Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,646
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 25, 2024 21:52:28 GMT
He's great on Channel 5 with Jeremy Vine. Not annoying at all. Assuming this isn’t sarcastic, I would agree. He does pretty well as a panel guest. And outside of rolling your eyes at another corbyn mention, he does have a point. He’s is absolutely right that Starmer appears to be preparing to do absolutely fuck all with a thumping great majority, which is incredibly disappointing however you slice it. |
|
|
|
Post by Danno on Jan 25, 2024 21:58:06 GMT
Edit: the Scot beat me to it in a better fashion. Who’s the Scot? You're not Scottish? My bad. |
|
X201
Full Member
Posts: 5,133
|
Post by X201 on Jan 25, 2024 21:59:57 GMT
You're not Scottish? My bad. I went to Leeds once, that’s as close as I’ve ever been. |
|
|
|
Post by Zomoniac on Jan 25, 2024 22:19:21 GMT
You're not Scottish? My bad. I went to Leeds once, that’s as close as I’ve ever been. Who let you in? Security round here has gone to shit. |
|
|
|
Post by Danno on Jan 25, 2024 22:20:07 GMT
He's great on Channel 5 with Jeremy Vine. Not annoying at all. Assuming this isn’t sarcastic, I would agree. He does pretty well as a panel guest. And outside of rolling your eyes at another corbyn mention, he does have a point. He’s is absolutely right that Starmer appears to be preparing to do absolutely fuck all with a thumping great majority, which is incredibly disappointing however you slice it. Yes, but it's very important to keep your powder dry. Miliband: savaged at every fucking turn and then some shitbag got *that* shot with a sandwich. And Dave eating his hotdog with cutlery was nowhere to be seen. EDSTONE was recently in the news again Corbyn: totally unelectable, but policies actually engaged young voters for the first time since forever. Constantly under fire for antisemitism, failure to cost anything, a mentally deficient shadow cabinet, and possibly killing a caterpillar in his allotment once. All fair. But is *still* used as a shitty stick by ministers and the actual Prime Minister when they don't have an answer Starmer: Advocated for people he was defending legally. A bit boring. Also he defended people when he was legally obligated to legally defend them. Starmer is on a tightrope because the Mail, Telegraph and Murdoch still control the narrative for some bastard reason. Their headlines will constantly put him on the defensive - see the kids teeth brushing thing a couple of weeks ago despite the NHS saying they're yanking out teeth at record levels - so if he puts any policy out (and if it's good policy that cunt Sunak will just try to nick it) then it just gets ripped up by bad actors and probably spun into rejoining the EU, kids carrying Zonbie knives or something something trans? He's far from what I want to see as the next PM Actually that's not fair. I'm a-ok with him as the next PM, it's the shitty hand he's been dealt dating back to 2010 and particularly 2015 that I'm not ok with. Who the fuck can manage both press and public expectations from this nadir other than a Trump? They better step up if the election smashes them into power, though |
|
|
|
Post by Danno on Jan 25, 2024 22:21:59 GMT
You're not Scottish? My bad. I went to Leeds once, that’s as close as I’ve ever been. Honestly thought you were Scottish heh  |
|
|
|
Post by Matt A on Jan 25, 2024 22:41:32 GMT
To my mind the fact that he isn't going to spend like Corbyn promised to is indicative that his intentions reflect an economic situation that doesn't facilitate big spending. I don't mind investment but to my mind Corbyns policy was rooted in ideology more than the factual reality of the situation he would potentially inherit. I really hope the Tories lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dougs on Jan 26, 2024 6:43:39 GMT
Starmer's Labour are both a bit underwhelming and also a bit concerning. Especially in relation to how close they are to private health companies. I get they have to court big business but they do come across as Tory lite at times. They do have some other good policies but are largely hamstrung by public finances. But despite that, I don't think they can or will sink as low as the current lot. It's a low bar and ideally I'd want to see more social policies but I agree with Danno, they have to tread a very fine line with the media. Would love to see Leveson 2...
|
|
|
|
Post by manfromdelmonte on Jan 26, 2024 7:01:33 GMT
I get the notion that, once in power, they'll wait until there's another big media scandal and move to tighten regulation.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuz359 on Jan 26, 2024 8:14:22 GMT
To my mind the fact that he isn't going to spend like Corbyn promised to is indicative that his intentions reflect an economic situation that doesn't facilitate big spending. I don't mind investment but to my mind Corbyns policy was rooted in ideology more than the factual reality of the situation he would potentially inherit. I really hope the Tories lose. I actually think it's the opposite way round. The situation warrants investment, take a look at the US for example with the IRA, their economy is growing at around 3-5% a year because they're investing. Because of that growth the extra borrowing is sustainable. The neoliberal policies of privatise everything, shrink the state and apply markets to everything even if it's not warranted is far more ideologically driven than anything Corbyn proposed. It was a mild social democrat offer more aligned with Scandinavian countries rather than full blown socialism. |
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,646
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 26, 2024 9:10:50 GMT
Yes, but it's very important to keep your powder dry. Its also important to make the powder you do use quite explosive and not miserable, grey and depressing. We have gone through this before and you don't get my vote by default and not only has he given me no reasons to vote labour, he has given me reasons NOT to. I know the cope over the last few years is 'he's giving them enough rope to hang themselves. he's playing the long game' but I disagree with that. We are at the end of the long game now and he is still giving us less than nothing. |
|
Rich
Junior Member
Posts: 1,989 
|
Post by Rich on Jan 26, 2024 9:23:14 GMT
Surely if nothing else the green energy plan is enough? If Labour sticks to it's guns and pull it off, it will be a tremendous success and will genuinely transform energy in this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by gibroon on Jan 26, 2024 9:29:20 GMT
Yes, but it's very important to keep your powder dry. Its also important to make the powder you do use quite explosive and not miserable, grey and depressing. We have gone through this before and you don't get my vote by default and not only has he given me no reasons to vote labour, he has given me reasons NOT to. I know the cope over the last few years is 'he's giving them enough rope to hang themselves. he's playing the long game' but I disagree with that. We are at the end of the long game now and he is still giving us less than nothing. Is it not the case of keeping your cards close to your chest? With the GE happening this year, manifestos will have been written up but not released. It is all a bit moot at this point as the main thing to get done is get the Conservatives out with hopefully the biggest kicking seen in modern politics and they deserve it. |
|
|
|
Post by manfromdelmonte on Jan 26, 2024 9:37:15 GMT
To my mind the fact that he isn't going to spend like Corbyn promised to is indicative that his intentions reflect an economic situation that doesn't facilitate big spending. I don't mind investment but to my mind Corbyns policy was rooted in ideology more than the factual reality of the situation he would potentially inherit. I really hope the Tories lose. I actually think it's the opposite way round. The situation warrants investment, take a look at the US for example with the IRA, their economy is growing at around 3-5% a year because they're investing. Because of that growth the extra borrowing is sustainable. The neoliberal policies of privatise everything, shrink the state and apply markets to everything even if it's not warranted is far more ideologically driven than anything Corbyn proposed. It was a mild social democrat offer more aligned with Scandinavian countries rather than full blown socialism. It's the case of squaring the circle of achieving the investment within a neo-liberal global system. Rating agencies, currency and bond markets are neo-liberal. It's not really Corbyn's policies which were at fault, but his approach. Taking a dictatorial stance economically would spook the markets (just like Truss did) and ultimately do more long term damage to the cause of socialism. Any government looking to do necessary investment and harness growth also needs to show that they know the game and are willing to play by the market's rule. |
|
geefe
Full Member
Short for Zangief
Posts: 8,323
|
Post by geefe on Jan 26, 2024 9:38:35 GMT
What reasons have Labour given not to vote for them?
As others noted, he's not being daft and announcing policy willy nilly. I can imagine it'll come out in the month before GE. They'll have a few venues on standby to announce them, when the GE is called. Everything will be ready to go but they're not releasing it yet for fear of the following
Policy gets nicked by Tories
Murdoch et al do their work
|
|
|
|
Post by Dougs on Jan 26, 2024 9:39:59 GMT
I agree that votes need to be earned and it's not enough to not be the tories. There's so little to go on at the moment and a lack of detail because who knows where public finances are at. If anything they come up with is not fully costed, they'll just fuel the "Labour is irresponsible with YOUR cash" narrative. Whether true or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt A on Jan 26, 2024 9:58:59 GMT
To my mind the fact that he isn't going to spend like Corbyn promised to is indicative that his intentions reflect an economic situation that doesn't facilitate big spending. I don't mind investment but to my mind Corbyns policy was rooted in ideology more than the factual reality of the situation he would potentially inherit. I really hope the Tories lose. I actually think it's the opposite way round. The situation warrants investment, take a look at the US for example with the IRA, their economy is growing at around 3-5% a year because they're investing. Because of that growth the extra borrowing is sustainable. The neoliberal policies of privatise everything, shrink the state and apply markets to everything even if it's not warranted is far more ideologically driven than anything Corbyn proposed. It was a mild social democrat offer more aligned with Scandinavian countries rather than full blown socialism. Yeah I didn't articulate very well, you're absolutely right that what the Tories have done for the last twelve years has amounted to a managed decline, cutting investment which resulted in low growth and productivity which resulted in forcing to cut spending the next cycle. My point about the distinction between Corbyn and Starmer is to my mind Corbyn proposed rampant spending that wasn't designed to address economic growth or productivity, it was all rooted in the idea of socialism. Would that result in growth? I don't know, but to my perception, Starmers realises we have deep seated economic problems that need to be addressed, and all the social problems need to be underpinned by sound economics, which has manifested a prudence and caution in his commitments. |
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,646
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 26, 2024 10:29:01 GMT
What reasons have Labour given not to vote for them? Messaging as much as anything else. 'we will be tough on this and tough' and 'we won't be rolling back that'. Its all very Tory lite. When this country is in a state the default seems to be for the Tories to lurch to the right and for Labour to follow them. The messaging in tough times is always 'we aren't going to socialism our way out of trouble' and I find that both predictable and depressing. I don't really know how or why the default is to fash our way out of problems but just for once, I would like to see us try to avoid them in the first place by being a bit more progressive. And Starmer has done worse than nothing to convince me that anything will change beyond the surface level stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Matt A on Jan 26, 2024 10:39:28 GMT
Is that pattern a choice made by politicians or is it them reflecting that England is a centre right country and they are trying to win?
|
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,646
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 26, 2024 11:01:36 GMT
Its a mixture of things and a lot of it is driven by people with vested interests throwing money at policy and the media. If you take a step back and ask the public 'do you like socialism?' questions they mostly answer 'yes'. Corbyns policies tested quite well if people didn't know who was delivering them. I know the temptation is to always bemoan the general public but we aren't as right wing as we like to pretend, its just that the left is more factional. I'd say we probably skew centre left if it really came down to it but even then, I don't think we would cry if progressive policies were successfully enacted.
If you don't take this opportunity to enact real, systemic change what's the point? Its like a good chunk of the Brexit vote. If nothing is really going to change for the people at the bottom with a change of government the only option is to burn the house down. I mean, after 14 years of this shit something has to give and I can't see continuity being anything but harmful in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt A on Jan 26, 2024 11:05:52 GMT
I guess my hope is that Starmer sees it the same way as you but is of the mind that you can’t go from where we are to a more left wing compassionate society in one leap and his intention is to implement change gradually.
