Westminster Politics

[That'sHernandez]

It's mad that anyone could take a person who lasted just 49 days as leader of their country, because they tanked its economy with all their policies, seriously. Like what possible insight could they have?

 

[rimaldo]

It's mad that anyone could take a person who lasted just 49 days as leader of their country, because they tanked its economy with all their policies, seriously. Like what possible insight could they have?

read it and if you share any common goals or ideals, revisit them.

 

[DavelinaJolie]

It's mad that anyone could take a person who lasted just 49 days as leader of their country, because they tanked its economy with all their policies, seriously. Like what possible insight could they have?

The only people that do are free market libertarians, and I imagine they still think she didn't go far enough, and people in Telegraph comments sections. It doesn't seem like the Conservatives even take her seriously anymore.

 

[golden_blunder]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

There he is grinning again. He’s got the maturity of a school boy

 

[Maticmaker]

I think the polls are seriously under estimating left voters choosing to vote away from Labour.

You could well be correct, it's amazing how many people who consider themselves true socialists are prepared to 'cut off their noses' to spite Starmer's face. Wonder what they will tell their children if they do managed to rob Labour of the large majority they are going to need (over 3 terms) to move the dial significantly?

Even a large majority for Labour in this next election will not make the difference it will take to improve the lot of working people... not in one term; the Tories have had 14 years, Labours going to need 3 terms (15 years) at least, not to just claw back, but to move the dial significantly.

I am in my late 70's and only once in my life time has a Labour government been in a position to improve the lot of working people to the next level and I was born in that era (i.e post WW2, NHS Act and Education Act) that Labour government change my life prospects no end, and for millions like me. It's true the Blair Government had a stab at it but too much in-fighting at the top stopped them really moving the dial. So, to anybody who is thinking of ditching, Labour because Starmer has the temerity to call for 'silence in the ranks' and to 'brook no nonsense' in marshalling his troops to win their most important election since the 1940/50's.
Then I say shame on you and warn that you will regret it the rest of your lives.

 

[Pexbo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I find him excruciating to watch. I can’t remember someone so insincere, arrogant and out of their depth.

 

[Buster15]

I find him excruciating to watch. I can’t remember someone so insincere, arrogant and out of their depth.

He just doesn't listen and keeps trotting out the same rubbish.
Then repeats the same thing whatever the question.

 

[Buster15]

https://news.sky.com/story/govt-has...-despite-renewed-threats-of-conflict-13106616

This is reassuring.
There is a war raging in Europe and the government has no plans for what to do in the event of a war.

These things require a great deal of forethought and planning... and investment.

 

[horsechoker]

I find him excruciating to watch. I can’t remember someone so insincere, arrogant and out of their depth.

His predecessor Liz Truss

 

[MancunianAngels]

You could well be correct, it's amazing how many people who consider themselves true socialists are prepared to 'cut off their noses' to spite Starmer's face. Wonder what they will tell their children if they do managed to rob Labour of the large majority they are going to need (over 3 terms) to move the dial significantly?

Even a large majority for Labour in this next election will not make the difference it will take to improve the lot of working people... not in one term; the Tories have had 14 years, Labours going to need 3 terms (15 years) at least, not to just claw back, but to move the dial significantly.

I am in my late 70's and only once in my life time has a Labour government been in a position to improve the lot of working people to the next level and I was born in that era (i.e post WW2, NHS Act and Education Act) that Labour government change my life prospects no end, and for millions like me. It's true the Blair Government had a stab at it but too much in-fighting at the top stopped them really moving the dial. So, to anybody who is thinking of ditching, Labour because Starmer has the temerity to call for 'silence in the ranks' and to 'brook no nonsense' in marshalling his troops to win their most important election since the 1940/50's.
Then I say shame on you and warn that you will regret it the rest of your lives.

Labour should have to work for votes. They can't just assume the left will turn up because they aren't as bad as the Tories.

For all his and their faults, Blair and New Labour did largely get a lot of the traditional more argumentative lefties behind them with a focus on schools and early years education.

Starmer needs to find his "education, education, education" message.

 

[TheGame]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[4bars]

You could well be correct, it's amazing how many people who consider themselves true socialists are prepared to 'cut off their noses' to spite Starmer's face. Wonder what they will tell their children if they do managed to rob Labour of the large majority they are going to need (over 3 terms) to move the dial significantly?

Even a large majority for Labour in this next election will not make the difference it will take to improve the lot of working people... not in one term; the Tories have had 14 years, Labours going to need 3 terms (15 years) at least, not to just claw back, but to move the dial significantly.

