Keir Starmer Labour Leader

sun_tzu said:
I dunno

based on 2020 it accounts for around 15% of the newspapers sold... and less than 1 in 10 people buy a paper... so something like 1.5% of the population... perhaps on average a couple of people read the paper once its brought... 3% of the population ... i think its the digital footprint and clickbaity nature of its headlines that leads it to it having any impact beyond its very small echo chamber

I believe its currenly selling under a million a day (covid etc) so again whilst its print audience has fallen its probably online it is having an even bigger presence

Circulation of papers has halfed over the last 20 years and its a trend that will continue... the mail has suffered less largly due to the age demographic of readership but fundamentally the 3% of people who pick up the mail reading negative things about labour is not and never will be an issue - its a self selecting echo chaber... a bit like the people who read the canary and are convinced that a youthquake is coming ... the battle is to be had over the people who have little engagement in politics and reaching out to those in the middle rather than trying to battle with people at teh end of a spectrum
Click to expand...

That is both interesting and pleasing. At one time it was the leading daily having overtaken the even worse Sun.
And of course there are the online readers who subscribe.
Having said that, it does have a loyal reader base amongst the more right wing voters and definitely has an effect on the way people vote.
I stopped buying a paper a long time ago. Full of made up stories and advertising.
Waste of time and money.
 
Maticmaker said:
Exactly its why past or currently proposed PR systems fail, especially with a small 'c' electorate, they want to vote for people not a parties, nor for that matter alliances, which either, get nothing done, forever arguing 'angels on the head of a pin' type, or 'cabals' form and eventually alliances crumble.
Click to expand...

Fail as in they fail to get implemented, or fail as in they fail to do the job? If the latter, there are plenty of very high functioning democratcies out there with proportional representation and party lists.
 
nimic said:
Fail as in they fail to get implemented, or fail as in they fail to do the job? If the latter, there are plenty of very high functioning democratcies out there with proportional representation and party lists.
Click to expand...

...but not all with an electorate that is steadfastly conservative (with a small 'c') in its ethos.

The 'first past' the post system is flawed there is no doubt, especially in terms of proportional representation. However the last time a change was proposed (I think Nick Clegg was involved) it never got out of the starting blocks.
The electorate in the UK has to be convinced that proportional representation is in their best interests and workable; whilst a large proportion of both Labour and Tory voters continue to not see it that way, the two party system will remain and the other parties will still strive to do their best to ensure some degree of success via tactical voting plans.

Of course if the Labour Party were to collapse as a meaningful national party... well then things might change!
 
sun_tzu said:
yes - I think this is the kind of compramise that could work... and the 2nd chamber as there is no traditional link to a constituiency perhpas totally PR?
Click to expand...
But then the people who think PR is a superior system would claim the second chamber to have greater moral authority than the first chamber. And from their point of view they would be right.
 
When it comes to alternative voting I think the pros and cons are best delivered through the medium of rap.

 
711 said:
But then the people who think PR is a superior system would claim the second chamber to have greater moral authority than the first chamber. And from their point of view they would be right.
Click to expand...
Yeah but some people will claim the queen has authority because God appointed her great great great granddaddy or summat... you can't please all of the people all of the time but at the moment we have a system that pretty much guarantees a party with a minority of the votes has 100% of the power so I say solve the bigger structural issues first
 
sun_tzu said:
Yeah but some people will claim the queen has authority because God appointed her great great great granddaddy or summat... you can't please all of the people all of the time but at the moment we have a system that pretty much guarantees a party with a minority of the votes has 100% of the power so I say solve the bigger structural issues first
Click to expand...
Then you're back to me asking what sort of PR is being proposed, and most of the time people just skate over that question and move on to another aspect. Also I'm not sure if you mean the second house should share power or not, but again I would ask how would that work exactly, or roughly, because I can't see it working myself.
 
Maticmaker said:
...but not all with an electorate that is steadfastly conservative (with a small 'c') in its ethos.

