but most of the time they just keep blundering on pandering to the real power in Germany: the industrial giants and economic interests.
I rest my case. 😀
I finally had some material through the letterbox yesterday
Reform and Greens
Reform can do one
Greens is tricky because I personally can't stand the candidate here (Andrew Cooper - Huddersfield), but that's after various professional dealings with him over the years and his attitude/arrogance.
That's a very personal position though because he has been a good public servant as a councillor,and I wouldn't put someone off voting for him if they wanted to support greens
To be populists you have to do stuff that is popular.
I think populists are more about saying they'll do stuff rather than doing stuff. Mostly because what they say they'll do doesn't survive contact with reality.
From that point of view the Tories have absolutely been populists.
If you're just doing stuff that's popular (for example, fixing the cost of living crisis) then you're not so much a populist and more just a popular government.
Don’t be daft. The tory govt is in no way a far right populist govt.
So Wilders is not a right wing populist? Le Pen? there is no significant differences between their policies and the tories
"To be populists you have to do stuff that is popular."
No you don't. That isn't what populist means.
Leaflet count so far in East Bristol:
- Lib Dems 1 (for local candidate)
- Labour 1 (generic)
- Greens 1 (local candidate)
- Independent nutter 1
Looks like the Tories aren't bothering. Not entirely surprised. And definitely nothing from farage's rabble
My leaflet count so far is at 4
Having been in a safe Tory seat for 30 years , 23 of them with the same MP, and getting nothing at each election for at least two decades, we have had four visits at the door by Green supporters- not directly canvassing in each case, six or eight Green leaflets two of which came in the post, two leaflets from the Torys and one each from Labour, Lib Dem’s and Reform, all via the postman.
I am guessing that the sudden influx is because this is one of the Greens target seats.
by far the least well produced was the Reform one, the second Tory one was in a mock newspaper format which had pictures of the candidate with Johnson amongst all the usual guff but not Sunak which I thought was revealing.
Honestly, I think the Tories are gone. I’m not sure what seismic event it would take to wake up on 5th of July and find the Tories are the largest party, let alone have a majority
You're probably right Bruce, (and buying a new bike wouldn't take away the pain if it did happen) - but this thread from Edwin Hayward is more eloquently put than i could about consigning the Tories to 3rd place:
You may dislike the current incarnation of Labour and deplore their Brexit position. You may believe that one Tory MP more or less makes no real difference when we're facing a Labour landslide. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The huge prize at this election is the Tories coming THIRD. That would change absolutely everything. It's the difference between them biding their time until they can regroup, and being finished forever as a political force.
Here's what they would lose by finishing up behind the LibDems:
- 6 questions at PMQs every week
- Automatic media coverage
- 17 Opposition Days when they get to set the agenda and hold votes
- First right to reply to key speeches like the King's Speech and the Budget
- A lot of their Short Money
- The right to form a Shadow Cabinet (other parties can mirror government functions but nobody really cares) as a government in waiting
- Chairs of several Select Committees
- Privy Council membership for senior figures
- Office of the Leader of the Opposition, with additional resources, funding and staff
As you can imagine, without any of that good stuff to fall back on, the path to rebuilding would be a vertical cliff. That's why it's essential to vote tactically to get the Tories out, no matter what you feel about the current incarnation of Labour. (Personally I'm furious about their views on Brexit and other issues.)
The chance will never come again to wipe them out for good. Literally never. We will never see the perfect storm of factors converge again:
- 14 years of Conservative rule, marked by growing public discontent
- A string of mismanagement issues, from the PPE scandal to Brexit complications
- The rise of Reform UK, splitting the traditional Conservative vote and the perfect protest vote for people who would never vote Labour, LibDem or Green
- A resurgent Liberal Democrat party
- An astonishingly poor Conservative election campaign
And with the LibDems in Opposition, the topic of Brexit will finally get a proper and frequent airing. That will advance the cause of Rejoin more than any other action possibly could.
So hold your nose. Look past your frustration, your distaste, your anger, your apathy. And vote for whichever party can beat the Tories in your constituency.
Eyes on the prize. Always. Eyes on the prize.
https://twitter.com/edwinhayward/status/1806240421258920112
I think populists are more about saying they’ll do stuff rather than doing stuff.
There are several definitions but the European variant tends towards that is a movement based around the claiming to represent the "people" vs the "elite". With "people" meaning anything from the general population to a specific subgroup and "elite" being equally flexible.
Admittedly when if they do get power then they often do find it difficult to do what they said but thats not limited to the populists.
Edit: what do I need to do to actually get the tweet to embed rather than just link?
Use twitter dot com rather than x dot com.
You’ve got to remember though that Blair was intensely disliked by many, even back then, both him personally and some of his policies.
Perhaps a question for a separate thread, but I've just thought:
Have we had any PM in, say, my lifetime who wasn't "intensely disliked by many"? Let's say the last 50 years.
Before this current shower and aside from Blair we had Gordon Brown and John Major, Major was about as controversial as porridge (or at least he was portrayed that way) and I'd forgotten Brown was even PM until I looked it up just now. Prior to them we had 11 years of Thatcher and well, enough said there. Before her I was too young to remember, I'd have been 7 when she supplanted Callaghan.
What I actually got warned for was saying that he was a [shit] advert for Labour and for every person he’s convinced to vote Labour by knocking on doors he’s probably turned at least one person off voting Labour with his hilarious antics on here.
I'm no longer a moderator so cannot check directly, but that sounds wildly unlikely to me. Personal attacks against other users on the other hand...
Already in for 120 seats and forming the opposition.
Analysed the support at elections since 1918 from the FT yesterday. Median voting percentages were;
Conservative: 43%
Labour: 38%
Liberal: 14%
Others: 3%
Labour (42%) and Liberals (11%) are at or about their historic medians, Conservatives (21%) are 20% below. That support has moved largely to the Others (27%). In fact, the Conservatives share is the lowest since at least 1918! Shy Tories will not stay at home. But Cleverly loosing would be the most joyous thing. Followed by Badenough. In fact all those sharpening their claws for greasy pole climbing are fair game.
but this thread from Edwin Hayward is more eloquently put than i could about consigning the Tories to 3rd place:
I get where you're coming from, and it would be fantastic for that to happen (although very unlikely), but in terms of importance I think it's way behind what Labour actually do once they are in power.
What worries me is people saying, 'Well, they can't really do much but that's fine' or, 'I think they're just lying to the easily led and they'll actually do stuff once in power'.
Both these things significantly increase the chances of a turbo-nutter Tory/Reform majority in 5 years time. Not doing anything or lying to the electorate and doing stuff they didn't sign up for are sure-fire ways to create a huge backlash.
I'd go for about 120-150 seats for the Tories 😕
That Monster Raving Looney flyer is terrifying!
I can recommend listening to Setting Sons by The Jam.
A cracking album. And a poignant reminder of how little many things have changed in 45 years!
So Wilders is not a right wing populist? Le Pen?
The UK's resident populist is Farage, not Sunak. Johnson came close, and Truss desperately wanted to be one, but both ultimately failed. May and Cameron were the very opposite of populists. When Farage joins the tory party as its new leader you can congratulate yourself on being right, unitl then I'm afraid they're just plain old right wing.
No you don’t. That isn’t what populist means.
Ok you have to claim you want to do stuff that is popular. Sunak and most other tory leaders before him doesn't meet this description either.
No you don’t. That isn’t what populist means.
Well to my mind a 'populist' govt is one that tries/pretends to be on the side of the populace rather than the elites, and relies on a strong leader Which again fails the sniff test for this version of the Tories, apart from maybe Johnson being strong-ish (but not decisive)
Sorry to spoil the joke, but - swifts aren't Passerines, they're Apodiforms. Now, martins and swallows are Passerines, despite being superficially the same.
Hate to bring reason and fact into the thread, obviously 🙂
A few have mentioned a sweepstake, I might be motivated to run that. Use the Like button to gauge interest. If there's enough I'll set up a new thread at 8am tomorrow on a FPTP (I mean, first come first served FCFS) basis.
I reckon we need 20 in to make it work, and it would be like a Grand National random draw, not a choose your runner. There's bookies for that. Unless you're a candidate obvs... oh no, wait. Although a secondary feature also to include actual guesses.
# Tory seats in 24 GE
slots of 10 votes, and using yesterday's BBC More or Less analysis of the MRP range prediction [ https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0020hkc 14:00 on, which said 53-155 across 3 polls] to set the potential range I'd propose
Under 40
40-49
50-59
etc. up to 220+ (on the basis I think many are fearful that polls are understated and that 155 is still low)
£10 in paypal to me as entry and winnings paid out as
To the winner of the random draw - 65% ie £130
As well as getting a randomised 10 seat slot, with every entry you also pick an actual number. 35% / £70 goes to the winner of that, or nearest guess (over or under). In event of tie it's shared. If more than one person chooses a number, it's shared. I can't be arsed with having to message people back to tell them that number's gone, I know a few have already 'guessed' a prediction but if you're in on this you don't have to use that and don't have to declare what you guessed.
Last point - if we get 15 or more in but not the full 20, any spares will be allocated to charity(s), to be selected by the STW Towers folks. Obvs they don't pay to enter, and the 65% / 35% could reduce accordingly.
Long message but who's in - tick the like button to say yes. Just to gauge interest, if enough, then real entry opens tomorrow.
Christ on a bendybus, that Sky interview is terrible! I know a lot of politicians try to talk over people but Sunak just radiates a 'how dare you question me?!' sense of entitlement. He genuinelly seems to think that the common peasantry should just accept what he bloody well says!!
I know its been said before that most people didn't think it could get worse than Johnson then Truss, but he's managed it. He's like a petulant child
Anyway, this made me laugh...
"Ok you have to claim you want to do stuff that is popular."
Still no. Population and popular share a root of course, but the meaning is quite different.
All politicians have to claim they are going to do stuff that is popular in the sense of attracting votes, of course. That's how democracy works, broadly speaking. But it's nothing to do with populism.
Populism is a philosophy that sets the (good) population against the (bad) elites, and although you have to attract votes to win an election, you don't have to be populist, and conversely, populists aren't necessarily popular. Neither, after it's won power, does a populist govt need to do anything that's popular.
In the UK, of course you can win a landslide with about 13 million votes out of 65 million people, which doesn't make you "popular" anyway.
Dazh - Wilders and Le Pen have very similar policies to the tories - so either they are all populist or none are.
Those videos that they do with planted councillors are just ****ing hilarious! Like this is a bold statement, but I reckon that there are very very few people in the country who are going 'I've voted Labour all my life but in 2024 I'll be voting Tory'
It's just so unlikely to happen, yet they still keep making these fake videos?! Madness.
Populism is a philosophy that sets the (good) population against the (bad) elites
Well by that definition my opinion that the tories are not populist is even more accurate. 🤷♂️
Wilders and Le Pen have very similar policies to the tories
And Starmer has very similar policies to the tories. What does that make labour? Look this is all interesting but I think we all know who the far right populists are in the UK without having to dissect it to the nth degree. It's entirely possible to hate the tories for being tories without having to make stuff up. Carry on!
Well by that definition my opinion that the tories are not populist is even more accurate.
Not really because you need quote marks around both population and elites. Especially the latter.
Hence how you have the likes of Johnson and Farage using the anti elite line whilst being members of the elite.
That's excellent.😀
Dazh – Wilders and Le Pen have very similar policies to the tories
Do stop with this stuff. Wilders wants to ban the hijab the Quran and building mosques, and Le Pen opposes privatisation of banks and utilities and is generally protectionist. Neither of those politicians are anything like the current Tories who're at best performatively cruel to the extent of painting over children's cartoons in refugee centres.
He really is a very tetchy person
His main problem seems to be he learns his set of lines and is knackered outside of the set piece.
If someone challenges his answer then all he can do is repeat it again basically word for word with something like "I have been clear" at the beginning but in a slightly louder way. Ask him again and its rinse and repeat.
Nickc - Both Wilders and Le Pen would happily sit in the UK tory party and would not be the most racist or extreme person in the party. sure not every policy is the same but they are in around the same place electorally looking at the same voters ie populist right wing. Banning the Quoran is not PPV policty any more.
His main problem seems to be he learns his set of lines
This is the curse of modern communications trap though isn't it? Starmer was doing the same thing when asked about his time as Corbyn's deputy, stubbornly repeating the same line over and over and refusing to say more. it makes for terrible interviews (that not many folks will actually watch the whole thing) but works OK as a news paper/X.com quote or a sound bite on the news.
I'd like to get away from reporters trying to "gotcha" questions all the time, and the media teams of politicians clipping them for sound bites, but what can we do?
Sorry to spoil the joke, but – swifts aren’t Passerines, they’re Apodiforms. Now, martins and swallows are Passerines, despite being superficially the same.
Hate to bring reason and fact into the thread, obviously 🙂
@petec - not at all. I'm in credit for the day now ' I genuinely did not know that.
Although I'm now going to have to wait for the opportunity to use Apodiform in a pun.
I wonder which will arise first - the pun opportunity or a politician from the two main parties admitting Brexit is a total **** up? 🤔
Both Wilders and Le Pen would happily sit in the UK tory party
Wilders would be more at home in Reform, and LePen's economic policies are literally the opposite of most globalist free market Tories, they might start as Tories as kids, but they'd soon enough defect to more extreme positions.
As someone with a specific academic interest in populism I'd just say that it is an incredibly hard term to define. It's made harder by it's over use and misuse.
Look for articles by Cas Mudde for stuff on both this and populism's links to the far/radical right. He wrote in the Guardian a few weeks ago, so not all of his output is impenetrable academia.