I am in my late 70's and only once in my life time has a Labour government been in a position to improve the lot of working people to the next level and I was born in that era (i.e post WW2, NHS Act and Education Act) that Labour government change my life prospects no end, and for millions like me. It's true the Blair Government had a stab at it but too much in-fighting at the top stopped them really moving the dial. So, to anybody who is thinking of ditching, Labour because Starmer has the temerity to call for 'silence in the ranks' and to 'brook no nonsense' in marshalling his troops to win their most important election since the 1940/50's.
Then I say shame on you and warn that you will regret it the rest of your lives.

Sure, then Tory can change its name as Socialist party of GB while behaving like always and then the socialist should vote them. Just because the Labour is called Labour doesn't entitle them to have the labour and left votes if their policies are Tory lite. If Labour is not left anymore, why the left should vote them?

 

[Giggsyking]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This was in January

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Maticmaker]

Labour should have to work for votes. They can't just assume the left will turn up because they aren't as bad as the Tories.

For all his and their faults, Blair and New Labour did largely get a lot of the traditional more argumentative lefties behind them with a focus on schools and early years education.

Starmer needs to find his "education, education, education" message.

They are already doing that, by keeping silent on somethings and by indicating they won't be reckless they are working very hard to capture middle of the road/disappointed Tories, or Tories who are not in the 'nasty party' Tory grouping. They are also not giving the RW press any real ammunition or targets to have a go at, certainly not before the GE run-in starts. Most of all though they are relying on the traditional Labour vote, that includes the far left, and they are hoping these traditional voters will know their intentions anyway and trust them.

The crucial thing being Labour have to keep everyone happy for this first GE, because the first term Labour government simply has to stop the rot..... the reality is it will not be able to do much more.
It will take two or three terms to move the dial as far as they want, and the reality is that their 'super large' majority (assuming it happens) will get eaten way at the next election especially if the Tory party recovers its 'we are the natural party of government' credentials. By the third term enough dial movement will have been achieved so that Labour can (rightly) ask the electorate for a third term, to finish the job.

The left although upset about many things, can help Labour win its 'super majority' and play a part in moving the dial, and in which direction; or it can be insulted, spoil ballots, or vote for others who have no chance and In so doing it will open the way for the Tories to realistically plan a quick return.

Labours priorities in its first term (in my opinion) should be to administer the emergency TLC needed for Health & Education, and plan a real drive on housing and on developing decent employment (with training) prospects and this needs full union support on this, not just the nodding of heads.

Another chance like this to move the dial for working folk will not come along in the foreseeable future, the left has to make sure its doesn't do the Tories job for them.

 

[Fully Fledged]

God help us. She’s still talking shite.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

She even got the books wrong. Holding up the one with the Union Flag on when she said The United States and the one with The Star and Stripes when she said The UK.

 

[TheGame]

One of the biggest scandals in recent politics will be how Andrew Jenkyns went on the honours list. A loathsome politician and a nasty piece of work.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[The Corinthian]

 

[saivet]

You could well be correct, it's amazing how many people who consider themselves true socialists are prepared to 'cut off their noses' to spite Starmer's face. Wonder what they will tell their children if they do managed to rob Labour of the large majority they are going to need (over 3 terms) to move the dial significantly?

The way I see it, I'm not voting for Labour by default, I'm not a Labour member and I never will be a member to any party. I'm not ruling out voting Labour but as it stands I'm leaning against them. For me I'll just look at a combination of the local candidates and what the manifesto's are decide based on that.

I won't vote Tory or any other right wing group but I'll consider all other options. I'm just not going to vote Labour based on greater good concept that they may make things better over the next 10 years, I don't believe in any party that much to be giving them a vote based on that.

 

[The Corinthian]

Alan Duncan being investigated by Conservative Party after criticising fellow Tories for Israel support

Sir Alan, a former government minister, called for his fellow Conservatives Lord Polak, Lord Pickles and Tom Tugendhat to face repercussions over their support of Israel on LBC on Thursday.

A Conservative Party spokesperson said: "Following his comments on LBC this morning, Alan Duncan has been informed in writing that he is under investigation by the party."

Investigations of this kind can take a few weeks, and can result in a member being expelled from the party.

Speaking on LBC's Nick Ferrari at Breakfast, Sir Alan also called for arms sales to Israel to be stopped "immediately".


"I think that anything in support of what is becoming a total catastrophe in Gaza is morally unacceptable and what we have to accept is it’s not just what they’re doing now is wrong – it’s what Israel has been doing for years has been wrong because the Israeli defence does not follow international law," he said.

"It has been backing and supporting illegal settlers in the West Bank who steal Palestinian land and it is that land theft, that annexation of Palestine, which is the origin of the problem, which has given rise to the Hamas atrocity and the battles we’re seeing."

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/alan-duncan-investigated-conservative-party-israel/

 

[Dumbstar]

Welcome to the resistance Alan

 

[Kaos]

Alan Duncan being investigated by Conservative Party after criticising fellow Tories for Israel support

Sir Alan, a former government minister, called for his fellow Conservatives Lord Polak, Lord Pickles and Tom Tugendhat to face repercussions over their support of Israel on LBC on Thursday.

A Conservative Party spokesperson said: "Following his comments on LBC this morning, Alan Duncan has been informed in writing that he is under investigation by the party."

Investigations of this kind can take a few weeks, and can result in a member being expelled from the party.

Speaking on LBC's Nick Ferrari at Breakfast, Sir Alan also called for arms sales to Israel to be stopped "immediately".


"I think that anything in support of what is becoming a total catastrophe in Gaza is morally unacceptable and what we have to accept is it’s not just what they’re doing now is wrong – it’s what Israel has been doing for years has been wrong because the Israeli defence does not follow international law," he said.

"It has been backing and supporting illegal settlers in the West Bank who steal Palestinian land and it is that land theft, that annexation of Palestine, which is the origin of the problem, which has given rise to the Hamas atrocity and the battles we’re seeing."

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/alan-duncan-investigated-conservative-party-israel/

Well worth listening to the interview. He's absolutely bang on.


Never thought a veteran Tory politician would be the voice of reason (putting to shame the pathetic apologist stance from Labour). And I'm glad he named and shamed those Tory MPs and Lords.

 

[Giggsyking]

Well worth listening to the interview. He's absolutely bang on.


Never thought a veteran Tory politician would be the voice of reason (putting to shame the pathetic apologist stance from Labour). And I'm glad he named and shamed those Tory MPs and Lords.

Wow, he did not hold back, sliced everyone in the Tory, but not only that, he put every IDF friend in Labour including their leader to shame.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Wow, he did not hold back, sliced everyone in the Tory, but not only that, he put every IDF friend in Labour including their leader to shame.

How is the producer not telling Nick Ferrari to stop breathing like an ape into the mic? It’s impossible to listen to the fella with headphones on. He does it every day.

Also - fella was spot on of course.

 

[Frosty]

What this means is that Sunak is closer to grasping the key issue than Starmer and the Labour Party. Wonderful.

 

[decorativeed]

She even got the books wrong. Holding up the one with the Union Flag on when she said The United States and the one with The Star and Stripes when she said The UK.

She's a total moron, but neither book has a stars and stripes flag on it.

 

[4bars]

She's a total moron, but neither book has a stars and stripes flag on it.

Check again. Maybe not stars, but if you don't want to clutch at straws is clearly the US stripes

 

[Cloud7]

What this means is that Sunak is closer to grasping the key issue than Starmer and the Labour Party. Wonderful.

Don’t you understand? Starmer has to avoid saying anything that could potentially upset anyone at all. It’s not his fault.

 

[The Corinthian]

Well worth listening to the interview. He's absolutely bang on.


Never thought a veteran Tory politician would be the voice of reason (putting to shame the pathetic apologist stance from Labour). And I'm glad he named and shamed those Tory MPs and Lords.

Wow, he did not hold back, sliced everyone in the Tory, but not only that, he put every IDF friend in Labour including their leader to shame.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Maticmaker]

The way I see it, I'm not voting for Labour by default, I'm not a Labour member and I never will be a member to any party. I'm not ruling out voting Labour but as it stands I'm leaning against them. For me I'll just look at a combination of the local candidates and what the manifesto's are decide based on that.

I won't vote Tory or any other right wing group but I'll consider all other options. I'm just not going to vote Labour based on greater good concept that they may make things better over the next 10 years, I don't believe in any party that much to be giving them a vote based on that.

Fair enough, but if Labour doesn't get your vote then (and its not clear from your comments what they would have to do to get your vote) it sounds like you may not be voting for anybody...... who actually has a chance of winning overall (that is if you are ruling out the Tories).

I suppose you may have a local candidate who is a good constituency MP and it would not matter what the candidates politics are, you would vote for them. That's your right of course, but for the uncommitted, Labour offers not only the option of 'not being Tory' and of course 'a change is as good as a rest' (my old mum use to say), but also realistically they are the only party with a strong enough potential majority to move the dial in favour of ordinary folk; who after 14 years of Tory rule, desperately need a government that will represent the needs of the majority and not the elite, or the ones that can shout the loudest.

I can appreciate (considering potentially) voting for a party for three consecutive terms, is a bit of a stretch, given the situation the country finds itself in just now. However, realistically an initial 5 years tenure might be something in which a dynamic government could be successful in overcoming the inertia that now seems to grip the country, almost in every facet of our existence; but to make a real difference, to move the dial etc.....starting from where we are now, will take at least 15 years (3 terms).

