Interestingly in my ward Reform didn’t come out tops as the Facebook poll suggested. In fact the Tories won all 3 seats. 2 of them were incumbent with the third taking the seat from Labour.
Oh, look, another one who cannot differentiate between race and country of origin. Is it any wonder why I think swing voters all lack critical thinking skills?
What do you think “race” means in the context of the human species?
Saying the quiet bit out loud https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/reform-uk-local-elections-peter-reeve-ukip-video-b2973182.html
Two things here.
1) They have no interest in engaging in discussion as how nice you might be, they just want to win. We've seen this time after time on STW alone. The Reformerlyremain supporters' playbook is to spout bollocks and then when challenged they either get all shouty, immediately change the subject, or vanish. It's futile to even try.
2) I've said this before but I think it's unfair to label all Reform voters as thick or racist. Rather, it's surely true that all the thick racists voted for Reform.
Well, actually .. what we are seeing now (and also before from my time short time here) is the anti-Reform supporters spouting bollocks and getting all shouty by falling back on their childish name calling of thick and/or racist to feel like they are winning the debate.
To be clear. I have never, and would never vote Reform for my own reasons. But as bonkers as I think it is that people would vote Reform, I find it equally bonkers that the anti-Reformers think that by identifying their-selves as boorish and churlish to anyone with different views is in anyway beneficial - because what that means is that you will only live in an echo chamber of sycophants or people simply humouring you .. or getting you to humour them with your Harry Enfield Short-Bloke impression.
The sadness of all of this is that it has resulted in basically name calling and the one who shouts loudest wins. There is no debate, reasoned discussion, acceptance or tolerance.
As someone said we are more alike than not.
Until that can happen then I fear for us.
The sadness of all of this is that it has resulted in basically name calling and the one who shouts loudest wins. There is no debate, reasoned discussion, acceptance or tolerance.
As someone said we are more alike than not.
Until that can happen then I fear for us.
Well, our next government is highly likely to polarise the electorate even further so brace yourself for a long slog.
I suspect a few of us are watching/engaging in conversations where the consensus of those conversations vary wildy. There's not a lot of tolerance going around.
There is no debate, reasoned discussion, acceptance or tolerance.
To be fair it's hard to imagine what a "debate" with someone whose sole philosophy is "I don't like darkies" might look like.
I was watching a little of the Scottish election coverage late last night. One of the panel, an election analyst, was saying that the two main demographics that Reform had managed to persuade to switch allegiance were (a) older men and (b) younger women. I'll admit that I was somewhat surprised at the latter. Anyone like to suggest the reason(s) for this?
Possibly the climate of fear, every immigrant/asylum seeker is a potential rapist rhetoric. It's all nonsense but they keep banging on about it.
I find it equally bonkers that the anti-Reformers think that by identifying their-selves as boorish and churlish to anyone with different views is in anyway beneficial
Who thinks it’s beneficial?
Away from the internet I talk to people all the time that think “we should give Farage a chance”. Of course I disagree with them politely, but until he’s been in power and there have been mass deportations and the slashing of benefits no polite discussion will dissuade them. And as long as he delivers that, and does it visibly with people shown to be suffering, he’ll get a second term, nothing else matters.
someone whose sole philosophy is "I don't like darkies"
I don't think it's even that with Reform voters. I think k most of them are unhappy with their lives but can't get their head around that might be down to them as much as it is politics, the area, deprivation etc. etc. And if tcan't be their fault as they consider themselves to be hardworking, honest members of society playing by the rules (they often aren't / dont) it must be somebody else's fault. Thats where the immigrants come in as easy scapegoats.
You've only got to look at Kevog's post on the previous page, sort out immigration and it'll all be fine. Of course anyone with a brain knows we need some immigration for economic reasons and clamping down on the rest however harshly isn't going to fix our underlying issues.
Infact follow the rest of his closed off from reality further, its all those other people not like me who cost the money via their DEI officers. Its pipe smoke, they don't exist, Reform got Lancashire and quickly discovered there weren't easy savings to be had by just axing stuff.
There's not enough money, expectations of what society should provide are too high and frankly councils are inefficient and wasteful at best, but not in the way Reform voters think.
is the anti-Reform supporters spouting bollocks and getting all shouty by falling back on their childish name calling of thick and/or racist to feel like they are winning the debate.
The thing is, I didn't just wake up one day and think 'a large portion or reform voters are all racist or stupid'. I've been hearing their arguments for years prior to coming to that conclusion.
Point in case...we have a poster arguing that illegal migration erodes workers job security, and the answer to that is to vote for a party that advocates removing workers rights.
