Pathetic
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
And if the polling was not going well what would you be saying then. There is no need to be so hysterical all the time. It's as if you would want Labour to lose to prove a point.
In fairness, turning a multi-three figure majority into 'we better hold off on changing anything meaningful for at least five years time' is the most Starmer thing imaginable.
Thanks for another perfect example of why you do things the second you get a majority, let alone anything close to these polls. Obama had multiple opportunities to do something about the judicial system over there. Trump turns up and manages to do it in one term, despite being a fecking moron who hadn't got a clue what he was doing.
Last edited:
Video footage of someone shifting the Overton Window left with the air generated by clapping.
It took a lot longer than that. Which is the point.
I can’t believe you switched the GIF
It'll have taken Labour 20 years to get back in government and you want them to turn a Mugabe level majority into five years of rearranging the deckchairs so not to startle the Overton Window gazers too much?
Nick Clegg even had more ambition that that. He managed to turn one term in a half job into completely fecking the NHS, ensuring no student would vote for his party ever again and life destroying austerity.
You’re conflating what people want to happen with what people are willing to accept in the hope of going further in time.
No offence but you seem to be the kind of person who gets all their takes from twitter. Did you watch any of the conference speeches? Do you pay attention to PMQs and parliamentary motion put forward such as when a windfall tax was shut down by the tories at the top of the year?
Pandering to the twitter crowd of people does not work. If you followed the 2019 election on there it was a shock that a landslide win didn't happen for Labour. There was no better youth turnout than usual. I agree with Corbyn on most things, voted for him both times, and defended him on here. But he was not popular and there's no point pretending otherwise.
Once again, why on earth would you be in politics if your first thought on gaining a Mugabe level majority was to be petrified of doing too much because of an election five years away? The Lib Dems managed to completely feck over an entire generation (and in terms of their vote share a good two or three more) in one term even involving things they'd not just not campaigned on but categorically ruled out during the negotiations that got them power in the first place. But Starmer has to play slowly, slowly catchy monkey with a majority not even Jo Swinson dreamt she'd get.
As I alluded to, the only person in British (if not world) politics in the last 50 years who would turn this potential majority into the least transformative political term imaginable (good or bad) is the guy whose lap it is falling into. And I'm supposed to sit here being delighted by that.
Last edited:
If they remain in power I can see them doing more shitty things like freezing benefits whilst, at the same time, raising the inheritance tax threshold. Just another thing to feck everyone's lives up for the good of the few.
Listening to some of those radio interviews, it's not that Truss is evil or a bad person. It's that she genuinely has no idea about anything she's talking about, or how damaging last Friday was for the UK. She has programmed responses and gets exposed as incompetent every time she speaks.
Tbh if people could just look at some long term polling and a bit of political economy, it would help(Also the purity test stuff is very funny considering everything that has happened since 2015, but well history isn’t a thing anymore)
The tories win because Thatcher gave a section of the working class a chance to become home owners. This has resulted in reactionary retirees having similar interest with finance in the city of London. It’s has nothing to do with the fact I got high and metal gear 3 during Election Day in 2015.
Tbh I guess it’s nice people are happy about the potential end of the Tory reign but yeah nothing will really change. Things will continue to decline regardless of the party in power.
The last constituency I lived in the Uk would still be blue according to that map (currently a 32k+ majority)
Its actually criminal that Starmer and the frontbench are not out there calling for an early election.
What’s the point, they’d just say no
Mental how these psychos are allowed to be in power.
Labour regaining my constituency would be huge but possible because the SNP only gained it in 2019 by a thousand votes (2%), and the MP recently defected to the Alba Party, which was just plain weird. They'll wheel out Gordon Brown for that one since he's still the Fecking Guy around here.
The constituency beside it also going to Labour is a strange one though, since the existing SNP vote would need to swing by a whole 20%/10,000.
You have gone full momentum haven't you?
Just shout and scream and cry and ruthlessly attack people until your blue in the face when you come up against any kind of opposition and then wonder why noone actually likes you or trusts you.
Your having a meltdown over something that hasn't happened and is extremely unlikely to happen based on those famously reliable polls along long way out from a GE.
Think we are all aware that Starmer isn't your man, but that's the way the apples have fallen that's democracy.
The facts are Starmer currently looks like a very safe pair of hands in comparison to Truss and co, that's why the polling is the way it is. Put Corbyn or someone similar In charge of labour right now they wouldn't be polling aswell because the average person likes safety and security not wild risk taking stubborn idealism.
Unless he's changed his mind since?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/voices/covid-keir-starmer-tax-budget-rishi-sunak-b1808508.html?amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...-starmer-labour-party-business-covid-pandemic
On the subject of Labours windfall tax it "would only cover a fraction of the total (energy) bill" at £8b extra this winter.
https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...ating-misleading-claim-on-energy-windfall-tax
can't get on board with that one. the dnc was the problem there. they actively worked against the sanders campaign and then the sanders campaign endorsed the official dnc candidate anyway, twice. victim-blaming here.
there is a similarity insofar as the left side in each scenario was targeted by the centrist and right wing sides and continued to support the centrist faction despite this, something the centrist faction cannot return by definition.
i'll go with starmer despite my near certainty that it won't change much or that what is changed is far too narrow to count. this is how he won the leadership election, unless people forget, the good will of the left-leaning members. if nothing else, a labour majority will end the discussion. it'll either deliver or it won't and people will then have to defend their positions. talking about it in general isn't going to change much in itself.
