General Election 2024....
- Thread starter Fab Foodie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
ebikeerwidnes
Well-Known Member
Well - in a way
Of all the
clearly he was not popular in "The Party" so a lot of them got hamstrung by the treasury - AKA the PM - after a great announcement that "The Party" (AKA the PM) can take credit for
but he did seem to do stuff
clearly a self serving whatsit in many case but one that could actually do stuff
detest the git but better than most of the top tories - which is a bar a worm could easily clear but there you go
Oh and Andrea Ledson is buggering off as well
At this point we are getting to the point where the Green party needs to step and make sure that someone switches the lights off when the last person leaves Tory party HQ
although don;t bother in the one near us - I have been here 10 years and drive down that road quite often and have NEVER seen anyone go in or out or any lights on
theclaud
Reading around the chip
cookiemonster
Veteran
- Location
- Far away from the asylum
Saying that you are a Starmer Fanboy is not peurile, it's just fact going by your posts.
What does Starmer stand for? What are the policies? What's going to change?
He's ditched every single pledge he's made in 4 years. All of them. Every single one, sometimes within days of them being announced because someone shouted at him. That is not what the UK needs. He's so far ahead in the polls that he has the oppportunity to be much braver and announce policies that'll drag the UK into something resembling a normal country.
He's sticking to the Tories spending plans, how he'll do that is something economists are scratching their heads about as the economy is just a firestorm. Sticking to the Tories 2 child benefit cap, forcing kids into poverty, almost 200,000 according to the Trussel Trust. He refuses to even consider rejoining the SM and CU, despite it being an immediate 4% bounce on GDP (when the country really needs that shot in the arm), because he's trying to win back the thick racists of the Red Wall that gave us Brexit (because their s*it lives are the fault of other people not their s*it decisions).
More privatisation of the NHS while him and Streeting take, so far, 175,000 quid in donations from lobbyists working for private health firms. Scrapping of the green pledge, a shocking decision in itself and even more shocking when you find out that Rachel Reeves took donations (10,100 pounds was one) from Lord Donoghue, a well known climate change sceptic.
No enquiries into austerity, which killed 330,000 people because they're old, sick, poor disabled or unemployed (no wonder the UN got involved, twice). No policies regarding food bank use, in work poverty, child poverty, arms sales to the genocidal Israeli regime which, I notice as a former Human Rights lawyer, refuses to state if there are war crimes going on. No plans to investigate the criminal corruption that occured during covid. Why? Because he's a coward.
There's nothing there. Nothing. All empty words. Vacuous.
He was in Scotland on Friday and he was asked questions and he failed to answer any one of them properly and kept using the word 'change in every one of the answers.' That's it. One word.
Labour's whole election strategy is 'Vote for us! We're not the Tories!' That's not going to last long.
I've pointed these issues out to you but you only respond with childish insults, which you are very quick to accuse others of. Starmer's not the person the UK needs to drag it out of it's decline. He's a coward with no vision or imagination.
So, tell us what he'll do to rebuild the UK? How will he do it by following the Tories spending plans, which are a mess. How will he help business by not rejoining the Sm and CU despite the GDP bounce and that poll after poll state that more than 70% of people want it. These same polls also show huge majorities in favour of renationalisation of public utilities. Why is he not doing that? He said he would during his leadership contest in 2020. One of many pledges ditched.
The UK's in a downward spiral and no-one, especially Starmer, has the vision to stop it.
Last edited:
multitool
Guest
No I haven't. Why lie?
Why are you asking me? You seem to have got it in your head that I'm some sort of massive Starmer fan.
Pretty much my only commentary is to point out the difference between being in power and trying to be in power.
As to him altering his position since becoming leader, it would be asinine to think he could maintain pledges made BEFORE the pandemic and BEFORE Truss put a huge hole in the economy.
I like his prudence. It's wise. He has an absolutely mammoth task ahead and only a fool would set himself up as a hostage to fortune. If he did, it would be you bleating that he hadn't kept his promises, wouldn't it
If I've admiration for Starmer it lies in how he has quietly but ruthlessly turned his own party around from a pathetic shambles into a disciplined machine that people appear to be willing to vote for. The Labour lead hasn't 'just happened'. It isn't 'just by default', although clearly even he will be surprised at the depth of Tory ineptitude.
As I've said before, my excitement resides in the forthcoming dispatch of the Tory party, and an incoming government that looks set to attempt remedies rather than engage in populist nonsense.
Last edited:
cookiemonster
Veteran
- Location
- Far away from the asylum
You have.
Does turning his party around kicking out anyone considered to be 'left wing?' Does that include kicking out many Jewish members? Does that include welcoming mental, ultra-right wing brexiters who rejoice at refugees drowning in the channel and criticise women who are sexual assualt victims while her ex-husband was being jailed for sexually assualting women?
I'm also looking forward to the utter destruction of the Tories. I will pop a bottle or 7 of champagne on the 5th July and you're more than welcome to join in.
However, I fear that all we'll get is a milder version of the same crap the UK has had for 14 years.I do hope I'm wrong about Starmer and the UK's future and only a sociopath would wish otherwise.
AndyRM
Elder Goth
He's got a point.
You've clearly made your points about Starmer for some time, and decried the previous Labour leadership.
I'm not trying to speak for other posters on this thread/forum, but I don't think I'm alone in that impression.
monkers
Legendary Member
This will be the status quo unless or until the end of FPTP. The system supports the exclusive nature of it - neither blue or red will destroy it as it suits their purpose of maintaining two horse races only.
Being as blues and reds are bent on maintaining this bent system, there is only one method available to the people to bring about the biggest change the country needs - that is to turn out to vote, and not to vote either blue or red.
Speaking for myself, I favour an end to the party system, at least any party that retains a whip system.
It's easy to predict the 'winnner' in the general election, but many people with experience of living through them know that the winners becomes whiners the day after the election. ''We can not keep to our promises because things are way more farked up by our predecessors than we knew about''. Yes, they do a Paula Vennels, pretending they didn't know the facts that ordinary people know, and claiming it was everybody else's fault.
Where I live, A town with strong military (RN) presence, it has always been the case that you can stand any candidate as a Tory regardless of merit, the electorate will vote for them, the retired RN folk will salute them as they do each other in the street.
The line has always been that you could stand a pig here with a blue rosette pinned to its arse and they will still salute it and vote for it.
This time is different. Electoral calculus predict that it is so close that the Tories have an advantage of just 1%.
I really think the Tories deserve obliteration as a party, they are mostly that awful, but Labour do not deserve office.
Faced with such dilemma that I must vote red to be rid of blue while wanting neither, I feel safe in saying UK democracy is dead, the majority are not faced with a positive outcome, yet there is a sense of duty to turn out and vote to be eaten by lions or wolves.
And yes, I do know that we once had a referendum on it.
It seems to me that the public can't be trusted with the responsibility of a referendum.
It also seems to me that the days of turning out and voting with the interest of self, and/or the country are past. It's almost as if people turn out to vote for a party that demonises a group of people [insert latest target group here] that they have been asked to dislike / hate.
Being as blues and reds are bent on maintaining this bent system, there is only one method available to the people to bring about the biggest change the country needs - that is to turn out to vote, and not to vote either blue or red.
Speaking for myself, I favour an end to the party system, at least any party that retains a whip system.
It's easy to predict the 'winnner' in the general election, but many people with experience of living through them know that the winners becomes whiners the day after the election. ''We can not keep to our promises because things are way more farked up by our predecessors than we knew about''. Yes, they do a Paula Vennels, pretending they didn't know the facts that ordinary people know, and claiming it was everybody else's fault.
Where I live, A town with strong military (RN) presence, it has always been the case that you can stand any candidate as a Tory regardless of merit, the electorate will vote for them, the retired RN folk will salute them as they do each other in the street.
The line has always been that you could stand a pig here with a blue rosette pinned to its arse and they will still salute it and vote for it.
This time is different. Electoral calculus predict that it is so close that the Tories have an advantage of just 1%.
I really think the Tories deserve obliteration as a party, they are mostly that awful, but Labour do not deserve office.
Faced with such dilemma that I must vote red to be rid of blue while wanting neither, I feel safe in saying UK democracy is dead, the majority are not faced with a positive outcome, yet there is a sense of duty to turn out and vote to be eaten by lions or wolves.
And yes, I do know that we once had a referendum on it.
It seems to me that the public can't be trusted with the responsibility of a referendum.
It also seems to me that the days of turning out and voting with the interest of self, and/or the country are past. It's almost as if people turn out to vote for a party that demonises a group of people [insert latest target group here] that they have been asked to dislike / hate.
multitool
Guest
It may do, yes, although you are being melodramatic. Gaining power is about optics. You don't acknowledge that the electorate in general see things differently to you. They have been told endlessly, for decades that Labour are financially reckless and crashed the economy in 2008. Labour have to undo that. Truth doesn't come into it. Moral purity does not result in unseating the Tories. Surely you've noticed that Labour are held to impossibly high standards and the Tories are not? In your own small way, you are part of this. Its what you are doing here. You'll won't like me saying this, but at least have a pause for thought about it.
I find the Elphicke thing particularly interesting. It's a means to an end thing, and I suspect it was a partial catalyst for Sunak throwing in the towel. You may disagree but I don't think there was a huge cost to Labour.
I'll drink to that.
You dont realise it, but it is because of people like you that there will not be an honest debate around the economic situation of the UK, because you want the impossible. You want mass-spending. But you aren't willing to acknowledge that the costs of borrowing have gone up, and more borrowing will push those costs up further. There is no way around this other than a huge spurt of economic growth, but this cannot be magicked up. The choices for labour are either spending cuts, tax rises, or borrowing. Labour faces an impossible position. If it wants to do anything it will need a decade, and if it makes unachievable promises now people like you and the Tories will be screeching about it in 5 years.
People here have talked about disappointment with "lack of vision", but what they are really saying is that they want to be lied to. It's just Brexit sunny uplands stuff all over again.
We all want to feel good, but surely the last decade has taught us that we need a realistic discussion of real issues and actual solutions. We aren't at that point yet. We might be in the autumn.
No, you are right about the UK's future. But we will get a genuine attempt at starting to tackle deep structural problems rather than populist window-dressing.
Starmer? He's not Boris Johnson. He's not Blair, he's not Corbyn. Everything about him and his past suggests he isn't interested in personal acclaim, devotion and crowds chanting his name. He seems a fundamentally decent person, with a pretty steely focus. Whatever he delivers will be better than what we have lived through for 14 years.
Last edited:
monkers
Legendary Member
I have to disagree. These are the choices of any government. What we are facing is choice between two parties, both of whom are refusing to tax those who can afford it because they rely on their money to exist. It's a choice between two parties competing to be the bitches of billionaires racing each other to become the first trillionaire. To this end, we are effectively controlled by super rich Americans. Would the Lem Sips be better? Lord knows. How about Reform with their Trump enthusiasm? For those of us in England that leaves Greens or Indies.
At least Greens would tax those who could afford it, nationalise public services, and put people and our environment first. To my view they have the best policy set, and one that is not changeable by their management team. And, oh, they don't have a control by whip.
Last edited:
