I’ve enjoyed it when ed milliband of all people is let off the leash. He seems to have some fire in him.
Yep, he is coming across WAY better than when he was leader. Maybe that is because he is not now leader so pressures are different and maybe seeing more of the real person?
Toynbee being a total moron.
Scrolling through my news feed yesterday I came across the Guardian headline "Keir Starmer is right to U-turn on tuition fees. The funds will be better spent elsewhere"
Wondering who the **** wrote an article for the Guardian with that headline my curiosity got the better of me and I clicked. I soon as I saw "Polly Toynbee" I burst out laughing - the predictability was so obvious!😂
Needless to say I didn't bother reading the article, I don't think I have ever managed to read more than a few sentences of anything that Toynbee has written.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of tuition fees U-turns on pledges by politicians is never acceptable imo.
If the viability of issues are subject to events then it should never be the basis of a "pledge".
Abolition of tuition fees was one of Keir Starmer's "my pledge to you", which makes what he says worthless.
https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
toynbees political journey is weird. Started off very much leftie and passionate. Became a centre right wing apologist.
Started off very much leftie
When? In 1983 she was a candidate for the SDP which split from the Labour Party because it considered the Labour Party to be too left-wing.
Edit: Even Tony Blair managed to stay in the Labour Party in 1983!
Well before that. I read her early books.
toynbees political journey is weird. Started off very much leftie and passionate. Became a centre right wing apologist.
She's clueless. The stuff she writes never adds up to me.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of tuition fees U-turns on pledges by politicians is never acceptable imo.
Well that and a government doesn't save money to spend money because it doesn't draw money from a pot of funds.
****ing brainless. Basic stuff.
So according to Wes Streeting Sir Keir Starmer only made his pledge to "Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning" (pledge number 2) because at the time he thought the Tories wouldn't leave public finances "in such a mess".
Presumably three years ago when Starmer made the pledge he had thought that the Tories would leave a healthy growing economy........why?
Wes Streeting also said:
“I think the important thing is learning from the Liberal Democrats’ experience, you don’t go into a general election making promises you can’t keep"
But it's okay to go into a leadership election making promises that you can't keep? Why?
And why is there no need to apologise?
Labour obviously think they're going to be busy doing something in the next parliament because there won't even be time to repeal the anti-protest laws.
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1655270520621879305?s=20
Labour obviously think they’re going to be busy doing something in the next parliament because there won’t even be time to repeal the anti-protest laws.
That's Labour all over, they don't want change, it suits them down to the ground to stay as 2nd biggest idiots with FPTP.
As I alluded to in the local election thread, they won't repeal anything the tories have done if they get elected, they will simply tread water for a term or two citing 'we're trying'...
...and then the status quo will be resumed when the tories enevitably get back in to carry on the planned destruction.
Et cetera.
they will simply tread water for a term or two citing ‘we’re trying’…
Whilst they might achieve some things, as the last labour government did, chances are those will be easily rolled back whereas the items they carried over from the tories will get normalised and allow the next tory government to double down on it.
I am confused as to what Lammy is trying to argue there. A lot of what they do should be replacing what shit the tories inflicted on us so yes that will need a lot of unpicking.
"The Public Order Act is profoundly anti-democratic and needs repealed. Scenes of peaceful protesters being arrested in the streets of London during the coronation were chilling and incompatible with democratic norms."
This is very true but I suspect that the reason Starmer won't want to repeal Tory anti-democratic laws is because he knows that they are likely to be very useful to him.
Expectations of a Labour government after the defeat of a Tory government are likely to be very high, also very likely will be the disappointment.
So it is quite likely that there will be more anti-government protests after the next general election than there has been in recent times.
Starmer isn't known for his tolerance of dissent and opposing opinions, there is no reason to believe that as prime minister his autocratic tendencies will somehow diminish.
Presumably three years ago when Starmer made the pledge he had thought that the Tories would leave a healthy growing economy……..why?
Well, he could reasonably have assumed a healthier economy, or at least an easier to turn around economy… unless he predicted Covid, Putin’s actions, and Truss & Kwarteng getting their little go at the wheel.
I am confused as to what Lammy is trying to argue there.
He’s just desperately trying to avoid the “Labour are on the side of the disruptors” claim… we might well want him to be standing chest out on the side of the more adventurous awkward environmental protestors etc… but, well, many voters don’t.
I am confused as to what Lammy is trying to argue there.
It's pretty clear what Lammy means when he says:
'We can't come into office picking through all the Conservative legislation and repealing it. It would take too much time.'
This means Labour just want the money and the retirement funds, they don't have time to actually do thier jobs.
I mean, it's fair enough, being a full time grifter at public expence to line your your own pockets is a profitable job...
...but it does require a modicum of attention, so as an MP you have to let your official duties slide for your own personal gain.
unless he predicted Covid, Putin’s actions
Well there's a couple of good excuses that the Tories can put the electorate to explain why they are leaving the country in such a mess......the Labour leader might even back them up on that!
The reality is that Starmer should never have made pledges on the basis of the Tories leaving a sound and healthy economy.
Politicians are very good at claiming that they can't possibly comment on "hypothetical" situations, and yet Starmer was very keen to make a pledge on tuition fees. Or to be more precise to say whatever he felt he needed to say to win an election. Which suggests the same level of honesty as a Tory.
Starmer was very keen to make a pledge on tuition fees. Or to be more precise to say whatever he felt he needed to say to win an election. Which suggests the same level of honesty as a Tory.
We can agree on some things! 😀
Well, he could reasonably have assumed a healthier economy, or at least an easier to turn around economy… unless he predicted Covid, Putin’s actions, and Truss & Kwarteng getting their little go at the wheel.
Why? I mean the economy had gone to a standstill before all of those things 2019/2020.
Starmer spent a whole lot of time supporting the government's actions during COVID too.
There's very little about Lammy other being a squirming two job hypocrit. His performance on QT was risible.
Not being able to pay tuition fees is not the fault of COVID or Putin in any way shape or form.
I mean the economy had gone to a standstill before all of those things 2019/2020.
You mean like this?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51459257
Very dissapointing from Lammy, I used to hold him in quite high esteem.
He's made some great speeches in the commons in previous years, but it seems now he's hiding behind his self perceived position and has become just another vaucous talking head.
You mean like this?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51459257/blockquote >
Exactly like that. Typical Tory numbers these days.
That's a larger point too - where exactly are these right leaning MPs expecting growth to come from post-pandemic if it was terrible pre-pandemic without the investment?
I think there was a slight uptick of GDP when awkwardly enough GPs were spending on medical stuff - well over a year ago.
Hardly a badge of honour for private enterprise.
And Wes Streeting the biggest automatic mouthpiece of Labour party propaganda.
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1655123333820686336?t=RE3pfmX_PYztv0bkPj-1qg&s=19
Here we go again - you can't have stuff because of public finances. "Afford."
This is where believing you need to find the public sector from the private sector gets you.
The man is lying.
What else is particular dumb-ass about Labour's current line in the sand is that when the economy is in a mess that they should tighten the purse strings.
Totally back to front.
The more the economy and society has problems the more the state should step up with financial solutions.
We are heading for an almighty downturn.
https://twitter.com/flying_rodent/status/1655363381207998465?t=nIO6yVzHRrfTzGWODsgWHw&s=19
performatively hating the Tories while working your arse off to secure their project.
This x 100.
Centrist's don't get it.
Very dissapointing from Lammy, I used to hold him in quite high esteem.
Controversial opinion, but I thought Hawkwind was the peak of his career.
Expectations of a Labour government after the defeat of a Tory government are likely to be very high, also very likely will be the disappointment.
I don't know why you think expectations will be high. Anti EU, austerity, pro privatising the NHS.
Very dissapointing from Lammy, I used to hold him in quite high esteem.
Hoping for a cabinet seat
I think Lammy was outspoken on brexit, which of course struck a chord of agreement with a lot of us. However I wonder if you go back over his history if he has actually done much else of note.
I don’t know why you think expectations will be high.
Because a lot of people consider the current Tory government to be exceptionally bad, the worse ever according to some people, and a Labour government, they believe, will be a massive improvement.
For those reasons I believe that expectations will be high. You don't agree?
Not at all. expectations are IMO low and rightfully so
Well maybe your analysis is correct but you wouldn't generally expect to see an opposition party with a 21% lead over a governing party if voters didn't believe that they offered a massive improvement.
https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1654487077138968579
So why the huge Labour lead if voters don't expect a Labour government to be significantly different?
So why the huge Labour lead if voters don’t expect a Labour government to be significantly different?
Like the brexit vote, the voters will make the only decision offered to them. More of the same, or the potential for something different, even if they don't know what it is or don't believe it'll happen.