Yeah, only 'full Momentum' want transformative stuff done by politicians with a massive majority in a country where people are shitting themselves about freezing to death, key workers are reliant on food banks and the country's infrastructure is a decaying nightmare people can barely afford to use.
For everyone else, Viva La Statusquolucion. Give us five years of nothing, Sir Keir!
I'm genuinely not sure if this supposed to be a parody post or not. Confused by anyone agreeing with it.
The Tory base is far from pragmatic they've spent ages splintering off to Lib Dems, UKIP, BNP in sizeable numbers and largely it got them the polices they wanted. They've very quickly turned against several leaders too.
That hasn't happened to the same extent with the left for several decades. The only time it has happened in recent years was the centrists self sabotaging against the leader they didn't like.
Spot on.
The labour right correctly identified the labour left as their primary enemy and purged them. While doing so, they naturally moved to the right on policy. A side-benefit of this move has been to legitimise the party in the eyes of the press, which had made it possible for tory scandals to result in a polling surge. But even if that hadn't happened, the purge itself is the victory. Centrists and right-wingers here recognise this, when they praise 2-time loser Neil Kinnock for giving Thatcher 10 years, but winning the battle that matters.
A vote by the left for Starmer is a vote for irrelevance deeper and grimmer than their current (very dead) status. As the centrists correctly identify, this is a long-term battle. What Reagan and Thatcher show is that this long-term battle isn't won by a series of incremental centre-right, centrist, and centre-left electoral wins, but by a long series of ideological defeats suddenly being reversed by changed economic circumstances. A successful imposition of your agenda means that, for the next few decades, politics are on your terms (FDR, Attlee - Reagan, Thatcher) even if your party is out of power (Eisenhower, Nixon, pre-Thatcher Tories - Blair, Clinton, Obama).
Corbyn had the chance for that once-in-a-generation ideological shift in 2017, but the press and labour right (correctly) tipped the scales by just enough to make him lose. There's no real way of saying when the next chance comes. But Starmer 2024 does not accelerate it.
A vote by the left for Starmer is a vote for irrelevance deeper and grimmer than their current (very dead) status. As the centrists correctly identify, this is a long-term battle. What Reagan and Thatcher show is that this long-term battle isn't won by a series of incremental centre-right, centrist, and centre-left electoral wins, but by a long series of ideological defeats suddenly being reversed by changed economic circumstances. A successful imposition of your agenda means that, for the next few decades, politics are on your terms (FDR, Attlee - Reagan, Thatcher) even if your party is out of power (Eisenhower, Nixon, pre-Thatcher Tories - Blair, Clinton, Obama).
Corbyn had the chance for that once-in-a-generation ideological shift in 2017, but the press and labour right (correctly) tipped the scales by just enough to make him lose. There's no real way of saying when the next chance comes. But Starmer 2024 does not accelerate it.
Last edited:
We don't need wildly transformative stuff done by politicians, wild transformation is fantasy land and it's dangerous and risky.
The majority of the electorate don't like dangerous and risky, the majority of the electorate have families to look after and some assets or debts to service. Wild and transformative is a risk to them, they want to help the more needy but not at a cost to them.
Ah, Starmer's dream voter. We meet at last.
we kind of do. minimally, the world needs its major economies to sign up to green new deal legislation. even biden is on board with that, scaled down as it is. beyond that, housing, healthcare, education, and all of these necessities hit by massive underfunding require transformative action. even starmer seems to understand that, which is why you get "fairer and greener" future.
the majority of the electorate requires the kind of transformational change covered by the topics above. whether it comes from the left or from the centre. the centrist doctrine has had to move, at least rhetorically, to accommodate this need. how do you do anything of utilitarian value which isn't transformational at this point? take a look at the mortgage market. the average person's debt, the nhs, the state of the schools, and the list goes on.
if you don't think we need transformational change then you could vote for the tories without any real problem. they don't always feck up mini budgets this badly.
Last edited:
Point taken.
But it really is important to stress that the problems you highlighted are most certainly not only in the north.
That kind of situation affects pretty much all towns and cities, maybe outside of inner London.
But because it was primarily done to persuade so called red wall voters, people think that it applies just to the north.
For Levelling Up to mean anything, it has to apply across the whole of the UK.
I will take your word on JRM being an election winner.
Did Starmer shag your wife and shit in her handbag?
No offence but you seem obsessed with the chap
Spot on.
No wonder you moved....
No point in saying that to Dobba, the ideologue's ideologue.
to be fair, that post is hard to comprehend. it's one step away from "there is no such thing as society", which is "get out of the way and let the market work", which is "toryism". if people don't see the need for transformational change, then i'd imagine their name is on a tory database somewhere as possible voter. starmer will fail or succeed depending on how he delivers this change across a whole series of tangible metrics like housing, healthcare, and energy. it doesn't make sense, as standalone post, whether you're starmer's biggest fan or his biggest critic because it neglects starmer's own position.
Last edited:
There is a false view presented that anything less than revolutionary change is pointless. In fact, sustained incremental change over time is just as capable of delivering transformational results, it just requires more patience and carefulness, plus it has the benefit of allowing things to be tried and tested.
The ideological right have been just as guilty of this mistake as the ideological left, and last Friday is the proof of what it gets you.
Last edited: