[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
politics

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 92282)
Message
File  []
close
EuCdG7VXMAEbuhg.jpg
922829228292282
>> No. 92282 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 8:11 pm
92282 spacer
Perhaps the problem with Labour wasn't actually Jeremy Corbyn?
Expand all images.
>> No. 92283 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 8:20 pm
92283 spacer
>>92282
No, it definitely was.
>> No. 92284 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 9:09 pm
92284 spacer
>>92283

But, stay with me here, what about if it wasn't?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/leaked-labour-report-should-have-been-explosive-scandal/
>> No. 92285 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 9:42 pm
92285 spacer
>>92283
Only for the latter part. He was close to smashing it before he was given too many opportunities to fuck it up.

I'll never forgive him for pissing about with his stance on Brexit. He threw the vote away.

On a niche internet website that servers to aggregate content to be read and reread, there seems to be a bit of a rift between "Fuck Starmer" hard left labour and "We like welfare" left, is this reflected in the party itself?
>> No. 92286 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 9:58 pm
92286 spacer

Untitled.png
922869228692286
Corbyn was a Liberal Democrat?
>> No. 92287 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 10:00 pm
92287 spacer
>>92286
Is this real? I haven't voted for them since they fucked me hard with their tuition fee bullshit. Clegg is a bastard.
>> No. 92288 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 10:44 pm
92288 spacer

Why did people not vote labour.jpg
922889228892288
>>92284
It definitely was, though.
>> No. 92289 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 10:46 pm
92289 spacer
>>92286

I'm not sure where they got those numbers from. 67 billion works out to £18.95 a week each. That isn't remotely enough to fund a UBI, no matter how you slice it.
>> No. 92290 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 11:35 pm
92290 spacer
>>92287
Yes.
https://www.libdems.org.uk/a20-ubi

>>92289
I'm wondering what the fag packet maths look like - presumably it is built on top of the welfare expenditure.
>> No. 92291 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 1:23 am
92291 spacer
>>92289

I suppose you can factor in the money already spent on welfare, because in theory UBI would just replace those existing systems and the £67 billion is all you need to add on top.

How much does it cost to staff the jobcentre with useless administrative wankers? We'd save a packet sacking every last one of those cunts.
>> No. 92292 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 2:02 am
92292 spacer
>>92289 >>92290 >>92291
https://works.bepress.com/widerquist/119/download/
>> No. 92293 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 2:12 am
92293 spacer
>>92291

Total pre-pandemic spending by the DWP was £227bn pa, including state pensions and admin. Split between the whole population, that works out to £64.20 a week. Without some massive tax increases, an extra £67bn doesn't get us anywhere near a workable UBI.
>> No. 92294 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 2:16 am
92294 spacer
>>92292

>a marginal tax rate of 50% on net beneficiaries

Ah, there we are.
>> No. 92295 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 2:25 am
92295 spacer
>>92293

If you only give it to working age people instead of the whole population you'd have it up to £85 a week.

There'd be loads more tax revenue anyway, on account of everyone earning an extra £340 a month. Pays for itself.
>> No. 92296 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 9:35 am
92296 spacer
>>92288
I know I'll just sound like a nutter, but I don't like to trust this sort of poll for making this sort of argument.
Leadership was the main thing the press (and the party itself) talked about. So it's obviously the sort of thing someone would reply to with "Oh yeah, I didn't vote Labour because their leadership was bad.", but if you strip away the bad leadership and re-run the 2019 election the press and party would talk about something else and you'd get a very similar result. Just because Labour couldn't win with Jeremy Corbyn doesn't mean it could've won without Jeremy Corbyn.

Labour's problems run much deeper than an incompetent leader, a specific set of policies, or even a stance on Brexit that nobody could possibly like. One would hope that Scottish Labour's complete collapse the minute an alternative cropped up would have UK Labour more afraid of going the route of the Liberal party, but it's pretty plain that they're completely blind to the threat, that they think a little tweak here or there can resolve an existential threat. It would be comical if it wasn't so tragic.
>> No. 92297 Anonymous
13th February 2021
Saturday 5:28 pm
92297 spacer
>>92296
>I know I'll just sound like a nutter, but I don't like to trust this sort of poll for making this sort of argument.
Thanks, that saves me wasting time reading whatever bollocks you were going to follow up with.
>> No. 92298 Anonymous
16th February 2021
Tuesday 4:34 pm
92298 spacer
>>92296
Luckily for you, Corbs was a big part of the problem whether you agree or not, and now he's no longer there, being a big part of the problem.

You still have plenty of insane carpet-baggers in the Labour party though, I have faith.
>> No. 92299 Anonymous
16th February 2021
Tuesday 8:27 pm
92299 spacer
>>92295
If everyone has a guaranteed income, surely scummy lenders are going to lend against that, because it's not quite enough for an emergency need - boiler breaks, Lisa needs braces, whatever. Or BrightHouse.
Repeat, until repayments don't leave enough to live on.
Then what happens? Is there no other safety net? Just bankruptcy and go around again?
Come to think of it, it's not just UBI, although the guaranteed nature of the payments makes it feel more likely.
>> No. 92300 Anonymous
16th February 2021
Tuesday 10:21 pm
92300 spacer
>>92298
I don't disagree that Corbyn was part of the problem, but I object to the casual idea that the biggest problem with his leadership was that the public didn't like him, rather than his failure to change the parties long term trajectory away from oblivion.
It feels rather like watching the passengers of the Titanic celebrate the election of a new captain an hour after the iceberg was struck. (But look at the opinion polls, 70% agree that this new captain won't strike another Iceberg... Oh dear, those people over there are arguing whether it was the last captain, or the captain before last who got us into this mess...)
>> No. 92301 Anonymous
16th February 2021
Tuesday 10:51 pm
92301 spacer
>>92288
How did 35% of people who voted for Corbyn in 2017 decide not to in 2019? Was he preferable to May but not Johnson?
>> No. 92302 Anonymous
16th February 2021
Tuesday 11:20 pm
92302 spacer
>>92301
Increased antisemitism hysteria and a Brexit policy so awful if you boiled it and served to a starving dog it would take one sniff and walk away. May also ran a campaign with a headliner policy about the compulsory purchase of care home resident's houses, or something like that, which wasn't quite as awful as Labour's 2019 Brexit offering, but it still stank.
>> No. 92303 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 2:50 am
92303 spacer
The "problem" with Corbyn was that he wasn't a liar. He was a genuine, honest, decent person. He found a lot of supporters because of that- a record-breaking number. That wasn't enough to win an election because the population are ignorant, partly as a result of a deliberate, lifelong campaign to keep them so, and partly because of the momentum of pre-existing ignorance.