The 'first past' the post system is flawed there is no doubt, especially in terms of proportional representation. However the last time a change was proposed (I think Nick Clegg was involved) it never got out of the starting blocks.
The electorate in the UK has to be convinced that proportional representation is in their best interests and workable; whilst a large proportion of both Labour and Tory voters continue to not see it that way, the two party system will remain and the other parties will still strive to do their best to ensure some degree of success via tactical voting plans.

Of course if the Labour Party were to collapse as a meaningful national party... well then things might change!
Click to expand...

Germany has a pretty conservative general public (albeit not necessarily economically - socialism is doing a great job for them so that's not terribly surprising of course) and their PR system seems to generally work fairly well.
 
Highlight of his Life Stories appearance is somehow pretending to find women being duped into relationships, with men pretending to be someone they're not, appalling and keeping a straight face whilst doing so.
 
Came across alright last night on the Piers Morgan show in a quite emotional interview mainly delving into his family life..

Doesnt chat enough blustering bullshit like that buffoon Boris though if he habours any ambitions to be at number 10.
 
GueRed said:
Came across alright last night on the Piers Morgan show in a quite emotional interview mainly delving into his family life..

Doesnt chat enough blustering bullshit like that buffoon Boris though if he habours any ambitions to be at number 10.
Click to expand...

there was a good article in the times the other week about everyone sharing too much about their personal lives, the Diana effect, and how the public are sick of it.

Boris, for all of his obvious faults, simply doesn’t allow anyone to talk to him about his private life, and as this is so different to this sharing/ personal reflection in the public eye/ emotional vulnerability and crying on TV (Prince Harry another example) - people have voted for him because of this. Whether that’s valuable insight or not, I don’t know. Clearly it’s not as simple as that…

it does however seem it’s turned into right of passage for everyone to go on TV and pour their fecking heart out - because that’s the done thing.
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
there was a good article in the times the other week about everyone sharing too much about their personal lives, the Diana effect, and how the public are sick of it.

Boris, for all of his obvious faults, simply doesn’t allow anyone to talk to him about his private life, and as this is so different to this sharing/ personal reflection in the public eye/ emotional vulnerability and crying on TV (Prince Harry another example) - people have voted for him because of this. Whether that’s valuable insight or not, I don’t know. Clearly it’s not as simple as that…

it does however seem it’s turned into right of passage for everyone to go on TV and pour their fecking heart out - because that’s the done thing.
Click to expand...

I wonder why twice divorced Boris Johnson with an unknown number children by mistresses who was recently cheating on his cancer stricken wife and enjoys spending his private time on holidays paid for by oligarchs doesn’t like to discuss his private life?
 
Pexbo said:
I wonder why twice divorced Boris Johnson with an unknown number children by mistresses who was recently cheating on his cancer stricken wife and enjoys spending his private time on holidays paid for by oligarchs doesn’t like to discuss his private life?
Click to expand...
I’m not defending it - just relaying a hypothesis.

Why does anyone feel the need to talk to the media about things that we don’t need to know about. Is it just so that they seem more in touch with the people, or to seem more like one of them…

do we need to know or care about Starmer having a difficult relationship with his father?
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
there was a good article in the times the other week about everyone sharing too much about their personal lives, the Diana effect, and how the public are sick of it.

Boris, for all of his obvious faults, simply doesn’t allow anyone to talk to him about his private life, and as this is so different to this sharing/ personal reflection in the public eye/ emotional vulnerability and crying on TV (Prince Harry another example) - people have voted for him because of this. Whether that’s valuable insight or not, I don’t know. Clearly it’s not as simple as that…

it does however seem it’s turned into right of passage for everyone to go on TV and pour their fecking heart out - because that’s the done thing.
Click to expand...

Keir has often been described as boring and robotic.

I think last night's raw emotional showing and insight into the man hasnt done him any harm.
 
GueRed said:
Keir has often been described as boring and robotic.