To reach that conclusion, if you aren't a bit 'racist', and you aren't ' stupid or ill informed', or you aren't 'incredibly naive', what are you?
im quite looking forward to seeing how badly reform so now we have 2 years before the next election and they will have a record to defend from these authorities
Actually thanks to Reform's own legal challenge, we get to turf them out in just a year.
I think the uncomfortable reality is that the turnout for local elections is that the turn out is pathetically low.
Turnouts for Manchester City Council were between 20 and 50% possibly because the only party who door knocked were Reform and the Labour councillor put leaflets through the door.
The Green Party and Libdems did nothing that I saw. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the party’s had bothered.
i feel sorry for some of the hard working councillors who try to support and help residents who have lost seats.
Well, Labour retained all three seats here, but more widely it was a landslide for Reform in Calderdale and we have a Reform council now… so our hard working councillors will lose their roles (which included delivering green transport initiatives that Reform are against). We had an “all out” election here where every seat was up for grabs. I think in other areas where Reform have made gains there’s more to come at future local elections, and far more councils will fall under their control over the next few years.
Point in case...we have a poster arguing that illegal migration erodes workers job security, and the answer to that is to vote for a party that advocates removing workers rights.
Do you agree with every policy of a party you vote for, or do you prioritise some policies over others? Labour Party policy on disability benefits and retention of the two child child benefit cap for example? Green Party policies on decriminalisation of drugs, or their long standing opposition to NATO membership?
and I’ve not seen Labour do anything at all to seriously tackle Amazon/Uber/Just Eat etc. so why would I continue to vote for them?
jesus, critical thinking skills really are lacking amongst you lot, aren’t they?
I think k most of them are unhappy with their lives but can't get their head around that might be down to them as much as it is politics, the area, deprivation etc. etc. And if tcan't be their fault as they consider themselves to be hardworking, honest members of society playing by the rules (they often aren't / dont) it must be somebody else's fault.
It may be down to them to the extent we all make decisions that affect our lives. Thing is though, like being an asylum seeker is down to circumstance or bad luck, huge numbers of people in the UK are in circumstances that are repressive and any one of us would struggle there. Whatever you are capable of or the ambitions you have, it's a reduction factor and I think most of us underestimate how strongly it pulls people down. I would make worse decisions in that life. Maybe I've let some of my experiences locally influence my thinking too much but I also know people who work in mental health and social care, it's really not good out there.
There are places like that in every town and city and in some some towns and cities it's the majority. Crushing poverty and no opportunity. It's a breeding ground for dissatisfaction and grudges and people are wide open to the politics of blame. Not all of us can have great prospects, life is not fair, but no-one will convince me the system offers a reasonably fair levels of opportunity. It's polarising like wealth is. We either all vote to fix that or we all get pulled down as the grifters take power.
Reminds me, there was a conversation on the news recently about working class areas that used to have industry or fishing and now have nothing. While there have been success from focus areas such as schools in more racially diverse but similarly deprived inner city areas (budgets or monitoring, not sure what the actual work was), the point being made iirc was that while some aspects of the effect of poverty had been turned around in some areas, there were other mainly ex-industrial areas that have been left out and the point was they're mainly white working class areas. I'm wary of misrepresenting this one so do your own reading - but I think they were making the point that where there is a racial difference between two poor areas with an imbalance in resolving the effects of poverty in them, it may be attributed to the fear or difficulty in talking about race. It's was said to have been happening for a long enough time that it could now be studied and links shown., The subject of resolving problems for the white working class was more difficult than for multi-racial working class. The results in schools performance was one indicator.
It was an interesting discussion because it was making a point that initially I reacted a bit '..woah hold on GB NEws..' - but this was BBC or C4 news discussion with 2 academics and someone from a studies group. A quick search shows up similar recent articles.
So when a Reform voter talks about 'the PC lot' or 'Queue jumping' and so on, it might be these influences providing a legitimate base for comment - not that it should be spun into something else but the media and politics will do that. And I'm not saying this in support of Reform, they can do one. I'm saying it in support of the point that if the other side take the "Stupid racist!" position excessively we're failing to get into the reasons that the populist grifters have increasing support - the conditions that breed the dissatisfaction.
Green Party policies on decriminalisation of drugs, or their long standing opposition to NATO membership?
Yep.
Do you agree with every policy of a party you vote for, or do you prioritise some policies over others?
Yes, I prioritise some policies, of course - everyone does. And the areas I prioritise are precisely those that Reform expose themselves to be deplorable.
Now - tell me again about the "race/country of origin" thing.
People talking up Great Yarmouth results eg - don't think GY has ever had any cheer leaders on here, - IGNORE
Great Yarmouth is notable because it was the test case for Restore Britain, they only ran for ten seats but they completely crushed Reform in every single one.