The idea of fixing this condition by continually telling the truth seems to have merit, but it doesn't work quick enough to win elections.

Starmer seems to have given up on the idea of fixing the country's collective headfuck and has just doubled down on lying. He's throwing away all the votes from reasonable, informed people and chasing after Tory votes by trying to out-Tory the Tories. It isn't going to work. It's cynical and short-sighted. It makes people more ignorant, and less engaged, and those kind of people vote Tory.

It beggers belief that anyone could look at the Tories and think, "Yes please! More of this!" They're transparently utter shite. You can't steal the Tory vote by trying to be worse than them. You have to fix the country.
>> No. 92304 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 5:50 am
92304 spacer
>>92303

Corbyn was just very bad at his job - he was very good at being an activist, but that's a very different set of skills to being a leader of the opposition or a prime minister. He was excellent at rallying the support of likeminded people, but so utterly hopeless at persuading the unconvinced that he lost the support of tens of thousands of lifelong Labour members.

Also he's a sneering egotist who the electorate rightly had no confidence in; if he's so genuine, honest and decent, why didn't he ever accept responsibility for losing two elections?


>> No. 92305 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 6:16 am
92305 spacer
>>92303

The bit those reasonable well informed people are perpetually ignorant of is that they make up a tiny portion of the electorate he can easily afford to lose.

If they were any more than that, the Greens, SDP, SWP, SDWP, TUSC, SWDUSP, TUSPD, DUSSDP or whoever else they're going to vote for instead would be storming it.
>> No. 92306 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:59 am
92306 spacer
>>92304
>Also he's a sneering egotist who the electorate rightly had no confidence in; if he's so genuine, honest and decent, why didn't he ever accept responsibility for losing two elections?

Jesus Christ, mate. You've been banging that drum for a long time without ever producing a tangible reason why you think that way. I think you've taken the media 'narrative' about this at face value and without an iota of critical thought.

I remember carefully putting together posts full of LSE studies and alternative views showing a measurable bias against Corbyn in print media at the time, reflecting a hostility toward his policies (with one former MI6 even labelling him a national security risk) and pointing to his long career as an activist.

If I remember right, you brushed off the research completely, and went on to say that Corbyn's activist career was just an extension of his supposed narcissism, which is cynical and completely divorced from reality. I don't know if you've ever been involved with a just but unpopular cause, but I can assure you it is not an ego-boosting exercise. You only stay with that kind of unrewarding work for the length of time that Corbyn has if you really believe in it.

And then you go on to post a Times video of Alan Johnson, who worked under Blair, as though it's some kind of smoking gun. Of course he's going to say that, the entire platform of that government was the ideological polar opposite to Momentum/Corbyn, and the result has been two and a half decades of unbroken economic policy, with slight variations in PR on social issues.
>> No. 92307 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 9:06 am
92307 spacer

http___com.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaw.png
923079230792307
>>92301
In 2019 Labour lost the votes it had gained in 2017 from the Lib Dems, UKIP and the Tories, but the biggest problem was that many people who usually vote Labour were disheartened and simply didn't vote at all.
>> No. 92308 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 9:41 am
92308 spacer
>>92307
Cool, and how do you imagine that answers my question?
>> No. 92309 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 9:44 am
92309 spacer
>>92307
I read that post in Adam Curtis' voice.
>> No. 92310 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 10:30 am
92310 spacer
>>92306

Not them, but I distinctly remember when I started distrusting Corbyn. It was about the time he wasn't setting labour policy. The shadow ministers would use their own initiative and then he would directly contradict them and stitch them up a kipper. Imagine having a boss like that. Imagine having that boss run the country.

Corbyn is very good at picking the cause to support that is on the right side of history. But being in charge doesn't afford that luxury, sometimes you need to apply the 'problematic' solution just to get through the day. And that is something Corbyn would wash his hands of dirtying himself with.
>> No. 92311 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 10:46 am
92311 spacer
>>92310
>But being in charge doesn't afford that luxury, sometimes you need to apply the 'problematic' solution just to get through the day.

What does this even mean?
>> No. 92312 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 10:49 am
92312 spacer
>>92304
>but so utterly hopeless at persuading the unconvinced that he lost the support of tens of thousands of lifelong Labour members.
You say this as though he didn't deliver a massive net increase in membership to a party that's always desperately in need of more money.
Losing lifelong Labour voters was unconscionable, but lifelong members? Find someone else willing to throw away £4.42 a month and it could not matter less.

