opposition, often indecisive, slow to react to events, preferring to sit on the fence over many issues, and of course responsible for a multitude of policy U-turns on a multitude of issues.
Whilst these critical failings can and are overlooked in an opposition leader they cannot, and will not, be ignored in the case of the leader of the UK government.
Starmer will as prime minister be as much out of his depth as any Tory PM imo.
Resorting to attacking the Tories won't cut the mustard with voters when Starmer is PM, so I fully expect public support for an incoming Starmer Labour government to very quickly collapse.
This will undoubtedly plunge the party into a crisis, especially if they have a huge parliamentry majority, I can't see Starmer surviving that.
I have absolutely no idea who is likely to replace Starmer, nor am I sure that it will make much if any difference - the top of the parliamentry party appear to be more or less all from the same cloning laboratory.
But I do believe that we are living in interesting and unpredictable times. The old norms of British politics no longer apply.
Nothing is ever ever Corbyn’s fault
The general consensus - for about 5 years, everything was Corbyn's fault.
Why does Owen Jones want five more years of Tory rule?
I'd flip this and say why do people want five more years of right-wing Labour rule?
The distinction shouldn't be Tory or Labour these days but left or right.
Why in the face of what has happened over the last decade we need more right wing ideals to solve right wing problems?
Until Starmer becomes a progressive (never) we aren't getting a future that fixes anything.
<p style="text-align: left;"></p>
I sill believe the country would be better with a Starmer Labour Party than any Tory party. The problem is it won't be really noticeably better, won't put in place any long term progressive solutions and will be ousted at next election as voters will wonder, quite rightly, what the difference was and go back to their Tory voting.
<p style="text-align: left;">Corbyn had lots of faults, the main one being he didn't stand up for himself. He made too many concessions but the lies and false allegations didn't cease so we got the Tories.</p>
Very much agree BillMC - he wasn't defensive enough, and he was in an unwinnable situation.
The bit that grates me so much about Starmer (apart from him being cut and paste Neoliberal/Mandelson puppet) is he's wasting a massive once in a lifetime opportunity to make things so much better.
I mean - in that clip when he says he stands for growth - FFS he could have articulated a better society for everyone or something remotely progressive.
He's destroying hope for many. The pandemic seems to have made these idiots double down on a private sector fuelled agenda.
That's not what I thought would happen happen - given how evidently the state was empowered to fix things.
The pandemic and the relevance of the NHS, frontline staff and food chain to keep us alive has quickly been replaced by business as usual for the asset class - in fact it's better because they're getting all that lovely interest income.
'Banks to do the right thing?'
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1676853395708100609?t=uxQhPBLGjKr4zjt9voIGYw&s=19
Blockquote>The general consensus – for about 5 years, everything was Corbyn’s fault.
Absolutely true, apart from the left wing headbangers on here who hold him up as the answer to everything and blame anybody but Corbyn for Labours failure under his leadership. Now there's your once in a generation opportunity lost. Unfortunately dealing with your own MPs, the press and the electorate are key parts of the role which a leader can't duck.
Absolutely true, apart from the left wing headbangers on here who hold him up as the answer to everything and blame anybody but Corbyn for Labours failure under his leadership.
I think most of us headbangers could see his faults- but unlike Starmer he was in an impossible situation and all the right wing MP headbangers spent all their time being Ian Austin.
Without Brexit he would have walked it. Which is why Starmer loves a good Brexit.
I'd have taken a few Corbyn bumps and faults instead of subservience to a right wing agenda under the brand of Labour in name only.
<p style="text-align: left;">Stumpy you do need to try to articulate lucid arguments based on evidence as ad hominems do not reflect well on your intellectual prowess.</p>
left wing headbangers on here who hold him up as the answer to everything
Why even post nonsense like that? Apart from running out of things to say.
It is clear that there is not a single person on here who thinks that.
and BillMC you need to learn how to enter text so you don't always have the <p style="text... stuff going on all the time.
left wing headbangers on here who hold him up as the answer to everything
Corbyns policies and McDonnells approach were more of an answer than we have seen since but I think we all agree that Corbyn became a liability which was the biggest shame as in his first election attempt he did very well so another person with same policies could have done it
I’d have taken a few Corbyn bumps and faults…
Has there been a single post in this thread from someone who didn’t vote for Labour under Corbyn at both those general elections? Everyone posting here voted for that change. Well apart from Ernie who won’t say.
Yep, struggling with my phone in foreign parts.
Has there been a single post in this thread from someone who didn’t vote for Labour
Well there's an admission of the complete lack of political balance on a political thread!! 😃
Is everyone who claims to cycle along narrow paths in woods a Labour voter?
Has there been a single post in this thread from someone who didn’t vote for Labour under Corbyn at both those general elections? Everyone posting here voted for that change. Well apart from Ernie who won’t say
Did I say there was?
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1677018501037391872?s=20
"though he warned of funding issues due to the state of the economy."
That there is total bullshit.
apart from the left wing headbangers
You need to raise your game Stumpy, you can't post a comment like that without an amusing picture alongside it.
“though he warned of funding issues due to the state of the economy.”
This really is the most brainless strategy I've ever seen from the Labour Party. I get why they want to lower expectations, but cutting yourself off at the knees before you've even got in power is bonkers. Turbo-charged cynicism and pessimism, what a thing to vote for!
Turbo-charged cynicism and pessimism, what a thing to vote for!
It's OK, I'm not going to.
Nor will anyone else who reads this thread, I think.
Job jobbed.
Better hope that pandering to those Red Wallers is enough, eh?
This really is the most brainless strategy I’ve ever seen from the Labour Party. I get why they want to lower expectations, but cutting yourself off at the knees before you’ve even got in power is bonkers. Turbo-charged cynicism and pessimism, what a thing to vote for!
Sigh - useless - private sector funds the state absolute guff.
Point is - how does the private sector every generate any 'growth' without new money circulating the economy, spent by the government.
They live in cuckooland.
Better hope that pandering to those Red Wallers is enough, eh?
I think you don't realise why they are called "red" wall voters Danny. Or at least you might have forgotten.
The term red wall was used to describe areas in which voters traditionally always vote Labour. You use the term as if it describes traditional Tory voters.
But true Labour voters would never vote Tory would they, even for something like Brexit, so they may need to be pandered to as a means to win them back.
I don't know what that would involve though, they now have their Brexit so what ill thought out thing do they want next?
They switched to tory because they had been disenfranchised for decades by both major parties, and was then sold a lie, false promises that "getting brexit done" was going to benefit them, that was the path for investment and the "norther powerhouse".
Going back to the policies of under investment and disenfranchisement isn't pandering to them, it is another rejection that will see more of those communities ebb away from Labour. It is just another tory victory where supposedly left leaning voters are blaming the victims of neoliberalism rather than the architects.
But true Labour voters would never vote Tory would they
So now we have established a new type of voter...... "true Labour voters", which presumably means the existence of also true Tory voters, true LibDem votes, true SNP voters, etc. It is gonna make life complicated for the pollsters.
Yes not unsurprisingly Tory voters vote Tory and Labour voters vote Labour.
The constituencies which the term "red wall" applies to have for many decades voted Labour. As far as I am aware every single one voted Labour in the 2017 general election.
That was not necessarily the case two years later despite all the issues being the same, except for two - in 2017 Labour pledged to respect the Referendum result two years later they were committed to not accepting the result insisting that another referendum would be necessary.
Also two years later the attacks on the Labour leader by Labour MPs had reached unprecedented historical levels - never in the history of the Labour Party have Labour MPs been so publicly disloyal to a Labour leader.
The idea that traditional Labour voters should have maintained their loyalty to Labour under those circumstances is bizarre to say the very least.
At the next general election in a few months time it is all but certain that Labour will win every single "red wall" seat extremely easily - brexit and attacks by Labour MPs on their leader are no longer issues for voters.
It is absurd and ridiculous to characterise these seats as traditional Tory seats.
Equally it would be wrong to see a LP success as an endorsement of Starmer. I'll be holding my nose voting for that duplicitous sack of ordure but obviously it'll be claimed as such.
I think most people understand the next general election will represent a verdict by voters on the behaviour of the Tories, not an endorsement of Starmer.
With Starmer not making the news very often compared to previous Labour leaders I think it is probably fair to say that most people haven't given much thought about what the alternative is.
I don’t know what that would involve though, they now have their Brexit so what ill thought out thing do they want next?
Further nastiness towards minorities and immigrants would do the trick.
After all, it is what they thought they were getting from Brexit.
🤷♂️
^^^^
Actually, scratch that.
I was going to go back in and edit/delete it, but was a minute too late.
Basically, CBA.
Ignore it.
I think most people understand the next general election will represent a verdict by voters on the behaviour of the Tories, not an endorsement of Starmer.
Which wont stop it being claimed as such. We can already see plenty of examples praising the glorious leader.
Plus the next election will likely allow him to pack parliament with a bunch of people chosen for loyalty.
moimoifan
Free MemberI don’t know what that would involve though, they now have their Brexit so what ill thought out thing do they want next?
Further nastiness towards minorities and immigrants would do the trick.
After all, it is what they thought they were getting from Brexit.
So why did the "red wall" constituencies all vote Labour in the 2017 general election then?
If anyone wants to try to understand the disconnect between working class Labour voters and today's Labour Party you could start off by looking at the self-righteous patronising contempt and disdain which so many middle-class politicos clearly feel.
Some people seem to despise the very people that they accuse the Tories of not caring about.
Some people seem to despise the very people that they accuse the Tories of not caring about.
Simple explanation for that. A lot of middle class liberal labour voters simply don't GAS about working class people. They want tory economic policy - because it benefits them - with a nice friendly face on it to assuage their selfish guilt. That's why Corbyn was so offensive to them because he was focused on the poor and working class rather than massaging the faux-progressive sensibilities of pinko liberals.
That’s why Corbyn was so offensive to them because he was focused on the poor and working class rather than massaging the faux-progressive sensibilities of pinko liberals.
He can't have been that offensive to me. I voted for him (the man and the policies) twice.
It seems he must have offended lots of other people, though.
🤷♂️
I think most of us headbangers could see his faults
Like what?
Online Corbynites seem to identify Corbyn's faults as simply being just too kind and dignified so he didn't want to challenge the criticisms made against him. It's never "he shouldn't have presented a phone-in show on Iranian state TV for thousands of pounds" or "he shouldn't have gone laying flowers in a PLO cemetary" or "maybe it was a mistake to call Hamas friends" or "perhaps writing a gushing foreword for an anti-Semite's book wasn't a good idea"...even in retrospect.
Worse than that, he's spoken up in parliament about bombing the shit out of refugee camps.
Corbyn's faults to me were his lack of ability in actually being a leader or having any media awareness. Yes you should be able to just be honest and not have to play the game but when the game is stacked against you that is not going to work.
Support for the Palestinian people in face the Israeli state's apartheid policies and endless aggression was one of the things that Corbyn got right, why should he be criticised for it?
Very few people on the left support Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land and their contempt for United Nations Resolutions.
And btw the EU was previously in favour of contact with Hamas, that only changed after Hamas won the 2006 elections - they weren't supposed to win.
https://www.politico.eu/article/israel-warns-eu-to-stay-away-from-hamas-ahead-of-election/
After six months of the Labour lead over the Tories very slowly narrowing the last couple of weeks they have been slowly widening again:
https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/
And the very latest opinion poll out today puts Labour support on the level it was when Liz Truss was PM - more than half of voters say they would vote Labour if there was an election now.
https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1677302168938848259
Any vague hope the Tories had of averting a historic electoral disaster in a few months time is fast fading.
Only the media can save them now but not sure the media will really care as Starmer is not going to be any different for them really.
Any vague hope the Tories had of averting a historic electoral disaster in a few months time is fast fading.
Well at least that's something we can all enjoy on a sunny late afternoon in July.
👍
What really astounds me, apart from the apparent collapse of the Tory vote, is how totally irrelevant the LibDems have become.
I often chuckle when I see polls showing how little support the LibDems enjoy these days. Which then makes me feel a bit uneasy as there is nothing actually funny about how Nick Clegg comprehensively destroyed their credibility. In fact it is quite a tragic story in British politics.
And now it's Clive Lewis's turn
<p style="text-align: left;">And now it’s Clive Lewis’s turn</p>
What have I not seen?