I think last night's raw emotional showing and insight into the man hasnt done him any harm.
Click to expand...
I think also it should be seen in the context of now that Covid is subsiding as an issue that overshadows all else its now the time to get out and start talking in the media as a few weeks ago this would have got zero (it still has relativly little) traction... but its probably the start of a strategic campaign to build profile over several years so yes in that context its done no harm but it is of course not the silver bullet to take down boris and his blundering mad uncle routine... but at least its a start
 
TwoSheds said:
Germany has a pretty conservative general public (albeit not necessarily economically - socialism is doing a great job for them so that's not terribly surprising of course) and their PR system seems to generally work fairly well.
Click to expand...
Apart from a few holidays and a couple of business trips to Germany over the years I cannot claim to have any insight into their politics; however what I did notice when I was there was how the people and Government of that country had responded to being somewhat 'shackled' by the allies after WW2 and the implications for how they, with massive aid, rebuilt their industry and social beliefs.
They virtually had a blank canvass and they have used that very well, including the reintegration of the East.

Our 'Canvass' is overloaded and distinctly mired in the past and its that what breeds the small 'c' conservatism in the majority of the populace. Perhaps it will take some sort of melt-down in one of the two main parties (guess which one) to start to clear the canvass, that and/or the breakup of the UK, to kick start our new journey to PR and the bright uplands of Socialism?
 
Maticmaker said:
Apart from a few holidays and a couple of business trips to Germany over the years I cannot claim to have any insight into their politics; however what I did notice when I was there was how the people and Government of that country had responded to being somewhat 'shackled' by the allies after WW2 and the implications for how they, with massive aid, rebuilt their industry and social beliefs.
They virtually had a blank canvass and they have used that very well, including the reintegration of the East.

Our 'Canvass' is overloaded and distinctly mired in the past and its that what breeds the small 'c' conservatism in the majority of the populace. Perhaps it will take some sort of melt-down in one of the two main parties (guess which one) to start to clear the canvass, that and/or the breakup of the UK, to kick start our new journey to PR and the bright uplands of Socialism?
Click to expand...

Well perhaps I don't know what you mean by small c conservative, are you talking about purely economically speaking? Because in that case I would agree the German public at large is fairly left wing. Certainly wouldn't agree if we're talking about "liberalism", particularly not in the south of Germany.
 
TwoSheds said:
Well perhaps I don't know what you mean by small c conservative, are you talking about purely economically speaking? Because in that case I would agree the German public at large is fairly left wing. Certainly wouldn't agree if we're talking about "liberalism", particularly not in the south of Germany.
Click to expand...

I've used the term 'small 'c' conservatives' more in terms of an ethos rather than any particular economic or political leaning. Its borne out of an 'island race' mentality, that newcomers to this country, certainly second and third generations, going back centuries, have become part of whatever or wherever they originated. An 'Englishman's home is his castle' etc.
 
Maticmaker said:
...but not all with an electorate that is steadfastly conservative (with a small 'c') in its ethos.
Click to expand...
I've heard a lot of people use the phrase "small 'c' conservative" (mostly in relation to US politics, where it fits slightly easier though is still pointless) and have come to the conclusion that it is completely redundant except as a cliche with upper or lower case "c". I.e., analytically, it means nothing.
 
Maticmaker said:
I've used the term 'small 'c' conservatives' more in terms of an ethos rather than any particular economic or political leaning. Its borne out of an 'island race' mentality, that newcomers to this country, certainly second and third generations, going back centuries, have become part of whatever or wherever they originated. An 'Englishman's home is his castle' etc.
Click to expand...

Racists? There's quite a lot of them in Germany mate.
 
neverdie said:
I've heard a lot of people use the phrase "small 'c' conservative" (mostly in relation to US politics, where it fits slightly easier though is still pointless) and have come to the conclusion that it is completely redundant except as a cliche with upper or lower case "c". I.e., analytically, it means nothing.
Click to expand...

Exactly, its a 'saying' and people use it in various countries, but in the UK its always meant a particular 'developed' ethos, usually accredited to being an 'island race'.
And I grant you Its only redundant, when you don't know what it means.
 