|
|
Vandelay
Junior Member
Posts: 4,713
Member is Online
|
Post by Vandelay on Jan 26, 2024 11:11:11 GMT
Is that pattern a choice made by politicians or is it them reflecting that England is a centre right country and they are trying to win? I think it is more accurate to say that the 25-30% of the country that you have to mostly win over in order to win an election is on the centre right to right spectrum. If you present progressive policies to people, the majority are in favour of them, but that doesn't mean you are going to win an election using them (although, there is also the argument that just because people like the policies it doesn't mean they are actually practical). Really though, the choice at the election ultimately boils down to Tory Vs Labour. Even if Labour actually were just Tory lite (I think it is nonsense, but people insist on repeating it), we also know that they wouldn't be wasting all their time going on about culture wars and trying to get ludicrous policies like the Rwanda scheme off the ground, and would be able to get on with actually making the country run vaguely properly. That would be a huge improvement on letting the Tories have another 4-5 years of their psycho-drama, no matter what qualms people might have about Labour not being radical enough. Edit - accidentally said "Tory Vs conservative" originally, which some might say was a Freudian slip! |
|
|
|
Post by Matt A on Jan 26, 2024 11:25:11 GMT
It's confusing at the moment because traditionally left wing poorer communities voted Conservative; I guess it's holding on to this demographic that is underpinning the Rwanda policy. Widespread deprivation in areas with large immigrant communities so they play up to prejudice and project blame. They really are terrible cunts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jambowayoh on Jan 26, 2024 11:30:24 GMT
It's confusing at the moment because traditionally left wing poorer communities voted Conservative; I guess it's holding on to this demographic that is underpinning the Rwanda policy. Widespread deprivation in areas with large immigrant communities so they play up to prejudice and project blame. They really are terrible cunts. While at the same time being really smart at carefully exploiting people's fears and going all in on defending ignorance. The fact that it's all so cynically done is the cherry on top. |
|
|
|
Post by Duffking on Jan 26, 2024 11:33:55 GMT
I honestly feel like Labour's policy is just "we're not the tories", while refusing to commit to undoing or addressing any of the shit they've done over the last decade. It's not so much about being given a reason not to vote for them, as struggling to think for any reason to do so. I'm not choosing to have someone fart on my face simply because it's a better option than having them shit in my nostrils. I don't even know what Starmer stands for beyond just "what can I say that makes me more likely to get elected". Not to mention, what they have that sounds good, Starmer seems so without any actual principles beyond wanting to be PM it's impossible to trust that he will actually follow through on anything. And I'm not planning to reward people with votes simply for being less shit than the alternative. That just drives political complacency. I won't mind if/when Labour win, especially with a big majority, but I hope it's against a backdrop of a fucking shite turnout. |
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,646
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 26, 2024 11:36:20 GMT
I guess my hope is that Starmer sees it the same way as you but is of the mind that you can’t go from where we are to a more left wing compassionate society in one leap and his intention is to implement change gradually. I hope so too and have never wanted to be proved more wrong in my life. I'd be delighted to be wearing a red rosette in the 2029 election but at the moment they just look like One Nation Tories and I just can't get down with that. |
|
rhaegyr
Junior Member
Posts: 3,563
Member is Online
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jan 26, 2024 11:39:10 GMT
I honestly feel like Labour's policy is just "we're not the tories", while refusing to commit to undoing or addressing any of the shit they've done over the last decade. It's not so much about being given a reason not to vote for them, as struggling to think for any reason to do so. I'm not choosing to have someone fart on my face simply because it's a better option than having them shit in my nostrils. I don't even know what Starmer stands for beyond just "what can I say that makes me more likely to get elected". Not to mention, what they have that sounds good, Starmer seems so without any actual principles beyond wanting to be PM it's impossible to trust that he will actually follow through on anything. And I'm not planning to reward people with votes simply for being less shit than the alternative. That just drives political complacency. I won't mind if/when Labour win, especially with a big majority, but I hope it's against a backdrop of a fucking shite turnout. I just don't understand this mentality at all. |
|
rhaegyr
Junior Member
Posts: 3,563
Member is Online
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jan 26, 2024 11:40:41 GMT
Someone stated a good analogy in this thread a while ago.
Politics is a bus stop, not a taxi service. You're never going to get delivered directly to your destination; you need to get off at the stop that's closest to where you want to go.
I'd like to vote Green but with the two party system we have here they're never going to get enough votes to be able to change anything - sad but true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duffking on Jan 26, 2024 11:41:48 GMT
Gotcha, I'll vote green then because as far as I can tell the tories and labour are going basically to the same place. Not sure what's so weird about not wanting either of them. At the moment it's like "congrats on being a cunt and not a fucking cunt, I guess".
|
|
|
|
Post by Dougs on Jan 26, 2024 11:42:00 GMT
The hope is that under the surface there will be real change. It'll be small and incremental but will make a difference to communities - thinks like Sure Start centres and policies like that which aren't very headline grabbing but really help. It may be wishful thinking but there's got to be some more traditional Labour policies in there!
|
|
