Starmer's vision quest

[Dorset Boy]

Isn't there a saying around you play politics to gain power, but when in power you need to govern?

On the flexibility being turned into U-turns, the issues are there have been too many really badly thought out policies that have had to result in U-turns.
However on the flip side, you can explain the need for flexibility around quite a lot of issues due to how the world has changed over the last couple of years. They should have explained that and, for example, put up income tax slightly instead of upping employer NI whilst also reducing the threshold at which it is paid, hammering the chance of growth.
The electorate aren't as stupid as you superior arrogant folks think, and will accept things if explained properly and truthfully. Add in the mahoosive majority Labour have, and they will be in power for a full term.

But god forbid we end up with a millipede or Rayner as PM.

 

[Pblakeney]

But god forbid we end up with a millipede or Rayner as PM.

Who do you think it should be?
Genuine question as I have no answer, although Rayner probably tops the list of availables.

 

[Ian H]

But god forbid we end up with a millipede or Rayner as PM.

I'd be interested to read what your actual objections are to those two.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

The electorate aren't as stupid as you superior arrogant folks think, and will accept things if explained properly and truthfully.

Evidence? Either of the electorate not be stupid or of superior arrogant folks. Both preferably.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Who do you think it should be?
Genuine question as I have no answer, although Rayner probably tops the list of availables.

Personally I think there should be no change. Starmer has done well on the international stage generally, the exceptions being the 2 State visits and sucking up to Trump early doors. Domestically he and Reeves need to be more honest about the state of the nation and explain why they need to be flexible. They also need to properly think policies through.

Rayner is divisive and a hypocrite.
Milliband just doesn't cut it and would do nothing to help the economy grow - he's inflexible on too many things.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Evidence? Either of the electorate not be stupid or of superior arrogant folks. Both preferably.

Try taking off your blinkers - there are vast numbers of posts that betray a we know better than the masses who are thick types of posts.
And perhaps if our politicians were more honest rather than regularly hiding behind weasel words and failing to answer questions, they may also be surprised by the electorate.

 

[Pblakeney]

Personally I think there should be no change. Starmer has done well on the international stage generally, the exceptions being the 2 State visits and sucking up to Trump early doors. Domestically he and Reeves need to be more honest about the state of the nation and explain why they need to be flexible. They also need to properly think policies through.

Rayner is divisive and a hypocrite.
Milliband just doesn't cut it and would do nothing to help the economy grow - he's inflexible on too many things.

Kind of replicates my earlier question, what will be gained?

 

[secretsqirrel]

Personally I think there should be no change. Starmer has done well on the international stage generally, the exceptions being the 2 State visits and sucking up to Trump early doors. Domestically he and Reeves need to be more honest about the state of the nation and explain why they need to be flexible. They also need to properly think policies through.

Rayner is divisive and a hypocrite.
Milliband just doesn't cut it and would do nothing to help the economy grow - he's inflexible on too many things.

I am coming around to the idea that Starmer should stay on those grounds and that fact that he has nearly 2 years of battle scars, so if he survives then he has showed some resilience.

Rayner is divisive but you really can’t rule out hypocrites there would be no-one left.

As for Miliband I think he should stand by his net zero principles, somebody has to own it for all of us.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

The electorate aren't as stupid as you superior arrogant folks think, and will accept things if explained properly and truthfully. Add in the mahoosive majority Labour have, and they will be in power for a full term.

I don't think the electorate is stupid, but I think we are at a point where there is such a mass proliferation of online misinformation and distrust, that a significant proportion of the electorate either does not want, or is not prepared to believe the truth. I totally agree with you on tax, but if the current govt did just that, what would now ensue would be a massive social media torrent of abuse and a right wing press running copious stories of wealthy middle class types who are now going to go broke.

The optimist in me would like to believe that people want the grown up explanation and will accept it, the pessimist in me thinks they want unicorns.