Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
It tanked the second they won due to social media mainly
Do you want to discuss boring politics? (13 Viewers)
- Thread starter mrtrench
- Start date
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
No, the government has made decisions itself admitted were ‘difficult’. The winter fuel allowance being cut whilst the costs of migrant hotels spiralling is absolute toxic to the electorate. Raising taxes in their maiden budget again didn’t go down well.
Starmer is unpopular, people don’t trust him because he doesn’t appear to stand for anything in particular.
Before Xmas, I went to the panto and it was revealing that the biggest boo was an impersonation of Keir Starmer. Bearing in mind this came after Matt Slack did impersonated; Trump, Boris Johnson and Sunak beforehand.
Yesterday there were chants of ‘Starmer is a c**t’ v Andorra which reveals just how much working class voters despise him.
There are genuine questions whether or not Starmer fights the next election already.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
And you think that’s rational or logical at Xmas having had what 6 months
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Someone on here is criticising a reform council after 4 weeks?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Yes because you yourself have said you haven’t got what you voted for.
If you look at the 2024 election with a view that Labour wasn’t that popular in the first place, then their polling ratings today should make sense to anyone.
There’s a sense that Labour are nothing differently to the Tories and given their vote share is tanking again, should tell you everything.
If this government made cutting migration and ‘stopping the boats’ a genuine priority from Day 1, they’d be in a far better position. Instead, they’re drawing up plans to house illegal migrants in privately rented accommodation… pure toxic politically in the context of housing shortages.
Starmer has made the exact same blunder as Sunak by raising the salience of the ‘small boats’ and immigration without a credible plan to stop them.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
If the electoral system was different the strategy and results would be different. You sound like the corbynites whining at the system cos your man can’t play it.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
No, not at all. I believe results like 2019 and 2024 is a vindication of first past the post.
There’s point you seem to miss is that Labour’s public support is low to begin with so their landslide majority could become a minority v quickly. Polling suggests this is the case already.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
There is no quick easy solution
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I’m coming round to the idea that we need to leave the ECHR, repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.
Labour scrapping Rwanda without an alternative was a serious blunder. Even if it was a flawed plan and didn’t do what set out to do, it removed any deterrent there was.
If that it takes to solve the small boats issue and deport people who commit crimes and violate their visas, then it’s worth it.
What evidence is there that the Rwanda scheme acted as any kind of deterrent?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Sounds like an entertaining night out for the kids
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
It didn’t remove any deterrent and those that come on boats are known to the system and are registered
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Ha ha ha, without an alternative. What’s the alternative to spanking £700 million to achieve nothing?
Not spanking £700 million to achieve nothing?
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
And Labour seem to be continuing that trend.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
I’ve cast doubt on Starmer’s likely lack of longevity from the beginning. He is a patsy.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
Production of Jack and the Budget Deficit.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
If the money has been spent and is non returnable, isn’t it a bit daft to just cut the scheme without trying it out for a while. Unless you are dogmatically opposed to it in principle and worried it might actually have some impact?
Labour has spanked the scheme as you so elegantly put it.
MalcSB
Well-Known Member
What a pointless alternative to quote when it wasn’t a possibility. Labour living in an alternative reality. As usual. Prepared to waste public money. As usual.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Ha ha ha, trying it out for a while. Good one. The Tories tried it out for 2 years. They planned on spanking as much of £10 billion on it if re-elected. Labour saved the country £9.7 billion simply by being elected.
I bet come the next GE no one will be running on a manifesto to bring it back. It’s not an election winner, simple as that. As proved at the GE and every opinion poll ever taken on the Rwanda scheme. More people oppose it in one way or another than approve it.
Alternatively you could cut your losses and not spend time, money and government resources on a scheme that you don’t believe to be effective, have no evidence to show is effective, and was roundly rejected by voters at the last election.
At some point you’re just going to have to accept that not only is it never going to happen, but you are wildly out of touch with public opinion on this one.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
WTAF are you talking about?
It was never going to work. It's not Labour's fault the previous government pissed loads of money up the wall on it.
If your concern is wasting public money it seems odd that you're so keen on Rwanda and throwing more money at it.
Could gift millions to a cabinet members pub landlord instead I guess?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Less so but not where I’d like them. Despite the memes capital investment and funding for public services has gone up significantly.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
The Rwanda scheme was paying people to move to Rwanda and shifting people there for asylum.
Labours plan is offshore processing. So they’d still be able to claim asylum here they’d just have to wait outside the country.
So no.