He’s being interviewed by Matt Chorley on Five Live at the moment, and talking a lot of sense, while batting away daft journalistic gossip about being PM.
Well worth a listen Ernesto
All good fun! And he’s getting a massive amount of coverage for his latest plans for economic growth in Greater Manchester.
Do you think he’d be getting that coverage without the leadership speculation?
I haven't heard anything at about Andy Burnham's latest plans for economic growth in Greater Manchester, is it because the Westminster-obsessed media aren't interested in it?
Why should I be? And why would Andy Burnham want the whole country to know? According to you he is massively popular in Manchester, isn't that enough?
That shows how bad Starmer is as I never rated Burnham when he was going for Labour leadership years ago.
TBF he's improved massively since the 2017 shambles. Back then he thought he had to play the part of centrist aspirational tory-lite leadership candidate talking tough about immigrants etc when the membership wanted the exact opposite. Now he's allowed to be himself and he's clearly much more comfortable and effective.
The tricky bit is that the Labour process (80 MPs, openly stating) is difficult assuming Starmer does suddenly get some self awareness and resign.
It was reported yesterday that the left of the PLP alreadty have 80 MPs willing to back an alternative. That's the easy part. The more difficult part is standing for and winning a seat. Starmer and his cronies will do everything possible to stop that happening, so he may have to wait til he's gone and a more friendly leader like Rayner is in place. If the latter he won't be a leadership candidate until at least the election after next.
Back on topic. I see Andy Burnham is all over the news again, this time giving his opinion on Mahmood's deranged asylum reforms and more importantly bigging up his growth plan in Manchester while strongly hinting that it could be applied to the whole UK. And binners thinks he isn't interested in the top job?
Sounds exactly like what Sadiq Khan does. 🤷♂️
We need someone with conviction who can just make some solid progressive decisions, and move fast.
Maybe it's too late to implement anything useful or undo the good ship Starmer's fantastic road to nowhere.
But I would welcome just about anything at this point that is 180 degrees of these economically illiterate cretins.
Anyone coming round to mine for a budget row on the 26th?
I can supply coffee and water. We need clear heads. The booze comes later.
"I demand to have some booze!" 😉
(Personally I think he's wobbling as a leader. Reeves or Starmer or both will go sooner than we think. Streeting knows what he's doing the loony toon.)
The very latest poll yet again puts Labour in 4th place. From a 172 majority to 4th place in the polls 18 short months later really is quite something....... Starmer will go down in history as the hero-to-zero prime minister
https://findoutnow.co.uk/blog/
And exactly twice as many voters saying that they would vote for a party led by Nigel Farage than would vote for Labour really is the stuff of nightmares, imo.
Still, looking at it from a more positive angle it does look increasingly likely that if there were a general election right now it would result in the Green Party being the official opposition.
The one hundred year logjam that has characterised UK politics has, it would appear, finally broken free
I can supply coffee and water. We need clear heads. The booze comes later.
Surely during the speech? After all its the one time alcohol is allowed in the Parliament chamber - just for the chancellor.
A habit which has sadly fallen out of use. I think it should be expanded to PMQs as well since they have given up all seriousness there might as well get a few drinks in and make it properly fun.
Can I suggest the regular media outlets drawing you attention to these things (just like Farage was platformed) rather than relatively little output about trans issues directly coming from the greens?
You can't blame the greens if Nick Ferrari and the BBC want to heighten these things.
The big media outlets set the narrative. They no longer just report the news.
LBC has gone “all-in” on rage baiting discussions/phone in’s and every single presenter has been at it to drive interactions on their show, the entire channel is a ****ing cess pit of presenters and needs nuked from space
And exactly twice as many voters saying that they would vote for a party led by Nigel Farage than would vote for Labour really is the stuff of nightmares, imo.
Still, looking at it from a more positive angle it does look increasingly likely that if there were a general election right now it would result in the Green Party being the official opposition.
It will be interesting to see how that actually turns out in reality and if for an actual election people kind of revert to type and drift back to older parties , also I think tactical voting will play a major role in the next election.
Having said that my fear is that the reform vote is now pretty solid and won't drop that much from the polls at the moment as those people have made their mind up already.
Having said that my fear is that the reform vote is now pretty solid and won't drop that much from the polls at the moment as those people have made their mind up already.
I think the only thing that will substantially weaken the Reform vote is it's voters actually seeing what Reform are like in government.
It'll soon become obvious that they are confined by the same realities as the established parties are and the old "simple solutions to complex problems" BS just might have finally ran out of road.
However, the country is going to be in a right bloody state before this realisation dawns on Reform voters.
It'll be an expensive lesson to teach them and just like Brexit, we'll all be paying the price, like it or not.
It will be interesting to see how that actually turns out in reality and if for an actual election people kind of revert to type and drift back to older parties
For no real reason other than a hunch, and depending who the Tory leader is, I suspect that some of the Reform vote might well drift back to the Tories at the next general election. Probably not much but I will be surprised if Reform do manage a double digit at the general election lead as most polls are currently suggesting.
For no real reason other than a hunch, and depending who the Tory leader is, I suspect that some of the Reform vote might well drift back to the Tories at the next general election. Probably not much but I will be surprised if Reform do manage a double digit at the general election lead as most polls are currently
Alot can change in 3 years but the potential parliamentary arithmetic in terms of potential coalitions is both frightening and potentially positive.
I can see a situation where Reform win the biggest vote share but aren't part of a government which would challenge some people's views on electoral reform I'm sure .
I think the only thing that will substantially weaken the Reform vote is it's voters actually seeing what Reform are like in government.
I thought that about Trumps first term but blimey was i wrong about that .
I thought that about Trumps first term but blimey was i wrong about that .
Isn't that why he lost in 2020 though?
Most US presidents can expect to win a second consecutive election after their first one.
You need to also throw in the failings of the Biden-Harris administration into the equation as well as Trump's
Edit : I have zero doubt that any Reform-led coalition government will be total chaos and very unstable. Even Reform majority councils are highly unstable. UK politics are very different to US politics and iirc the Republican Party is the second oldest political party in the world. How experienced in government is Reform?
Isn't that why he lost in 2020 though?
Very possibly but it didn't stop normal Americans voting for him again . I agree that american poliitics are very different to UK but there are parallels that we would be unwise to ignore
I think the theory that the only way to get people to understand that Reform are a bad idea is to let them be a failure in government is flawed as it doesn't guarantee that someone on the left or center follows . A failed reform government could lead to people looking for something even further right.
You need to also throw in the failings of the Biden-Harris administration into the equation as well as Trump's
We're in a world where the options are rightwing and pure evil batshit crazy rightwing. Neither works and people can see that so we now just alternate between the two with the inevitable decline into the abyss accelerating during the batshit years and slowing slightly during the 'normal' years, but always on an ever downward trajectory.
It was a straightforward issue that we've witnessed - you either make the bond market happy, try to balance the books etc or your create a large deficit to fix the holes in society (and thus employment and investment.)
They are all political choices created by government.
However, this has now been ignored for so long the momentum has gathered that there is more wrong than just broken down infrastructure and facilities.
We're beyond all that - so it requires much of a realignment of ideas and hope, that we're miles behind and into mental illness, crime, lack of community, racism etc.
The real sad thing is Labour have helped accelerate the decline and what with even Tommy Robinson 'endorsing' Labour we're in the worst place possible now.
It's going to take years to get on a decent footing even if we started tomorrow.
Step aside Labour. 😉
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1991484654638288960?t=DmePyAiiS1yNQgiSZJPl5Q&s=19
Campaign on good solid progressive policies you go up.
Corbyn
Starmer (lied to get there.)
Polanski
People crying out for change.
Centrism is the most bankrupt, dangerous, deceitful and misguided ideology to walk this earth because it gives power to the right to wreck everything.
It confuses people into believing the middle is a great place to be whilst actually delivering right-wing outcomes.
Junior Conservativism.
Campaign on good solid progressive policies you go up.
You could also read that poll as having a charismatic leader and up you go.
I doubt many people who say they will vote Green really understand their policies, same with Reform voters. We're firmly in the time of protest politics which is why Reform and the Greens are doing well. I doubt either will affect much positive change if they get into government, reality will come crashing in. The major parties having been over egging what people can expect for years and of course have failed to deliver. People are now bitter and less rational than normal.
That is absolutely grade A bullshit, it isn't that the traditional parties have over promised it is that they have objectively failed to not only gradually improve peoples lives, but have made them consistently worse, the markets and asset owners have seen huge increases, while wages have fallen far behind compared to economic growth and the cost of life.
People are bitter and angry not because they are irrational but because they are suffering the failure and ignorance of the establishment path.
I doubt either will affect much positive change if they get into government, reality will come crashing in.
The reality is that if you try to implement progressive policies that reduce wealth inequality the mainstream press and the bot-farms will get put into action to turn public opinion against these policies and the party trying to impalement them.
Reform's policies are pie in the sky bullshit because the objective is not to make life better for everyday people, but rather it's to distract everyday people so the wealthy can steal even more from them.
The reality of implementing policies to reduce wealth inequality is not that it's pie in the sky distraction. It is real action that will improve life for everyone. And that's why it will be fought against so ferociously.
Reform and the Greens are not the same. Painting them as such is lazy, wrong, and ultimately harmful.
Not the same in the slightest, but the Greens now have a leader who can do media nearly as well as Farage, and, although it's still early days for him, it's paying off.
It is true that in addition to having a coherent narrative and principles, you do need to have a charismatic and articulate leader who can communicate this message without allowing that message to get derailed. ZP seems to be doing a pretty good job on that front so far.
I don't think any of the above could be used to describe Farage, which just goes to show how much easier a path it is to just find groups to other and make the enemy. Having a press that is onside no doubt helps as well.
Is Farage actually good at doing media or is he just working with a product that is easier to sell?
He's good. It's not just that othering is easy, he's very good at making it sound reasonable (and necessary) to a lot of people. Compare with, for example, Tice.
EDIT: or for that matter, the current cabinet... out there selling their own version of blame the vulnerable without getting much cut through with the public.
You could also read that poll as having a charismatic leader and up you go.
We are back to the false centrist explanation that support for UKIP/Brexit Party/Reform UK is down to the alleged personal charisma of Nigel Farage.
Nigel Farage has never been personally popular with UK voters. There is obviously a reason why it took him 8 desperate attempts over several decades before he was successful in securing the Westminster seat, something which must surely be unique in British politics?
Currently Nigel Farage has a favourability rating of -32 which is the same as Kemi Badenoch's. Sure it's more than Sir Keir Starmer's but that isn't a reflection that Farage is personally liked by voters just a reflection of just how unpopular Starmer is. Even Jeremy Corbyn's favourability rating is now higher than Starmer's!
Starmer is without doubt the least charismatic Labour leader in history and yet he managed to secure the second largest Labour parliamentary majority every. How did a Labour leader with no charisma manage to achieve something so spectacular?
Quite simply by not being a Tory after 14 years of Tory governments, or at least that's what voters thought. When the truth became more obvious that nothing had really changed support for Labour collapsed overnight.
Now it is Nigel Farage's turn to pretend that he is offering something different. I am sure that many voters are very cynical about Farage being much different, they are generally very cynical about all politicians, and they are quite right to be, but they are apparently willing to give him a go, they have after all given both the Tories and now Labour a go.
If the smarter ones are now apparently gravitating towards the Greens it is because Zack Polanski is very successfully articulating an alternative to both Labour and Reform. It's got bugger-all to do with anyone's charisma.
Currently Nigel Farage has a favourability rating of -32 which is the same as Kemi Badenoch's.
In a politically polarised world, net favourability means nothing. More people are favourable toward Farage than any other leader (more than twice as many people polled than Badenoch). That many people also dislike him doesn't reduce his appeal to the same level as other leaders... it may "cap" it, but not enough to stop him being the most popular leader (of the most popular party).
Yeah but it's got bugger-all to do with charisma. Sir Keir Starmer managed a 172 majority with zero charisma.
Centrist want to give "charisma" as the excuse because they refuse to accept that voters want radical change.
Radical change is the antithesis of centrism.
At the risk of pointing out the bleeding obvious though Ernesto, the kind of ‘radical change’ that different people are demanding varies wildly between pure socialism to full blown fascism.
That’s why the two parties in the ascendancy - the Greens and Reform - have approaches that are diametrically opposed to one another.
The mainstream ‘centrist’ (if that word even means anything any more) parties are simply caught in the no-man’s land between the two and none seem to have a clue how to deal with this new political reality
How do you square this particular circle?
How do you square this particular circle?