TwoSheds said:
Racists? There's quite a lot of them in Germany mate.
Click to expand...
If you say so, as I said in an earlier post, I don't claim to have a lot of knowledge of the political views in that Country...in fact not sure how we got onto Germany I certainly was not pleading them as a special case, only that after WW2 they had a 'blank canvas' to work on. and lots of aid from the allies and they seem to have done well from that point.
 
Maticmaker said:
Exactly, its a 'saying' and people use it in various countries, but in the UK its always meant a particular 'developed' ethos, usually accredited to being an 'island race'.
And I grant you Its only redundant, when you don't know what it means.
Click to expand...
It means conservative in relation to something or other but not a member of a conservative party (typically the GOP but I see it's being extended to include the Tories). Saying someone "is a small 'c' conservative" literally means that you think they are conservative on a given topic but not that they are members of their local/national conservative party.

What is this conservative ethos? I have no idea what that means either. I think you're referring to nationalism but could be mistaken.
 
sun_tzu said:
they will get at least one in Caroline Lucas... and if they were to get 9% nationally then perhaps Bristol West would come into play?

What did UKIP get 12.5% of the vote and 1 MP?.

Im not a fan of FPTP
Click to expand...
Why cant we have another right wing party eat votes off the tories again too? Just so annoying how they get everyone's vote from the far right as well as centre-right while left is split completely.
 
GoranIvanisevic said:
Why cant we have another right wing party eat votes off the tories again too? Just so annoying how they get everyone's vote from the far right as well as centre-right while left is split completely.
Click to expand...
To be fair the right are far better than the left at this
UKIP or the brexit party or whatever other name farrage was using at the time stood down all candidates agaist sitting Conservative MP's
Labour refused to be part of the progressive allience (where one non conservative candidate would stand out of Labour, Greens, Libs, Plaid)
If Labour had got on board with that I believe we probably wouldnt have a conservative government now
I believe Naomi Smith and Best for Britian are already sounding out parties for the next election (with a commitment to passing PR legistlation if elected) ... again it seems to be labour who are not prepared to fully engage with this
 
neverdie said:
What is this conservative ethos? I have no idea what that means either. I think you're referring to nationalism but could be mistaken.
Click to expand...

Yes, I suppose it could be viewed as a form of 'soft' nationalism; a pride in one's country, an acceptance of certain shared beliefs, self sufficiency, support for self and family (e.g.an Englishman's home is his Castle) ; an initial resistance to change,(even when ultimately 'the change' turns out to be beneficial) or a sort of naturally occurring 'inertia', or an inclination to conserve by 'staying put'... these are not exactly political; however some aspects of e.g. 'staying put' when extended to include expecting work to come to you, can result from what is otherwise an apolitical ethos.
 
I always had the impression "small c-conservative" mainly meant members of the business world who are financially in favour of low tax, less regulation and government getting out of the way of enterprise basically but in social matters they are less inclined to have an opinion because their wealth and status is at a level where a significant social reform won't really touch them.
 
Boycott said:
I always had the impression "small c-conservative" mainly meant members of the business world who are financially in favour of low tax, less regulation and government getting out of the way of enterprise basically but in social matters they are less inclined to have an opinion because their wealth and status is at a level where a significant social reform won't really touch them.
Click to expand...
Isn't that Libertarianism?
 
Fully Fledged said:
Isn't that Libertarianism?
Click to expand...

Very close but I would say Libertarianism is slightly different because they would want to repeal certain existing social structures which constitutes "nanny state" government but the people I refer to wouldn't repeal what is existing. They just don't want to add more to it and make government bigger than it already is.
 
I think conservatism is primarily about property ownership, whether buildings, land, money, shares, wife at one time, and the idea no one has the right to take any of that from you. Even the nationalism side of it is related to that, johnny foreigner would take it all from you if he could. Also the reason why conservative people don't want public spending for anything, they don't want to be taxed to pay for it. And they don't like change, any sort of change really, because that might threaten what they have one way or another, and that would never do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.