You might say who cares about ten seats in some obscure town? It wouldn’t be an unreasonable assessment but I see the seeds of something that could be huge.
The party is only around 3 months old, already has over 130,000 members, polls at 8/9% when prompted and just comfortably won every seat it stood for. If I was Farage I’d be worried.
Of course anyone with a brain knows we need some immigration for economic reasons and clamping down on the rest however harshly isn't going to fix our underlying issues.
Of course controlled legal immigration to match the country’s needs is required and completely necessary. What’s not required is illegal immigration of random people who have decided they want to be in the uk.
The problem as I see it is that we have polarising views from reform who want to ban everyone to the left who want to let everyone in. There isn’t a grow up conversation about what immigration is needed and why, how it can be delivered whilst preventing illegal immigration. No one seems to have a workable clue as to how to stop illegal entry which is creating the problem that is being exploited
It feels those opposing Reform learnt very little from Brexit and how to fight an opposing party that isn't playing by their traditional rules*. Brexit caused the implosion of the Tory party and now there is a void to fill. My sample size is small but I know a few paid up members who held their nose and voted for other parties at the last GE and council. Not reform though, normally Lib Dems.
Reform have in part filled that void. But they also seem to have taken the dissatisfied working class. That is noticeable where I live in Newcastle.
Others have touched on it above but Labour don't offer much and a shift to the middle ground has changed things I don't really get the hatred for Starmer* he's not the most dynamic or charismatic of leaders but there is a rhetoric that seems much stronger. . I think there is an element of picking up a few flaws and massively focussing on them. That would be an easy job with Farage.
*I don't really understand why Labour haven't started to fight Reform on their platforms and tactics. Social media is awful if you click on anything politics. It's clear that a significant amount of the traffic is rage bait posting by bots. I don't think being an honourable loser in this scenario is the way forward and I'd think a more aggressive approach is necessary. I've seen it from a few back bench labour MPs.
How you counter this on an individual level is a mystery. Often when discussing politics you ask people in more detail about their opinions and you don't get much depth. Logic and debate won't win because that doesn't appear to be the starting point - its why that gap is filled with "thick" and "racist". As above, need to understand the rules of the game and change approach. Some digging is needed to understand motives, even if unpalatable and not explained.
I think a reform led UK will make us all worse off. I was young when Blair won. But I remember those early years being full of optimism and a positive outlook (maybe that was jut the song!). There have been other politician that have run on that message. But so much of recent years has been negative. Reform's message is one of division, blame and anger. They clearly have no credible plan, in exactly the same way Brexit played out. Politics does tend to move in cycles, however I'd sooner avoid the dips while people figure out we made some bad choices.
when discussing politics you ask people in more detail about their opinions and you don't get much depth
I notice this with many of the vox pop type pieces heard on the TV and radio recently, with reporters asking folk on the street, 'well what do you think of' X, Y, Z etc and the reponses are usually just tabloid or R/W broadsheet headlines/mantras... or else some sort of vague, 'I don't like Starmer etc', overlooking the point surely that the (English) local elections were about electing their councillors, a fairly fundamental point?
Well, actually .. what we are seeing now (and also before from my time short time here) is the anti-Reform supporters spouting bollocks and getting all shouty by falling back on their childish name calling of thick and/or racist to feel like they are winning the debate.
You miss my point, I think.
We aren't winning the debate, we're losing it badly, because "the debate" doesn't exist. How do you suppose that's going to pan out?
"I hate immigrants."
"Well actually, many of them are lovely and hard working."
"Oh, are they? My bad, I didn't realise."
I'm increasingly of the mind that the only way we're going to 'win' anything is by letting them find out the hard way. And it's looking increasingly like the only way to achieve that is to let them have what they want so that they can work it out the hard way. There's only so often you can put out Wet Paint signs before you have to just let people stick their fingers in it.
Until then we're playing chess with pigeons. How long have we been having these conversations now, since 2016 at least? We lost back then because we thought we could reason with feelings and we still haven't learned that this is not possible. I don't doubt that many people have changed their minds over the years, but how many have had their minds changed by "debate"? If it's not zero then I'd bet good money that it will be bloody close to it.
Oh, and if you think that 'the left' is guilty of name-calling, you want to spend more time outside of a woke echo chamber. Maybe start with X.
when discussing politics you ask people in more detail about their opinions and you don't get much depth
We made the fatal error of talking about politics in the pub last night. 4 of the regulars said they'd all voted Reform, so I asked them what policies - other than stopping immigraion - they were voting for. None of them had a clue what Reforms policies were on any other subject than immigration, yet all 4 of them went out and voted for them on Thursday.
I mean... how do you counter that? I haven't got a ****ing clue what I'm voting for, but vote I will!
I totally get how disillusioned people are with the two main parties, but you'd think that people might check out what the alternative being offered is about before backing it with their vote? Apparently not.
I'd like to hope that Reform will be held to account a lot more by the media, who seemed to have given them a free pass so far, but I can't see it happening. They're given a hugely dissproportionate amount of media coverage and are simply allowed to spout utter garbage, completely unchallenged
Yes, I prioritise some policies, of course - everyone does.
Is this actually the case though?
I can't cite sources, but it's my understanding that people typically vote because of one policy which they either strongly approve of or strongly object to. This was abundantly clear in the vox pops post-referendum, "well, I don't know anything about the EU so I voted Leave because more money to the NHS is a good idea" and many, many similar comments from both Leave and Remain voters alike.
Whilst I've got my betting hat on this morning, I reckon that if you stopped your average Reform voter in the street and asked them to name one Reform policy they were in favour of which was wholly unrelated to immigration then you'd get a blank look.
Meanwhile, the Greens' biggest barrier to entry (aside from mainstream media) is that in people's minds they're a one-policy party and if you don't care about the environment then why would you vote Green? Bunch of tree-hugging hippies telling us we can't use carrier bags and drinking straws (yes yes, I know).
Neither side has the monopoly on being ill-informed I'm afraid, it is endemic. The narrative here on STW is atypical.
I can't remember where I heard it but I steal the idea that political parties are like trains, not taxis. They take you in the right direction but not necessarily the exact route or precise destination you would choose. You get on the train that takes you closest to where you want to go by a sensible route.
It’s alright lads.
Kier has just signed up Gordon Brown and Harriet Harperson as advisors to no10
😆
Good choices (for those briefs).
Yes, reopening Harpersons history of ‘protection of women and girls’ through her support of the Paedophile Information Exchange sounds like absolute political genius, doesn’t it?
Might as well give Harold Shipman the health & social care job…
Just had a chat with a local Conservative councillor at the local butty shop. This isn't where I live so I've no skin in the game. Never met the guy before, someone else mentioned who he was.
He's just been returned successfully. Lots of councillors are now Reform - apparently about 29 of them (Kirklees). Out of those, apparently two shouldn't have been able to stand and there are questions over another one or two.
At the count, the Reform wallahs were arguing about something or other so can't even behave themselves.
He said he thinks it's going to be very "interesting" when these new councillors turn up to their first full meeting, and then how things will develop over the next year. And he despairs that the voters can't differentiate between local and national issues.
I commented that my mum is in a local care home where all the staff bar two are non-white, and all the residents are elderly and white. This weekend's papers? Only the Mail and the Express are delivered.
The problem as I see it is that we have polarising views from reform who want to ban everyone to the left who want to let everyone in. There isn’t a grow up conversation about what immigration is needed and why, how it can be delivered whilst preventing illegal immigration. No one seems to have a workable clue as to how to stop illegal entry which is creating the problem that is being exploited
I don’t think that this is the case. Firstly, I don’t think we have a Reform vs ‘the left’ situation. The opposition to and distaste for Reform probably spans quite a wide spectrum of political beliefs.
And those who tend to be on the left (whatever that means these days) don’t want to just ‘let everyone in’. Most will have more nuanced views… but the problem is that those views can’t be explained in one catch phrase and many Reform voters will not (in my experience) listen to a complex and nuanced argument.
Many non Reform voters will see immigration as a series of interlinked issues, not as one discreet phenomenon that can simply be stamped out. They will also be more tolerant of governments who try and deal with immigration as fairly and humanely as is possible. So whilst they may worry about some aspects of the impact of immigration in its current form, they won’t tolerate an ICE style clampdown. When they criticise Reform’s stated policies, they get accused of wanting open borders.
Most importantly they don’t buy the notion that immigration is the number one biggest problem in the UK and that it is to blame for all the countries ills. They understand that immigration policy and practice may need to be worked on to adapt to a changing world… but they see other problems as more pressing and fundamental.
I myself struggle with the ethical basis for closed borders. If you strive for equality and fairness within your own country… it’s a bit difficult to see how you can then draw lines around a place and say that I want everyone in this place to be treated fairly but I don’t care about everyone outside the line.
But I know that the reality of the situation is that if all borders were open right now, we would face un-manageable chaos…
her support of the Paedophile Information Exchange
Ah, the old lies are the best lies. God bless the Daily Mail and all who read it.
I deleted an earlier comment. I think opponents of reform should fight on their terms. That PIE stuff is a classic example.
It is niche as F. As I understand it Harman was a lawyer for an organisation that PIE affiliated to. She wrote a legal position piece. That's been twisted to direct, overt support of PIE.
I honestly don't understand why others at this point don't do some digging and start writing hit pieces on Reform. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel. I know it would be stopping to their level but theirs no point having the moral high ground and losing at this point.
I clicked on the guardian article on Facebook and the comments echoed exactly the comment above, and Gordon Brown selling gold. A number of them appeared to be bots then I stopped. Again, it's a tool, not one I agree with but it clearly it influences people as those sound bites make it off there and into the wider world.
I don't really get the hatred for Starmer*
Anecdotally, I see three things at play.
To the gammons, he's not gammony enough. This is cousin to brexit failing because it wasn't brexity enough, it would've been a roaring success but for all those lefties interfering rather than getting behind it.
To the wokerati, he's exactly what we voted against only worse. Labour won because a large swathe of the electorate voted tactically to get rid of the Tories, only to find Starmer is just another Tory only with a different badge and less charisma. Ironically, history has just repeated itself with Reform and other parties surely netting shitloads of anti-Labour protest votes.
But far and away the largest narrative I hear on social media is "what do you expect from a Labour government?" There are those still papping on about Tony Blair and war crimes which, whatever your feelings on that matter, has **** all relevance to today's politics.
That's enough to dislike him but not hate. He's hardly a Thatcher, Blair or Johnson figure.
No one seems to have a workable clue as to how to stop illegal entry which is creating the problem that is being exploited
Rejoining the EU would fix that. "Small boats" is a symptom of a problem we created, it's an issue which didn't exist 15 years ago.
Which you'd know if you attempted to answer the question I asked you on the previous page.
I'm increasingly of the mind that the only way we're going to 'win' anything is by letting them find out the hard way. And it's looking increasingly like the only way to achieve that is to let them have what they want so that they can work it out the hard way.
Given how the populists will present things and how much better they are at messaging, and how many people and politicians in opposition to them don't understand how simple a large part of politics is (it's basic marketing)..
When things are worse for those Reform voters, do you will they double-down or see the light?
nd I’ve not seen Labour do anything at all to seriously tackle Amazon/Uber/Just Eat etc. so why would I continue to vote for them?
jesus, critical thinking skills really are lacking amongst you lot, aren’t they?
So by that statement is it fair to assume that you expect reform to do "something" (what exactly?) to tackle amazon/uber/just eats etc?........
It’s alright lads.
Kier has just signed up Gordon Brown and Harriet Harperson as advisors to no10
😆
Much as I dislike Gordons stance against Scottish independence and take disagreement with him, I have much respect for his integrity and political actions throughout his political career and what he has been up to since leaving office, he's a genuine political heavyweight of the kind we need more of.
I don't know much about Harriet to comment on.
I was just listening to Any Questions on R4. One of the panel was Tim Montgomerie - obviously he fits the usual profile of useless ex-Tory. One of the issues was about renewable energy, and he was repeating the line that Britain has the most expensive electricity in Europe/the world/the universe, while ignoring the fact that everyone who's looked at this issue for more than a minute knows, which is that the cost of generation and the cost of turning on a light are 2 different things, and that renewables are cheaper than the alternatives.
All of which is just to say that while Reform are pumping out naive un-truths, it's not surprising that folk whose first instinct is not to look for data or other evidence will be taken in, and vote accordingly.
Given how the populists will present things and how much better they are at messaging, and how many people and politicians in opposition to them don't understand how simple a large part of politics is (it's basic marketing)..
When things are worse for those Reform voters, do you will they double-down or see the light?
The standard playbook at that point would seem to be to blame a nebulous "deep state" and use that to justify further erosion of the protections that would otherwise provide oversight of the executive and prevent the executive from tearing down the state and rebuilding it in a form more suitable for advancing their goals of personal enrichment and control.
^ Regulations ^……..you forgot to mention the nebulous blob that is regulations and how a simple tearing up of such regulations will lead us to a garden of Eden with rivers of milk and honey (*)
* Terms & conditions below
may actually be rivers of shit spreading pestilence and disease throughout the land, but look!………..absolutely no regulations to hold us back as a great nation once again.
Rejoining the EU would fix that. "Small boats" is a symptom of a problem we created, it's an issue which didn't exist 15 years ago.
Which you'd know if you attempted to answer the question I asked you on the previous page.
thqts right, illegal immigration didn’t exist before 2016, and there weren’t any riots in Calais with immigrants trying to storm the Channel Tunnel en-masse when Blair was PM, right?