More of the same, or the potential for something different
Which suggests that they will be very disappointed, no?
Edit:
don’t believe it’ll happen.
In politics it's difficult to get people to support change if they don't believe that it will happen, one of the prerequisite is to convince voters that you are offering change, even if they don't understand what change you are offering.
They will only be disappointment if they have high expectations. As I do not believe they do have high expectations then I don't see the disappointment coming. Hence the somewhat lukewarm response that labour gets. its the tories being awful thats driving the polling not labour being good
Which suggests that they will be very disappointed, no?
Almost certainly. No one apart from a few financiers and company directors has any expectation that the tories will do anything to help them, but almost everyone else expects to be better off under a labour govt. It's why labour have a much tougher time in both govt and opposition than the tories ever do.
Hence the somewhat lukewarm response that labour gets.
I don't call a 21% lead Labour gets over the Tories when voters are asked how would you vote if there was a general election now "lukewarm".
Well it is very obvious that we aren't talking about "the locals" when we are discussing whether voters will be disappointed with the next Labour government.
Unless you believe that the local election results reflects how voters will vote in a general election? Do you really believe that the LibDems will be only 6% behind the Tories?
Edit: Have a look at some "detailed polling" here
https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/
No one apart from a few financiers and company directors has any expectation that the tories will do anything to help them, but almost everyone else expects to be better off under a labour govt. It’s why labour have a much tougher time in both govt and opposition than the tories ever do.
I didn’t realise there was so many financiers & company directors knocking around… I mean, if everyone else expects to better off under Labour, & everyone else must be a fairly big number, then there must be loads of them. Otherwise how come they keep getting elected?
Obviously that’s nonsense but what it does highlight is that ordinary people who have literally nothing to gain from the Tories except less of everything, seem to vote Tory. Why is that? Why do people believe that the Tories are the party of responsible finances, when historically that can be shown to be untrue?
It’s because their PR machine is so good. They’re particularly adept at tapping into National emotion & then preying upon it. That and a largely sympathetic media.
ordinary people who have literally nothing to gain from the Tories except less of everything, seem to vote Tory. Why is that?
I can only assume...
Stop the boats
Keep the Foreigners out
Get rid of EU law
Keep britain british
Etc.
Complete nonsense of course.
I can only assume…
Stop the boats
Keep the Foreigners out
Get rid of EU law
Keep britain britishEtc.
English Nationalism.
Actually, that's a bit unfair. Let's call it British Nationalism. There are, after all, pockets of it in all the home nations.
It’s because their PR machine is so good. They’re particularly adept at tapping into National emotion & then preying upon it. That and a largely sympathetic media.
It's partly that imo and partly that Labour make it easy for them. Labour almost always take a defensive position or even abandon any attempt to defend themselves - the Tory/LibDem attack on Labour's handling of the global credit crisis (which imo was the single most impressive achievement by New Labour) and the subsequent deficit is a good example of this.
Labour all but went along with the false narrative and claimed that they too would commit themselves to deficit reduction/austerity but over the course of two parliament rather than one. It was a gift to the Tories as it basically backed up what they were saying.
Today Starmer carries on with this traditional Labour defensive strategy by claiming that he will exercise the same level of fiscal prudence as the Tories if not more so, thereby giving credence to Tory economic policies.
In contrast the Tories traditionally attack Labour rather than take a defensive position - why would they need to defend themselves when Labour is largely agreeing with their economic strategies?
By constantly attacking Labour, and Labour either making half-arse attempts to defend themselves or capitulating and agreeing with the Tories, the Tories are able to create myths which the electorate have little reason to doubt as Labour invariably fails to offer a compelling alternative narrative.
All this imo helps to explain why the Tories are hugely successful in winning elections. Margaret Thatcher is an exceptionally good example of relentless Tory attacks on Labour economic policies, until Labour eventually capitulated and agreed with her.
People trust the Tories over Labour to run the economy. Labour really need to try harder to not just show the current lot to be shite but also previous governments. Statistics are on Labour's side.
I can only assume…
Stop the boats
Keep the Foreigners out
Get rid of EU law
Keep britain britishEtc.
The idea that the Tories have been in power for most of the time since universal suffrage was first granted because of those reasons is clearly nonsense.
Although the simplistic conclusion that voters are foreign-hating racists obviously provides more comfortable reassurance than self-criticism does.