>>92310
Labour's single worst policy came from the initiative of a shadow minister. (In his token defense, Labour had little option but to pick a policy that would piss a lot of people off. They did not pick the least worst option though.) If anything, Corbyn's mistake was being afraid to confront that particular policy with what he must surely have believed.
>> No. 92313 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 11:24 am
92313 spacer
>>92311

It means you don't always get to pick the perfect answer to a problem because it doesn't exist or isn't practical, but you must nether the less still take responsibility for the decision for the imperfect solution you apply.

Corbyn's modus operandi for his career up to the point of being leader has been being able to sneer at the imperfect solution and always paint what he would have done as perfect even sneering at the actions of his own party members, in this he could pick and choose his battles and never have to face the uncomfortable truth of practical action or negative consequences. As leader he was suddenly faced with no longer being able to disappear into the shadows claiming he could do better. That said Trump somehow did it, but I assume British people to not be as stupid as to fall for such obvious projection.
>> No. 92314 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 11:36 am
92314 spacer
>>92313
I would say that British people were stupid enough to fall for it, but that Corbyn wasn't smart enough to lie to them.
Of course he did the standard little lies of omission and so on, but that doesn't work. People just see you being evasive. Corbyn was never willing to do the sort of thing Trump would do - rock up to the people's vote wankers and go "We're going to stop Brexit folks, Brexit is over, the next Labour government will cancel Brexit", then go off to the general public and say "We've got a great Brexit deal here, Labour's going to make a success of it. You voted for it and we're sticking to that".
(Hell, despite unequivocally picking a side that's what Johnson more or less did. An oven ready deal that will get more concessions than May's deal, which he'd rather be dead in a ditch than delay...)

As glad as I am we avoided that, I'm now disappointed he wasn't willing to have a similarly antagonistic relationship with journalists. It wouldn't have saved him, but it would've made politics much more interesting. (And potentially even straight talking, honest...)
>> No. 92315 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 12:10 pm
92315 spacer
Aye, if there's one thing Trump's four years made American politics it's "more straight talking", you utter cretin.
>> No. 92316 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 12:14 pm
92316 spacer
If the chief criticism against Corbyn is that he couldn't win elections, the chief criticism against Starmer is that, like his predecessors apart from Corbyn, he's chasing "electability" without the substance to make Labour worth voting for. The Conservative Party needs neither electability nor sound policy. It has a more or less fixed base of voters that will always vote Tory no matter what. Labour can't steal these votes. They can only increase their vote share by inspiring those voters who wouldn't vote for any other parties otherwise.

Momentum was aptly named because it built slowly. Corbyn vastly inflated Labour membership and built up an army of normal people to campaign on Labour's behalf. Starmer has decided to shit all over the membership and piss away any hope of them campaigning on his behalf. That only leaves the possibility of favourable media coverage and "experts" to promote a new Labour policy of lies and appealing to the lowest common denominator, which Labour voters detest.

His hopes of the next GE victory depend largely upon Johnson doing a poor enough job that Tory voters turn away in disgust. No chance.
>> No. 92317 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 1:27 pm
92317 spacer
>>92315
Congratulations, you managed to miss the point of a separate paragraph. You utter cretin.
>> No. 92318 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 4:06 pm
92318 spacer
>>92316

>They can only increase their vote share by inspiring those voters who wouldn't vote for any other parties otherwise.

That was Corbyn's strategy, but it never works. Convincing a non-voter to vote for you gains you one vote. Convincing someone to switch from the Tories counts double, because you gain one vote at the expense of the other side. Persuading someone to change parties is considerably cheaper and easier than persuading a non-voter to turn out.

>Corbyn vastly inflated Labour membership and built up an army of normal people to campaign on Labour's behalf.

That vast army was actively harmful, because it was comprised of unlikeable people pushing an unappealing agenda. Somewhat fortuitously for Corbyn, bad electoral strategy meant that those worse-than-useless activists were mainly deployed to inconsequential constituencies where they couldn't do much real harm.

The left of the Labour party refuses to engage with some pretty obvious facts: The size of the party membership has negligible causal relationship with electoral success. Labour party members are overwhelmingly more middle-class than the general population; the membership became substantially more middle-class under Corbyn's leadership. Elections are decided by centrists with limited interest in politics, because they represent the bulk of winnable votes in winnable seats. Tony Blair is the most successful leader in the history of the Labour party, at both the ballot box and the dispatch box. A centre-left Prime Minister can do more to advance a left-wing agenda than a hard-left LOTO.

The fundamental question is whether you want political change or ideological purity. You can't have both.
>> No. 92319 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 4:44 pm
92319 spacer
>>92318
>Persuading someone to change parties is considerably cheaper and easier than persuading a non-voter to turn out.
This. Not only because it counts double, but also because you don't have to do the work of convincing them to vote in the first place.
>> No. 92320 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 5:01 pm
92320 spacer
>>92319
>>Persuading someone to change parties is considerably cheaper and easier than persuading a non-voter to turn out.
>This. Not only because it counts double, but also because you don't have to do the work of convincing them to vote in the first place.
Citation needed. What are the metrics for spend & effort, how did you quantify this, gather the data, etc?
>> No. 92321 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 5:26 pm
92321 spacer
>>92318
>Elections are decided by centrists with limited interest in politics, because they represent the bulk of winnable votes in winnable seats
Pretending the average voter is a centrist in the aftermath of Brexit is tenable only by completely abandoning any common understanding of the term.

(You've also got to love the idea that the pre-Corbyn membership of Labour was anything but a slightly older gang of unlikeable people pushing an unappealing Agenda.)
>> No. 92322 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 5:36 pm
92322 spacer
>>92319

That's a great strategy when you're playing Age of Empires with a priest, but it doesn't take into account the Tory floor. The only time hardcore Tory voters drifted their voting intentions away from the Tories was when the Tories intimated that they might be moving away from a hard Brexit. Politically, that was never going to be a window for Corbyn to use, and unfortunately it was the only window that counted in the last election.