If you mean how do the mainstream parties regain lost support from Reform/Green Party, I think the answer is fairly simple. They need to clearly demonstrate that they are on the side of working people and that they have the solutions to the problems they are facing. Both parties, and Labour in particular under Starmer, have spent the last 30-odd years telling voters that there is no alternative to the way things currently work, and more recently tell us that we're basically at the mercy of the bond markets so the govt can't invest or spend money on the things that would make a difference to people's lives. Voters want to hear 'This is what we believe, here's what we think the problems are, and this is how we're going to solve them', not 'sorry we're in very tough times and there's not much we can do'. It's really not rocket science.
It's really not rocket science.
Isn’t it?
I don’t see how on earth, in this present ultra-polarised and febrile political climate, that you appeal to voters who have fled to Reform (and the far right agenda they offer) without then hemorrhaging votes on you’re left, to parties offering the opposite answers to Reform, ie: the Green Party? 🤷♂️
And vice versa, obviously
How exactly do you do that then, what policy platform do you stand on, seeing as you seem to think that it’s easy?
Over to you, Mr rocket scientist….
Over to you, Mr rocket scientist….
Well you have to nail you colours to a mast. For the Labour party that should be fairly simple because it should be obvious whose side they're on. But at the moment it really isn't. No one is going to vote for a party which doesn't believe in itself, and thinks it's main purpose in govt is to deliver bad news with no apparent interest or ideas about how to fix things. The main overriding message from Starmer and his govt at the moment is 'this is the way things are, get used to it!'.
I have just heard the current "Labour" Home Secretary on the BBC Nick Robinson politics programme say that she doesn't want the Royal Navy** to be, quote, "a taxi service" for those trying to get the UK.
Nigel Farage isn't in the studio but he doesn't need to be because he is dictating the subject being discussed with the Home Secretary, ie immigration and refugees, and our Labour Home Secretary is obligingly using emotive rhetoric which he would personally totally approve of, eg suggesting that the Royal Navy is acting as a taxi service for illegal immigrants.
Labour really have slipped from the gutter into the sewer as they enthusiastically dance to Nigel Farage's tune.
**she actually said the "British navy"....... would she fail the citizens test? I think most patriotic Brits know the correct way to refer to this country's navy.
I cant think of anyone who does want the RN to be a taxi service for illegal immigration. I dont want the RNLI doing it either, or any other well meaning charity. The people smuggling industry uses it as part of its business model to make more money and de risk the journey, thus making it more appealing to a wider range of people. Thats not what I want to see happen, I dont want the smuggling industry supported
They are not a taxi service, that is the language of hate hidden behind a façade of civility. Because the alternative is watching people drown because you don't think their lives are worth saving because they are immigrants, because they are brown and because they are not British.
Anyone promoting the idea that they are a "taxi service" should hang their heads in shame, they are a ****ing disgrace to the human race.
How about just let them get onto a ferry - £92 from Calais to Dover and much cheaper and more importantly safer than paying someone for a dinghy space.
They are not a taxi service, that is the language of hate hidden behind a façade of civility. Because the alternative is watching people drown because you don't think their lives are not worth saving because they are immigrants, because they are brown and because they are not British.
Anyone promoting the idea that they are a "taxi service" should hang their heads in shame, they are a ****ing disgrace to the human race.
No it’s not, it has nothing to do with hate, or are we all supposed to celebrate people acting illegally or is it just when they break laws you dont like?.
It’s pointing out the reality of the smugglers business model to attract more customers. If it’s not a taxi service then what else is it? It’s not a rescue service as the smuggling business relies on it as an essential part of its logistics process. A rescue service is there for when things go wrong when people had set out properly prepared and something went wrong, not deliberately going to ssa with an expectation that you will automatically be picked up half way.
How about just let them get onto a ferry - £92 from Calais to Dover and much cheaper and more importantly safer than paying someone for a dinghy space.
Probably a better solution than having the Navy do it with the added advantage of it then being easy to meet and process the asylum applications in a more timely manner
I've often thought that.... If it's genuinely about stopping the boats and smashing the gangs, just lay on a free ferry a couple of times a week. Would that cost less than pursuing the people smuggling gangs and patrolling the navy all the time!?
How about just let them get onto a ferry
Because they don't have a visa. Because you can't apply for and receive a visa for the purpose of seeking asylum in the UK once you arrive in the UK.
It wouldn't improve processing times.
How about just let them get onto a ferry
Because they don't have a visa. Because you can't apply for and receive a visa for the purpose of seeking asylum in the UK once you arrive in the UK.
It wouldn't improve processing times.
How is that any different to the RN, Border Force or the RNLI transporting them to the UK
The alternative is watching people drown
The alternative is the UK and France getting their act together amd stopping organised crime groups from running a highly dangerous and lucrative business to transport people from France to the UK.
Agreed, but what’s in it for France. I dont suppose they are any keener on sorting out their real immigration status than we are
Just finished watching Years&Years. Highly recommended. It’s relevant to every recent post in this thread. On Netflix currently.
. I dont want the RNLI doing it either, or any other well meaning charity.
The RNLI only do one thing - save lives, they don't do anything else. So you are saying that you don't won't the RNLI to save the lives of those seeking asylum in the UK and are at risk of drowning.
The hard-right who lack basic humanity are becoming bolder under the present climate, I blame Nigel Farage in part for that with him stirring hatred against immigrants and refugees but we have to be honest and admit that the Labour Party is now also part of the problem.
It isn't all Nigel Farage's fault.
And if should anyone doubt that senior "Labour" politicians are attempting to steal Nigel Farage's thunder with their own dog whistling and the same offensive rhetoric against refugees:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8dejyg4l37o
The RNLI has faced accusations from some on social media, including Nigel Farage, that it was acting as a "taxi service" for people trying to enter the UK illegally.
Could Labour and Reform possibly be singing more from the same hymn sheet when it comes to refugees?
The RNLI only do one thing - save lives, they don't do anything else.
In reality though they have accidentally become part of the smugglers business model and an essential part of the process.
Not wanting illigeal immigration into the UK is not hard right, and calling it hard right is just a way to try and shut down debate in the same way Isreal calls everything antisemitism it doesnt agree with.. We have already established on this thread that approximately 1/3 of those who have applied have had asylum granted meaning the remain 2/3 are not asylum seekers and are therefore economic migrants. Why should they be able to illegally enter and stay in this country. Would you expect to do the same and arrive in France and just set up home and say well this is where I want to live.
We have already established on this thread that approximately 1/3 of those who have applied have had asylum granted meaning the remain 2/3 are not asylum seekers and are therefore economic migrants.
No, you assert that is was it means... it does not.
The point is they are all claiming asylum, the % don't really matter, they are all people and the fact that some people give the impression they are happy for them to suffer or even worse drown just because they may be chancing it says it all about those people.
Not wanting illigeal immigration into the UK is not hard right, and calling it hard right is just a way to try and shut down debate in the same way Isreal calls everything antisemitism it doesnt agree with.
Not wanting illegal immigration into the UK is not hard right. In fact, I've never heard anyone say, 'Do you know what this country needs? More illegal immigration!'
What is hard right is de-humanising illegal immigrants and advocating for them to be left to drown.
In fact, I would say not letting people drown who could have been saved is a basic British value. If you want to argue that anyone who says 'illegal immigrants should be left to drown' be deported regardless of nationality then I'm listening.
Not wanting illigeal immigration into the UK is not hard right
No of course it isn't. Any sensible person wants immigration to be lawful and legal.
That has absolutely nothing to do at all with your criticism of the RNLI which is that they are saving the lives of those seeking asylum.
Criticising the RNLI for saving the lives of refugees is definitely a hard-right stance.
Saving immigrants is the humane modern way. My uncle left his not inconsiderable fortune to the RNLI - I'm pleased to see it being used well. I mean we don't even hang people for treason anymore:
Surprised this interview hasn't been posted yet - it's all over socials!...
I cant think of anyone who does want the RN to be a taxi service for illegal immigration. I dont want the RNLI doing it either, or any other well meaning charity. The people smuggling industry uses it as part of its business model to make more money and de risk the journey, thus making it more appealing to a wider range of people. Thats not what I want to see happen, I dont want the smuggling industry supported
Upon seeing a bunch of human beings in manifestly unsuitable vessel at sea there is no way that any sailor will do anything other than everything they can to get them to land safely. RN / RNLI / merchant marine, they'll all do the same thing, that's how it works at sea. Nobody is going to leave them to drown, which is what you seem to be suggesting.
I am lovin' this article by Jonathan Rutherford who is on the hard-right of the Labour Party :
Best of all I like this line which sums up the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the Labour Party's hard-right:
The Home Secretary is a rare Labour politician who believes exactly what she says
Here is his beloved Shabana Mahmood in 2014 :
https://twitter.com/ShabanaMahmood/status/498076170328760320
And here she is today as UK Home Secretary accusing supporters of Palestine on demos of being nothing less than "unbritish" and "dishonourable".
This total turnaround helps to explain why the current system works so well and why it is practically impossible to fundamentally change anything. Power corrupts and Mahmood provides an excellent example of how it does that. Take a yong radical politician, give her one of the Great Offices of State, provide her with a huge salary and a ministerial limousine, and suddenly they become the champions of the status quo.
Ann Pettifor substack
Central Banks and Government Budgets - As If Democracy Matters
https://annpettifor.substack.com/p/central-banks-and-government-budgets
It is accountancy that leads politicians to bewail the existence of “black holes” in the budget. And, even though the government owns the state’s most powerful institution - the Bank of England and its money creation powers - politicians and journalists yell hysterically into the void: “there is no money”.
Like households, the government is deemed to be short of cash and to have overspent. Unlike households or even the most powerful financial institutions, the government is in possession of some of the most valuable collateral in the world. The bond markets live in fear of the Bank’s power - real life bond traders have told me so. And yet the accountants (and technocrats) treat the Bank as impotent and unable to provide finance for a democratically elected government confronting private economic failure and political instability.
Repeat after me: government budgets are not like household budgets. They do not have to balance. The state - and in particular the British state - has enormous (collateral) power to mobilise the finance needed to meet the economy’s needs, as we learnt during the GFC and the pandemic.
Mahmoodism will save the Labour Party
Labour Party members don't appear to share Jonathan Rutherford's enthusiasm for her Reform-lite policies!
https://labourlist.org/2025/11/labour-cabinet-league-table-november-2025/
Shabana Mahmood’s approval among Labour members has plummeted since her announcement on reform of asylum policy, exclusive polling for LabourList has revealed.
The poll, conducted by Survation, saw a 32 point drop in the Home Secretary’s approval, from +26 in September to -6 now.
It looks like Starmer adopting the Tory tactic of having a brown Home Secretary talk tough on immigration and refugees is proving to be no more successful than it was for the Tories. Who would have thought it ?
The latest poll out by Opinium gives Reform UK a 13% lead over Labour.
It is almost as if Labour feeding into Nigel Farage's anti-immigration anti-refugee narrative is helping Reform !
I dont understand the constant obsession over polls. The next general election is 3 years away. Given the current parliamentary majority Labour have then polls are irrelevant for at least the next 2 years.
Not really, it shows what people think of them and what they are doing. It appears the public don't think much of them or what they are doing so Labour need to either listen to that or just carry on with their aping of Reform and get wiped out at next election.
I dont understand the constant obsession over polls.
Normally I'd agree but we're not talking about a drop of a few points into second place against the official opposition. It's a complete collapse of support where they're now in 4th place. That doesn't just mean out of govt, it means only having a few MPs in parliament.
I dont understand the constant obsession over polls. The next general election is 3 years away. Given the current parliamentary majority Labour have then polls are irrelevant for at least the next 2 years.
Tell that to Starmer and McSweeney, I think most pundits are agreed that they are in a state of panic.
As is the Parliamentary Labour Party and the growing number of Labour MPs who are convinced that Starmer must go.
If it isn't the opinion polls and the fact that Nigel Farage's party has been leading every single one since mid-April what do you think might be the cause of this panic?
The locals will be terrible for labour, so its right for them to be worried about the polls (obviously reacting by punching down on immigrants is an idiotic way to deal with it)
Anyway after years of protecting motorists from budget increases the government will apparently be freezing rail fairs, which on a personal level is great, but also makes a lot of sense on an environmental front
Anyway after years of protecting motorists from budget increases the government will apparently be freezing rail fairs, which on a personal level is great, but also makes a lot of sense on an environmental front
Quite. Although a cynic might reasonably think that it is in reaction to a new and growing threat
https://twitter.com/ZackPolanski/status/1765375204610482257
The centrists are now, as you might expect, facing attacks from both the left and the right. And as centrist they deal with the political threats from their opponents by trying to come up with some sort of fudged response.
The problem with trying to please everyone is that you invariably end up pleasing no one and pissing off most people.
I think the werid reality is Labour somehow don't understand what their supporters & members actually want.
They have just for some reason decided that the best course of action is to chase the people are Reformed voters (see what I did there) rather than giving the kids something & increasing their vote share among the demographics where they have traditionally been popular.