On a purely personal level, my advice to voters at the next GE would be not to vote on a one term basis only, but to look realistically at whether;
a) the party you are supporting or likely to support, can keep going beyond one term, stamina, will, commitment,
b) does it have the kind of people in post, who can stay the course, i.e. beyond 1 term, possibly up to 3,
c) does its leader, really lead or is there someone else /group in the shadows pulling the strings,
d) is there some one else waiting in the wings for the incumbent to fall from grace,
e) is what is being proposed over the 3 terms work for the majority of ordinary people, e.g. does it contain aims and objectives for improving; health, education, housing and employment and training opportunities?

 

[4bars]

Im sick of the "you should vote for this to not get the other one". The "useful" vote. Is shitty to guilt-trap you to vote for a party/person that doesn't represent and even go against your values and it only propagates the bipartidism that exist in any big western country

Who ever advocates for this are a big part of the problem that we have shitty representatives because they don't feel threatened. They are all part of the establishment and if they win they will be comfortably in the government and if they lose they will be comfortably in the opposition. Never out

 

[TheGame]

Didn’t know MS Paint is still being used.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[The Boy]

Didn’t know MS Paint is still being used.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I would be pretty pissed off if I was King Charles or Aston Martin being used in political campaigning by the Tories

EDIT and the English football team, I didnt spot them initially hiding at the bottom

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The MSC Zoe was the ship that lost about 300 containers overboard in the North Sea but is not British anyway.

 

[Frosty]

Second most powerful country in the world at what?

Edit: Nevermind, it is a study in soft power produced by the Henry Jackson Society: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-study-ranks-britain-second-powerful-country-world/.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Jackson_Society

Co-founder Matthew Jamison, who now works for YouGov, wrote in 2017 that he was ashamed of his involvement, having never imagined the Henry Jackson Society "would become a far-right, deeply anti-Muslim racist ... propaganda outfit to smear other cultures, religions and ethnic groups". He claimed that "The HJS for many years has relentlessly demonised Muslims and Islam".

 

[The Corinthian]

I would be pretty pissed off if I was King Charles or Aston Martin being used in political campaigning by the Tories

EDIT and the English football team, I didnt spot them initially hiding at the bottom

Chris Nolan there too.

 

[Red in STL]

Chris Nolan there too.

Maybe he should make a movie about how the Tories have fecked the country!

 

[saivet]

Fair enough, but if Labour doesn't get your vote then (and its not clear from your comments what they would have to do to get your vote) it sounds like you may not be voting for anybody...... who actually has a chance of winning overall (that is if you are ruling out the Tories).

I suppose you may have a local candidate who is a good constituency MP and it would not matter what the candidates politics are, you would vote for them. That's your right of course, but for the uncommitted, Labour offers not only the option of 'not being Tory' and of course 'a change is as good as a rest' (my old mum use to say), but also realistically they are the only party with a strong enough potential majority to move the dial in favour of ordinary folk; who after 14 years of Tory rule, desperately need a government that will represent the needs of the majority and not the elite, or the ones that can shout the loudest.

I do generally agree with the premise but I personally don't believe I owe the Labour party anything to have a guaranteed vote from me. I may well decide Labour is the best party for me to vote for but I think political parties relying on certain demographics to vote for them by default is a dangerous game and potentially leaves those groups unhappy that the party doesn't do much for them.

 

[Maticmaker]

I do generally agree with the premise but I personally don't believe I owe the Labour party anything to have a guaranteed vote from me. I may well decide Labour is the best party for me to vote for but I think political parties relying on certain demographics to vote for them by default is a dangerous game and potentially leaves those groups unhappy that the party doesn't do much for them.

Yes, I can understand that, I was a member of the Labour party (in my Youth) and even then didn't vote blindly for the party (even though my father did). I do think Starmer is trying to harness voters who would not be natural labour people and in so doing is risking the left leaning element, because he can see maybe once in a lifetime opportunity to move the dial.... A 'super majority'at the next GE, that would get reduced over two or three terms, but keep his government in power long enough to change the course of history of the British working populace, as did the post WW2 labour government with the NHS Act and the Education Act, that empowered millions of ordinary folk, me among them.

 

[Bobade]

Yes, I can understand that, I was a member of the Labour party (in my Youth) and even then didn't vote blindly for the party (even though my father did). I do think Starmer is trying to harness voters who would not be natural labour people and in so doing is risking the left leaning element, because he can see maybe once in a lifetime opportunity to move the dial.... A 'super majority'at the next GE, that would get reduced over two or three terms, but keep his government in power long enough to change the course of history of the British working populace, as did the post WW2 labour government with the NHS Act and the Education Act, that empowered millions of ordinary folk, me among them.

Literally all of this only exists as your gut feeling though. You're constantly in this thread explaining the 4D chess that Starmer is playing, based on nothing but your say so and what a party did decades ago.