Genuine socialists might represent a relatively small sector of the voting population, but unless liberal voters and socialists vote together they can't beat the Tory floor. Socialism is growing in popularity today; young people from middle-class backgrounds can't break into middle-class incomes. Those "middle-class" voters the "working class" so detest are actually a part of the contemporary post-industrial working class. The liberal labour voters are the real middle class ones. It's a shrinking demographic.

Starmer has just been unnecessarily spiting socialist Labour members/voters to chase after what he clearly thinks is the "thicko vote" and just taking it for granted he'll hoover up the liberal vote. It's just not going to work and there's no reason to want it to. The best we can hope for from a Starmer government is less than complete incompetence.
>> No. 92323 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 5:46 pm
92323 spacer

Employment-01.png
923239232392323
Did anyone ever do an equivalent chart for 2019? YouGov don't seem to have done one.
I'd rather work with 2019 than 2017 since obviously we know how things went, but when you look at a chart like this it's very hard to maintain the idea in your head of some kind of nice median voter who just wants a little pledge card promising 10,000 more police and a balanced budget when you start to break down the electorate like this and go: hang on, everyone but the coffin dodgers voted for this nutter and his too-left-wing manifesto. (That, despite the fact that May's big blunder was the "Dementia Tax", a policy that would primarily hurt elderly retirees!)

I'm not saying Corbyn was ever going to be electable, but if you were him doing 2017 all over again you'd do much better to figure out what the biggest barrier to old people voting Labour is and go for that rather than pissing about trying to get Mondeo man to vote for you by abandoning policies left and right.
(That's not even getting into what you do if old people are just stuck-in-their-ways Tories. If you can't swing them your options quickly dwindle to boosting youth turnout or wait for them to die.)
>> No. 92324 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 6:03 pm
92324 spacer
>>92322
>unless liberal voters and socialists vote together they can't beat the Tory floor.
Right, which is one of the two reasons Corbyn was never going to actually win a general election. The other being that he was utterly fucking useless as a leader.

>The best we can hope for from a Starmer government is less than complete incompetence.
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but this would actually be an improvement over the current situation.
>> No. 92325 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 6:10 pm
92325 spacer

4be49000-20d3-11ea-bbbf-c2523b5eef69.png
923259232592325
FUCK A DUCK FOR LUCK
>> No. 92326 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 7:08 pm
92326 spacer
>>92321

>Pretending the average voter is a centrist

The average voter is not the same as the average swing voter in a marginal constituency. >95% of the electorate are wholly insignificant to the outcome of a general election because they've been disenfranchised by FPTP, because their views are too entrenched or both.

>>92322

The demographic breakdown you're describing has absolutely no basis in reality. We have very tight political spending limits, so campaigns have to be laser-precision targeted.

The votes of "genuine socialists" are completely irrelevant, because there aren't very many of them and they overwhelmingly live in safe Labour seats. Young people don't matter because they have very low turnout and they overwhelmingly vote Labour anyway. Older voters lean heavily Tory, they're very entrenched in their views and their propensity to show up on polling day depends mainly on the weather. People who follow the news and have strong opinions are no good - they take far too much time and money to persuade. The poor never vote, the rich reliably vote Labour until their mid-20s and Tory thereafter. That doesn't leave a lot of people who are actually worth targeting.

For many decades, the decisive demographic has been lower middle class and aspirational working class voters aged 30-49 with low levels of political engagement. You win elections by looking sufficiently plausible to people who live in Barratt houses and drive a Nissan Juke and have an inspirational slogan stencilled on their living room wall next to a vase of twigs. Find the subset of those people who live in marginal constituencies and you've found the only people who actually count in our "democracy".

Corbyn doesn't look or sound like a Prime Minister. He wasn't willing to try and probably couldn't pull it off, so the whole project was fucked from the outset. We all know that Cameron blaming the 2008 financial crisis on Labour spending too much was total bollocks, but it sounded vaguely plausible to people who aren't paying much attention, which is the only thing that matters. Elections are won and lost on slogans, soundbites and gut instinct.

That's the bleak reality of our political system. The way we choose our leaders has about as much substance as a reality TV show. Deal with that reality or face an eternity of Tory rule, because those chinless born-to-rule cunts will do anything to stay in government.
>> No. 92327 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 7:13 pm
92327 spacer

Turnout by age-01.png
923279232792327
>>92325

Also:
>> No. 92328 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:11 pm
92328 spacer
>>92326

Would you say that BoJo looks and/or sounds like a Prime Minister?
>> No. 92329 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:12 pm
92329 spacer

Party-support-in-general--004.jpg
923299232992329
Can't forget Murdoch. The Sun, for example, has not been wrong on an election or poll since 1974, with the exception of 2010, but even then, the Tories were still basically in power.

It'll be interesting to see as the print media's influence diminishes how this progresses, but then again the Mail Online is still the most-read "news" site in the world.
>> No. 92330 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:21 pm
92330 spacer
>>92327

Young voting age people tend to live in major metropolitan areas and have more progressive views, whilst older wealthy retired people tend to live in more rural areas and tend to favour the status quo, and their vote is worth more.

http://m.voterpower.org.uk/about-voter-power-index
>> No. 92331 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:22 pm
92331 spacer
>>92329

Also, Paul Dacre is basically the Mail personified and he is about to be in charge of Ofcom.
>> No. 92332 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:33 pm
92332 spacer
>>92326
Other than some quibbles about youth turnout I agree with basically everything you say - and yet I get the sense that our views on Labour's internal politics are implacably opposed.
The burning reason why I cannot stand the center and right of the Labour party is that they fail to understand the vacuousness of the contest: They will undertake a bonfire of worthwhile policies to appease middle class swing voters, but not think twice about having the entire enterprise fronted by an implausible weirdo. It would be one thing if they were just cynics and wreckers, but they aren't: They're genuinely the sort of people who believe that policies win and lose elections. That Blair's big achievements were clause 4 and a modest manifesto, not a pretty face and a good speaking voice. That David Miliband would've won.