I do also think not being in the pocket of the press doesn't help them as they cannot control the narrative, that is being controlled by Reform leaning Tories -hence why all we hear about day in day out is immagrant this, immagrant that.
They have just for some reason decided that the best course of action is to chase the people are Reformed voters
Even then its only a subset of those voters.
I think the primary problem is they dont want to make those tough grown up decisions and hence go for the easy right wing rag targets of immigrants and co.
Although a cynic might reasonably think that it is in reaction to a new and growing threat
That “threat” is also from Labour Regional Mayors showing what can be done with public transport. In addition, the government has to begin to deliver obvious and measurable advantages to the public as it rolls out nationalisation. There has to be a pay off, just changing ownership isn’t enough. And results need to start being delivered early; it’s clear people won’t wait ‘till changes deliver direct results. The public has no patience.
hence why all we hear about day in day out is immagrant this, immagrant that
I’m the first to blame this on the press, but this government is making all the running, and all the headlines, on this at the moment. They are as responsible as anyone (and as they are in a position to change and deliver policy… arguably the most responsible currently).
i see priti patel praising israel as a beacon of democracy 😥 😱 🤡 🤮
Latest poll out, fieldwork carried out yesterday, yet again puts Labour in fourth place. Large sample too....2.5+k
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1993992748605558920
... Find out Now are the company that try to identify reluctant voters who may vote given the more diverse political landscape with a second go after recording an initial don't know. This increases the vote share for challenger parties. Compare with yougov give who use a more traditional methodology and so Labour "do better".
As I said on a different thread the polling companies will be struggling to some extent given the new landscape as there are potentially a lot of reluctant voters who may turn out to vote if they feel green or reform better represent their views than traditional parties.
The elections in May next year will help to calibrate to some extent but it's still going to be a bit of a punt until the next GE
That said the broad thrust of the polls is similar and catastrophic for Labour and Tories as it stands
Both Find Out Now and YouGov overestimated support for Labour at last year's general election, Find Out Now slightly more, 5% to YouGov's 4%. I don't think that Find Out Now have changed their methodology as a result of that.
The reality is that had any poll shown Labour in fourth place whilst Jeremy Corbyn was Labour leader the centrists in the Parliamentary Labour Party would be hyperventilating as they ranted before TV cameras about the damage he was doing to the party.
Contrast that with barely a whisper from them as everyone watches Sir Keir Starmer reduce support for Labour down to the level of a fringe party.
Liz Truss's disastrous premiership in which support for the Tories collapsed to their lowest level in 200 years, and from which they have yet to recover, is used as a textbook example of how a prime minister can screw their own governing party.
And yet whichever opinion poll you look at right now Sir Keir Starmer has at least matched the damage Liz Truss on her party, if not actually exceeded it.
The significant difference though are the consequences. Liz Truss's disastrous premiership eventually led to a landslide victory for the Labour Party, whilst Sir Keir Starmer's disastrous premiership looks increasingly likely to hand the keys of Downing Street to Nigel Farage and Reform.
Worse than all of this is the timescales it's taken.
It must be the fastest decline of party from hero to zero in months.
Imagine coming to power and thinking despite all the Tory decay you are going to be given an ounce of room.
People thought they were voting to get rid of this version of capitalism only to find we now have an enhanced continuity version. Keeping the same OBR treasury-brained way of doing things is an utter farcical embarrassment. Anything created by George Osborne is not the basis of good "independent" economic thinking. There is no such thing as an independent economic institution. Absurd.
I mean, everyone hates austerity - yet here we are with the savagely incompetent OBR and ploddingly backwards BoE deciding the direction of the UK - into a contracting economy.
Literally by their own forecasts.
Suggestions to rename to OBI. Office of budget Irresponsibility.
Worse than all of this is the timescales it's taken.
It must be the fastest decline of party from hero to zero in months.
Imagine coming to power and thinking despite all the Tory decay you are going to be given an ounce of room.
People thought they were voting to get rid of this version of capitalism only to find we now have an enhanced continuity version. Keeping the same OBR treasury-brained way of doing things is an utter farcical embarrassment. Anything created by George Osborne is not the basis of good "independent" economic thinking. There is no such thing as an independent economic institution. Absurd.
