The fact he administers well and appears to have joined up thinking. Just because I may not like him ideologically doesn't automatically disqualify him from competence. Thatcher was competent, if horrendous for the country in my view, Heath somewhat less so, if closer to being a tolerable Tory. Ditto for Labour Blair, for Lib Dems Ashdown. Sturgeon, too, is competent...Where do you get that idea from?
It’s not a lazy accusation… just one you don’t like. These are things that Labour did 15 years ago. Are you telling me Starmer and Reeves are going to do all that again. Do you really believe that?
Do I believe Labour MPs are on the whole more left wing than Tory MPs? Yes, yes I do.
Do I think Rachel Reeves is a better Chancellor than Nadine Dorries or whoever and Starmer a better PM than Truss or Sunak? Yes I do.
Do I think that any Labour government would do more for the economy, social justice, climate, poverty and public services than any Tory govenrment by an order of magnitude? 100%
“They’re all the same” when talking about a class of people dedicated to their beliefs is a lazy accusation. They may not all be like you, but that’s representative democracy for you. And it’s lazy paranoid thinking like that that frankly prevents the left from getting on with the job of changing peoples lives.
I mean, they're not remotely like them. That much is surely obvious.
It's seemingly obvious enough to the electorate at the moment anyway.
Even if you said their policies are identical. One is utterly corrupt, full of criminals and sex pests. The other...isn't. So by default they aren't like each other even if you thought their policies are the same.
I mean, they're not remotely like them. That much is surely obvious.
It's seemingly obvious enough to the electorate at the moment anyway.
Even if you said their policies are identical. One is utterly corrupt, full of criminals and sex pests. The other...isn't. So by default they aren't like each other even if you thought their policies are the same.
exactly this - we can’t rely on a 1997 reboot. The world has changed.They're far too similar for my liking but I do think Starmer, Reeves et Al would bring a level of competency the tories seem incapable of at the moment.
However, no one from either party seems to possess any vision or big ideas and thats exactly what the country needs at the moment given the many challenges we're facing.
It's pretty depressing.
By the time we get to an election there will be a new Tory leader… and they have an exceptional ability to pin all the shit on the previous incumbent.
So I say again - policy wise how will Labour differentiate?
In what way are Labour not different to the Tories? It’s just a lazy accusation. We’ve seen what happens with the Labour right in power: we get Sure Start and NMW and LGBT reform and massive investment in public services, massive poverty and homelessness decreases, economic growth. Because while they may be the right of Labour, they’re significantly to the left of the Tories.
The electorate is indeed bigger than 50+ homeowners, and it’s an order of magnitude bigger than the number of committed socialists.
Committed socialists are the only people who want better than 3rd way rubbish
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Having this debate about the forde report. I am more and more convinced that the left wing of the Labour Party want opposition as it comes without responsibility and accountabilitySadly, like pretty football, being right isn’t actually what the game is about. As Bruce Lee said: willing is not enough, we must do. Ultimately an opposition achieves little.
I’m sorry but that is complete tosh.Having this debate about the force report. I am more and more convinced that the left wing of the Labour Party want opposition as it comes without responsibility and accountability
Having this debate about the force report. I am more and more convinced that the left wing of the Labour Party want opposition as it comes without responsibility and accountability
And then it flips, and the same thing happens the other way.I think you need to read it again. Not that it vindicates the left of the party of any responsibility for the recent shit show but its clear the right of the party actively tried to prevent Corbyn becoming PM.
Same people who drone on about enabling the tories if you don't vote for Keith.
Yep. I'm not a fan of Labour but they're an improvement on this lot and if they're the only likely people able to displace them then that's how I'll go, even though I'd be more akin to vote Green idealistically.I think no being Conservative will be as much as a reason and a good enough reason to vote Labour at the next GE for many. I live in a safe Tory seat so will probably end up voting Green but if there’s a good indication that Labour or Lib Dem can take Rugby I’ll be voting for either of them. Both would be an improvement and at the end of the day that’s the only real expectation anyone should take to a GE when voting.
It's not that safe a Tory seat - take away Pawseys and they're sandwiched by Bill Price and Andy KingI think not being Conservative will be as much as a reason and a good enough reason to vote Labour at the next GE for many. I live in a safe Tory seat so will probably end up voting Green but if there’s a good indication that Labour or Lib Dem can take Rugby I’ll be voting for either of them. Both would be an improvement and at the end of the day that’s the only real expectation anyone should take to a GE when voting.
And then it flips, and the same thing happens the other way.
And so on, and so on. In the meantime we end up with Johnson and very possibly Truss.
The point is it works both ways. Corbyn was prime agitator against his own government after all, but they had a large enough majority he had no effect.They should have thought about that.
Or maybe stuck to the ten pledges which were enough for some of us to let bygones be bygones.
Tories have never taken less than 44% of the votes and the smallest margin it’s been won by is about 5000 seats. It’s going to take a massive swing from the last election. Not impossible but I’m not holding my breath. One thing for sure, I’ll be voting tactically at the next GE if there’s a chance of swinging it.It's not that safe a Tory seat - take away Pawseys and they're sandwiched by Bill Price and Andy King
Not trueTories have never taken less than 44% of the votes and the smallest margin it’s been won by is about 5000 seats.
I think you’re thinking back to when it was Rugby and Kenilworth or Rugby and Bulkington or one of the other variation’s it’s been over the years. It’s been a stand alone seat since 2010 and been a safe Tory seat ever since.Not true
The report was asked to consider it and found it didn’t affect the election. Starmer commissioned the report tooI think you need to read it again. Not that it vindicates the left of the party of any responsibility for the recent shit show but its clear the right of the party actively tried to prevent Corbyn becoming PM.
Same people who drone on about enabling the tories if you don't vote for Keith.
Yep absolutelyAnd then it flips, and the same thing happens the other way.
And so on, and so on. In the meantime we end up with Johnson and very possibly Truss.
The report was asked to consider it and found it didn’t affect the election. Starmer commissioned the report too
The point is it works both ways. Corbyn was prime agitator against his own government after all, but they had a large enough majority he had no effect.
Watch most of those who think Truss is a crazed loon get behind her, as they did Johnson, and you'll see a more effective election fighting machine. I'll grant you that Rees Mogg and co didn't exactly unite behind May, mind you
I agree it didn’t say it affected the electionIt found they didn't support the leader, that's tory enabling right there.
Truss it is oh wellBut corbyn was a contrarian backbencher. We're talking about the higher echelon of the party.
I'm getting nothing from starmer that makes me want to give him my vote. And if it stays that way he'll be the first Labour leader in my lifetime I haven't voted for
I agree it didn’t say it affected the election
It was Rugby before then, Bill Price was MP (Labour!!) It was adding Kenilworth turned it Tory as they were more affluent and, well, Tories.I think you’re thinking back to when it was Rugby and Kenilworth or Rugby and Bulkington or one of the other variation’s it’s been over the years. It’s been a stand alone seat since 2010 and been a safe Tory seat ever since.
It is. Not supporting the leader enables the Tories, whichever faction of the party does it.It found they didn't support the leader, that's tory enabling right there.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?