The left says "We believe in these policies, they're morally right", etc. Then it marches headlong into electoral oblivion.
The center says "These policies aren't perfect, but they'll improve people's lives more than sitting in opposition" and then it marches headlong into electoral oblivion.
The right says "These policies aren't perfect, but they'll improve people's lives more than sitting in opposition" while actually thinking "We believe in these policies, they're morally right" and then it marches headlong into electoral oblivion.*
My vice is that I sympathise with the left. They are nice but dim. I can imagine teaching them to be more cynical. They might not oppose targetting swing voters if you explain you're going to do it by making the election adverts a nice shade of lilac rather than by tinkering with their manifesto. The others are a mixture of the stupid and dim and the evil and dim, already cynics but completely unaware of how to put that to any use. They're already convinced of the need to target swing voters but they're about as appealing to that group as a textbook on tax accounting.

So we're stuck sitting here watching Sphere Starmer awkwardly drape himself in the flag as his personal poll numbers start trailing a clown responsible for more deaths than the Blitz, and the big question on our minds isn't "How do we find a replacement?", "How does Labour get him some media presence?", or "So what are our plans for 2029?", it's "So is he better or worse than the last guy?"
>> No. 92333 Anonymous
17th February 2021
Wednesday 8:45 pm
92333 spacer
>>92332
Forgot my *, which was just to say:
*The right have a legitimate claim to have won under Blair, but their wider political project to make Labour a natural party of government has been a comical failure.
And I would assign at least part of the blame for that on their own need for ideological purity. As Blair himself said: Even if he could win on a Corbyn manifesto, he wouldn't want to because it would be wrong for the country. That's utterly the wrong mindset to have if you want to be the natural party of government. That's why the Tories are the natural party of government and the natural party of running the country into the ground.
>> No. 92334 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 3:31 am
92334 spacer
>>92328

>Would you say that BoJo looks and/or sounds like a Prime Minister?

Tragically, yes. For all his floppy-haired shambolicness, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is still an old Etonian with all that implies.

>>92332

If Labour do seriously try and work towards being electable, it's going to take a long time to turn the ship around. Starmer might genuinely the least-worst option for leader right now, because of the total dearth of talent on the opposition front bench. I mean, who the fuck are you going to replace him with? Angela Rayner? Jon Ashworth? Wes Streeting? Thangnam fucking Debonnaire?

Long before Corbyn, Labour has been actively repellent to anyone with an ounce of sense. The unions stitched up the 2010 leadership election, we got the shit Miliband and it's all been downhill from there. You could argue that it's Blair's fault for stuffing the back benches with yes-men, you could argue that it's cyclical, but any project to revive Labour as an electoral force needs to start with the reform of candidate selection to rebuild the talent pool.
>> No. 92335 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 10:54 am
92335 spacer
>>92331
Topically, Murdoch is winning in Aus:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/feb/18/facebooks-australia-news-ban-what-is-the-social-media-giant-up-to-and-how-will-you-be-affected

News Corp lobbied their Tories (confusingly called the Liberals) to bring a law in which would require sites like Facebook to pay news publishers if 'news content' was shared from the news publishers to their website, under the pretense of 'fair pay'. Facebook turned around and went 'yeah nah cunt' and all news content (including that of the ABC) is now blocked on Facebook in Australia.

It's expected that Facebook and the big publishers (i.e. News Corp and Fairfax, both massive supporters of the aus Liberal party) will eventually enter into some sort of sharing agreement, but smaller, independent news sources will be left out in the cold, effectively turning social media in Aus into another news corp mouthpiece.

If they can make it work there, I don't see why it won't spread to here.
>> No. 92336 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 11:34 am
92336 spacer
>>92335

Well, the traditional Conservative ideology is economically liberal. Our Conservatives abandoned their ideology when they lined up behind Brexit. They really don't stand for anything any more.

>>92326

Genuine socialists aren't a small demographic any more; young people are mostly genuine socialists. It's a different socialism from the socialism in the UK during the Soviet era; it's still heavily influenced by 19th Century theory but it doesn't flow from the influence of corrupt union bosses or foreign communist agitators. Young people are looking at the world as it is, and seeing what they don't like, and adapting dusty old theories to the current world in order to understand the problems and how to fix them. They aren't trying to shoehorn those dusty old theories into a world that has made them irrelevant.

Even a mere ten years ago, traditional socialist theory was seldom discussed; it was very much a fringe, niche obsession. Now I find people on my facebook posting Marx memes and berating capitalism every day. These aren't people I've gone looking for because they matched my political biases. These are people I've just run across out in the world and who have independently absorbed socialist ideas.

Perhaps that's just my own biased, unique perspective. But I'll take my own perspective over one packaged for consumption through someone else's political bias any day.
>> No. 92337 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 11:53 am
92337 spacer
>>92336

Young people don't vote in particularly large numbers and they overwhelmingly vote Labour. Corbyn had two goes at the "youthquake" strategy of mobilising young voters and it failed on both occasions. Corbyn was more popular than Miliband among young people, but that didn't translate to an increase in turnout. There also aren't very many young people - fiftysomethings outnumber twentysomethings and the imbalance is getting worse.

It fundamentally makes no difference whether most young people are slightly left-of-centre or raving Stalinists, because Labour gets their votes either way. There just aren't a meaningful number of people who don't currently vote but might be persuaded to vote by a sufficiently left-wing leader.

>young people are mostly genuine socialists

Young people are mostly politically apathetic. There's a noisy minority on social media, but most young people just don't give a toss - the majority of 16-24 year olds don't know the name of their MP.

https://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Sky-Youth-Poll-Tables.pdf
>> No. 92340 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 1:55 pm
92340 spacer
>>92335
>News Corp lobbied their Tories (confusingly called the Liberals) to bring a law in which would require sites like Facebook to pay news publishers if 'news content' was shared from the news publishers to their website
Yeah, god forbid poor little Facebook should have to pay for a resource that drives traffic for them.
>> No. 92341 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:02 pm
92341 spacer
>>92340

Facebook decided not to use that resource and the Aussies have thrown a massive tantrum. It's a blatant shakedown. Much as I loathe Facebook, they're entirely in the right in this situation. They don't need news content and they're not going to be extorted in this manner.

We need better international tax treaties so that the tech giants can't funnel everything through Ireland, but that's a separate issue.
>> No. 92342 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:12 pm
92342 spacer
>>92340
You can't bill people, or Facebook, for posting links. Insane precedent to set. What if you've got a wee blog fifteen people read and you hyperlink to an external site? Are you liable then? How many people have to have a mental connection between a website and the discussion of wider news stories before you've got to give Murdoch kickbacks?
>> No. 92343 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:13 pm
92343 spacer
>>92341
>Facebook decided not to use that resource and the Aussies have thrown a massive tantrum.
But that's not true, is it? Facebook have decided not to allow their users access to that resource, while still using the resource themselves. You didn't seriously think their Aussie news boycott extends to not collecting data from Aussie news websites, did you?
>> No. 92344 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:15 pm
92344 spacer
>>92342
>What if you've got a wee blog fifteen people read and you hyperlink to an external site?
That depends. Are you posting the link because you want people to read it, or are you letting people post it so you can drive traffic to your multi-billion dollar operation?
>> No. 92345 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:18 pm
92345 spacer
>>92340
Here's the problem though - this is entirely designed to benefit News Corp and Fairfax. Consider that Google and News Corp have already done a deal, it's not a stretch to imagine that Facebook would do the same.

If you're a small news blog though, it's not like you can do the same deal with Facebook and it's not likely they'll pay you, so they'll probably just outright block you.

What about online articles that use news articles as sources? Are you going to have chuck a few dollarydoos to Murdoch to publish a paper?
>> No. 92346 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:19 pm
92346 spacer
>>92345
>What about online articles that use news articles as sources? Are you going to have chuck a few dollarydoos to Murdoch to publish a paper?
This is a disingenuous argument and you know it.
>> No. 92347 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 2:29 pm
92347 spacer
>>92343

>You didn't seriously think their Aussie news boycott extends to not collecting data from Aussie news websites, did you?

Facebook can only track activity on third-party websites if those third-party websites choose to embed Facebook's tracking resources. Facebook is a big website, not the CIA.
>> No. 92348 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 3:03 pm
92348 spacer
>>92347
>Facebook can only track activity on third-party websites if those third-party websites choose to embed Facebook's tracking resources.
... or if those websites embed something else that embed's Facebook's tracking resources. Either way, they're not disabling ingest from those sites that for whatever reason have left it up.
>> No. 92349 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 3:36 pm
92349 spacer
>>92344
Functionally they are the same, is what I'm saying. How big does a site need to be before it owes money to other sites its users post links to? People post links all over this place in order to discuss the news stories featured on the other side, does Purpz owe The Ecomonmist? Laws are about precedents as much as anything and this one sets out a very harmful line in the sand. Not for Facebook, they could just buy these papers tomorrow if they were so inclined, but much like suggestions of ending online anonymity, there are unforceseen consquences to these ideas because the people having them are technologically illiterate and politically biased.
>> No. 92350 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 3:56 pm
92350 spacer
>>92349
>Functionally they are the same, is what I'm saying.
Right. And you're wrong on that, is what I'm saying.

The rest of your post is reminiscent of people who say raising the minimum wage will kill jobs and call anyone that disagrees "economically illiterate".
>> No. 92351 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 4:20 pm
92351 spacer
Facebook should just be banned from having links to any kind of news articles at all, frankly.

It has been disastrous for the state of global human interaction and discourse, and I don't beleive for a minute that their manipulation of algorithms etc doesn't lead to biases with what people see and all that. Funnelling people into reality tunnels.

We should also just ban twitter full stop.
>> No. 92352 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 4:34 pm
92352 spacer
>>92351
You had me at "Facebook should just be banned". There's no reason the world should be dependent on a shitty web app some mediocre student wrote to help him get laid.
>> No. 92353 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 4:43 pm
92353 spacer

PRI172864028.jpg
923539235392353
He's definitely a robot.
>> No. 92354 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 4:46 pm
92354 spacer
>>92353

I see he's using the patented David Cameron invisible fork of power.
>> No. 92355 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 5:03 pm
92355 spacer
>>92353
You don't see Zuck posting much himself because of reCaptcha.
>> No. 92381 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 12:29 pm
92381 spacer
I think I may have zero hope for Kier Starmer as Labour leader.
>> No. 92383 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 1:41 pm
92383 spacer

itv-archive-shutterstock-editorial-814149z.jpg
923839238392383
>>92381
I've realized who he reminds me of.
>> No. 92384 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 1:49 pm
92384 spacer
>>92383
Mark Speight's final days make me really sad to think about.
>> No. 92389 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 4:45 pm
92389 spacer
>>92384
I miss the bastard. He was a pretty cool kids' presenter.
>> No. 92403 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 5:44 pm
92403 spacer
>>92389