I mean, everyone hates austerity - yet here we are with the savagely incompetent OBR and ploddingly backwards BoE deciding the direction of the UK - into a contracting economy.
Literally by their own forecasts.
Suggestions to rename to OBI. Office of budget Irresponsibility.
Worse than all of this is the timescales it's taken.
It must be the fastest decline of party from hero to zero in months.
Imagine coming to power and thinking despite all the Tory decay you are going to be given an ounce of room.
People thought they were voting to get rid of this version of capitalism only to find we now have an enhanced continuity version. Keeping the same OBR treasury-brained way of doing things is an utter farcical embarrassment. Anything created by George Osborne is not the basis of good "independent" economic thinking. There is no such thing as an independent economic institution. Absurd.
I mean, everyone hates austerity - yet here we are with the savagely incompetent OBR and ploddingly backwards BoE deciding the direction of the UK - into a contracting economy.
Literally by their own forecasts.
Suggestions to rename to OBI. Office of budget Irresponsibility.
I mean, everyone hates austerity
To be fair from at least 2010 until 2015 the majority of voters felt that austerity was a necessary evil. The Tories and the LibDems played a blinder with regards to convincing voters of that.
Helped massively by a Labour Party which backed austerity but at half the pace of the Tories and the LibDems. Austerity-lite was the easy cop-out that Labour resorted to when faced with the combined force of the Tories, LibDems, and right-wing press.
All that changed during 2015-17 when the Labour Party became an anti-austerity party and forced the then Tory prime minister to claim that austerity was no longer necessary.
Austerity has now become a dirty word which no party wants to be associated with.
Some sense! It’s going to be 6 months of employment before unfair dismissal rights kick in (rather than 1 day). Getting rid of the awful 24 months needed currently with something that works for employees without putting the brakes on recruitment. More “uturns” like this please (AKA listening).
Some sense! It’s going to be 6 months of employment before unfair dismissal rights kick in (rather than 1 day).
Why on earth is 6 months better than one day?
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1994103030166266359?t=ktbsQllGbCrSz6WgRRVFyA&s=19
This government is horrendously unstable with it's constant trying to appease moving targets.
Key manifesto pledge.
"This willi include banning exploitative zero hours contracts; ending fire and
rehire; and introducing basic rights
from day one to parental leave,
sick pay, and protection from unfair dismissal."
Austerity has now become a dirty word which no party wants to be associated with.
For sure. However what's not really discussed is even though there was austerity for many - the Tories and coalition managed to add 500bn to the national 'debt' (bond issuance) during their tenure so were spending a lot of money on something.
(Obviously it's not a debt but they issued the gilts for consecutive deficit amounts for that period. Which everyone calls the national debt. Very much using their language.)
Why on earth is 6 months better than one day?
Yup, it is hard to believe that some people actually believe that it is perfectly acceptable to dismiss someone unfairly in the first six months of their employment.
All this will do is encourage ruthless employers to sack employees just before they reach the 6 months threshold instead of the 2 year threshold.
Ban unfair dismissals from day one and employers will understand that if they want to employ people then sacking them unfairly is not going to be an option.
I can understand Tories rejoicing at the "U-turn" (aka breaking a election manifesto commitment) though.
Starmer won a 172 majority and yet he still can't stick to his clear manifesto commitments.
deliver obvious and measurable advantages to the public
Part quotation, but let me explain why.
When Labour got in they got a populous who were feeling skint and that politicians were all lying to them. They even had the advantage of an opposition that was ripping themselves apart.
All” they had to do was 3 things.
1. make people feel a bit better off.
2. avoid any scandals
3. Keep their promises from the election campaign
And so far, they’ve failed to do any of those 3 things. Which has left an open goal to a right biased press and people like Farage. And to play even further i to their hands, they’re even talking about immigration and trying to be seen as “hard” in it
They had an open goal, or at least a free run at the goal and they’re missed it completely.
Why on earth is 6 months better than one day?
When you’re recruiting? I think that’s obvious. From the job hunter’s point of view it might be better as well, if it means getting the job is easier.
12 months wasn’t hugely problematic, 24 months removes rights from millions of long term employees, 6 months seems fair.
Looks like it’s still going to be day one for other employment rights by the way.
Yep 6 months is fair, 2 years was totally out of order, instant protection was silly, people aren't always right for a role, some plain lie about their abilities in interviews. Instant protection would just have led to lots of short term contracts rather than permanent ones.