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P5BYgPEFOo

Fond memories of SMarT
>> No. 92404 Anonymous
19th February 2021
Friday 5:52 pm
92404 spacer
>>92403
I wonder what Jay is up to these days.
>> No. 92437 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 12:42 am
92437 spacer
Regarding Starmer: it's one thing for him to be daft, I went in two-footed sticking up for Corbyn plenty of times, but what exactly am I supposed to do, as a Labour member, when he's not even got any policies? I don't really know what I'm meant to be defending here. I feel hopeless generally and Nova Labour aren't helping. Is Labour still in the bit where people start a new antidepressant and get told "this will make you feel worse or even induce suicide for the first six weeks"? What's going on?
>> No. 92438 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 8:03 am
92438 spacer
>>92437

>What's going on?

The next general election is more than three years away and we're in the middle of the biggest crisis since the war. There's no point in laying out a manifesto when nobody has any idea of what the country will look like in three months time, let alone three years time. Starmer might be running against Johnson, Sunak or someone who doesn't have much of a profile right now. He might be campaigning in the midst of a grinding recession or a post-crisis recovery boom. He might be campaigning against a new even nastier form of austerity, or a government that is still shaking the magic money tree.

Starmer's job right now is to do the boring, unglamorous work of getting the party in order, clearing out the Corbyn-era deadwood and building strength in depth. Going into campaign mode now would be a waste of effort and would look opportunistic and divisive.
>> No. 92439 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 8:43 am
92439 spacer
>>92438

>clearing out the Corbyn-era deadwood

I'm of the view he'd have been far better off building bridges with the more "hard left" of the party and proving them wrong about any intentions of a Blairite takeover, but so far he's only succeeded in furthering the division. It's not as if the centrists don't have plenty of deadwood themselves; in fact it's hard to say the dead weight in their camp was ever alive enough to be called dead.

(And to be clear, I think Labour lefties are by and large a set of moaning cunts who would rather be in opposition than government, because they're already privileged enough that they can stand on principle and tolerate another ten years of Tory rule without really feeling the bite.)
>> No. 92440 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 9:09 am
92440 spacer
>>92438
>Starmer's job right now is to do the boring, unglamorous work of getting the party in order, clearing out the Corbyn-era deadwood and building strength in depth.
There's very little evidence he's actually doing this. Or if he is, he's doing it with the cack handedness that defines the Labour party.
Even though Labour has no actual policies it could still be going harder on the government's failures while doing some competent marketing that promises nothing but suggests a lot about "values". Instead it has had about as much media presence as David Steel. (and the coverage is about as positive as well)

When it comes to deadwood the Corbyn era is a few small twigs. Labour's a forest of deadwood. It's easy to clear out the legacy of one leader the party has always hated, it's quite another to recognize that the party has been fucking things up for decades and that those fuckups charge compound interest. In my eyes Corbyn's greatest failure was not managing to get some kind of one-off reselection introduced, not to drive the party left (the experience of the 70s/80s suggests that lefty MPs will drift all over the place with time) but to take a gamble that might deliver some much needed talent to the Labour benches. A lot of Labour's current crop would seem like vacuous nonentities even in the Scottish parliament, and there's still nobody who looks like a prime minister amongst them. The ridiculousness of the fact that Gordon Brown is only Labour MP of the past decade worthy of being prime minister cannot be overstated.
>> No. 92441 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 11:34 am
92441 spacer
>>92440

That cack-handedness you speak of is relative though. The Conservative party is in complete disarray, with a voting base that doesn't care. If Labour sorted out its problems, it wouldn't lure a single Tory voter.

Ultimately, the problem, from a political point of view, is a very fickel country and a broken electoral system. The entire political system is paralysed by it. Even if a party can get the Tories out by chasing electability, it has to do so on the back of abhorrent policies that defeat the purpose of getting the Tories out in the first place. And as long as the Tories are in, everyone loses but them.
>> No. 92442 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 12:28 pm
92442 spacer
>>92440
It does raise the point that with Scottish Labour being an absolute leaderless shit-show this would be a good time for Starmer to be more involved but all he's done is mealy-mouthed points on the status quo.
>> No. 92443 Anonymous
25th February 2021
Thursday 12:34 pm
92443 spacer
>>92438
I don't want a complete manifesto, but with local elections coming up in May I have literally nothing to tell people about what the Labour Party currently stands for. If his plan is simply to disappear into the woodwork for several years and burst forth like an electoral cicada I don't think it's going to work nor is he doing especially well at it.

>>92441
The Tories are not in "complete disarry", they have minor gripes with one another as to when and how lockdown should end, but are largely on the same page. I could moan for hours about these things, but I need to go shopping and it's otherwise very disheartening.
>> No. 92444 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 5:10 pm
92444 spacer
>>92443
Every PMQs Starmer is trying WAAY too hard to be middle ground and compromising, to the extent that you could just record him saying "Mr Boris you're doing the right thing but here are some minor details you should change", then stick it on loop and you wouldn't notice any difference.
>> No. 92452 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 10:30 am
92452 spacer
>>92444
I mean was the consensus really that the problem with Corbyn was he called out the Tories too much? People always tell me Labour lost the election because of antisemitism and Brexit but I never hear it's because Jeremy was a meanie to Boris.
>> No. 92453 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 11:12 am
92453 spacer
Tories don't like the NHS like they're Inclement Attlee. Get it? It would be a good bar for some horribly white, political hiphop.
>> No. 92454 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 11:13 am
92454 spacer
>>92452
The problem with Labour and a large part of the left is that they assume everyone hates the Tories as much as they do, to the extent that if you were to say something like "I don't support the Tories but I don't believe they're pure evil incarnate" you may get dirty looks. It all stems from the fact that they believe what they're doing is morally right, so if you disagree you're not just wrong; you're wicked.

This has led to a bit of complacency. You believe you're on the right side of history and people will inevitably see this, but the Tories have been in power since 2010 and currently have a huge majority. Austerity didn't bring them down. Privatising the NHS further didn't bring them down. Grenfell didn't bring them down. Brexit didn't bring them down. Labour have expected people will come around to their point of view because they're morally in the right, but they're not actually connecting with them. There's also the fact that if you constantly whine about the Tories no matter what you'll turn into the boy who cried wolf so people will tune out and won't pay attention when you actually have valid criticism about them.

It's not about getting the right level of criticism of the Tories, it's about ensuring that this is communicated out effectively to the wider public and actually resonates with them. After all, the point of an argument is not to convince the other party to your way of thinking; it's to sway the people listening in on the sidelines and Labour have no idea how to target floating voters rather than simply preaching to the choir.
>> No. 92455 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 12:53 pm
92455 spacer

_87013561_kendall.png
924559245592455
>>92454
You sound like a Tory m8

Actually said to me when I was a member of the party
>> No. 92456 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 1:59 pm
92456 spacer
>>92454
>Labour have no idea how to target floating voters rather than simply preaching to the choir

I don't think anyone does, really. Have you ever talked to a "floating voter"? To the extent that they actually have any political views, they are by and large incoherent. There's nothing there that unites them as a group that can be targetted.
>> No. 92457 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 5:12 pm
92457 spacer
I think one thing that Labour supporters and members could do is distinguish between The Tories and their voters. Far too many people talk as if Bob Smith from Leekesdale, occasional voter, frequent normal man, is the same as George Osbourne or Priti Patel, and go off like Cato the Elder whenever politics is being discussed. I'm not saying I've never done this myself, but actually trying to convince people can work.

>>92453
Is the world ready for DemSoc-hop? It can't be any worse than chap-hop.
>> No. 92458 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 6:21 pm
92458 spacer
>>92457

>Far too many people talk as if Bob Smith from Leekesdale, occasional voter, frequent normal man, is the same as George Osbourne or Priti Patel

A lot of those people have never had a real conversation with anyone like Bob Smith. "I don't understand how a working-class person could vote Tory" isn't hyperbole - to a lot of the Labour Left, Red Wall voters might as well be Martians. They don't understand the vast cultural gap that has opened up between cities and towns, they don't recognise the values that the Labour party is failing to connect with. It's not as severe a disconnect as the one blighting the Democrats in the US, but it isn't far off.
>> No. 92459 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 7:05 pm
92459 spacer
>>92458
>"I don't understand how a working-class person could vote Tory" isn't hyperbole - to a lot of the Labour Left, Red Wall voters might as well be Martians. They don't understand the vast cultural gap that has opened up between cities and towns, they don't recognise the values that the Labour party is failing to connect with.

The whole point of the term "red wall" was that it described constituencies which, because of their industrial legacy, reliably returned a strong Labour vote despite sharing characteristics (age, rate of homeownership, deprivation, etc.) with other constituencies which would swing or return a Tory.
>> No. 92460 Anonymous
2nd March 2021
Tuesday 10:48 pm
92460 spacer
>>92454
>It's not about getting the right level of criticism of the Tories, it's about ensuring that this is communicated out effectively to the wider public and actually resonates with them. After all, the point of an argument is not to convince the other party to your way of thinking; it's to sway the people listening in on the sidelines and Labour have no idea how to target floating voters rather than simply preaching to the choir.
This is all true as it goes, but it's a problem of public relations - not politics. That is the most deeply frustrating thing: Labour is going to waste a lot of time on internal bickering and policy change when fundamentally what it needs is a good marketing team and a consistent message. (And a good leader, but there isn't a single MP in parliament for any party eligible for that position.)

I am all but willing to put money on the idea that at the next election Starmer will try to connect with voters by pushing "Aspirational" policies and by trying to portray himself by his actions as "The adult in the room", ignoring that he could be the reincarnation of Christ himself lifting the burden on the NHS by healing the sick with his own two hands and with Labour's PR and communications team responsible for getting his message out there he'd be lucky just to hold the votes of his twelve disciples.
>> No. 92461 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 9:04 am
92461 spacer
>>92460
Indeed, people I speak to, who have political opinions, are by and large of the opinion that Tony Blair is political kryptonite, despite the often confusing myriad of falsehoods, half-truths and mental gymnastics that form a lot of the thought process. It still seems to be the case that whenever Blair is brought up, there's an immediate, gut-felt reaction of dislike across a wide variety of people of all classes, levels of education, career etc.

I don't understand at all why Labour are going for the Blair-esque route with Starmer, when the "Blair brand" is unquestionably fucked and probably about as big a turn off as the Clinton brand in the States.

I don't know, Starmer is simultaneously portrayed as being a massive shit for being hyper-critical of the government at all times (seriously!) and for doing absolutely fuck all to oppose the government. So when the election cycle is started off again, people already have those pre-conceptions in their head that he's either ineffectual or spiteful. This mental disconnect is useful to fulfil the sense than you cannot question Big Boris. You must obey your media luvvie overlord, Big Boris.
>> No. 92462 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 9:20 am
92462 spacer
>>92461
The main reason people dislike Blair in this country is because of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan rather than to do with neoliberalism.

Anyway, what people want is someone who appears like a Prime Minister. As long as you can give the impression of being statesmanlike you've won half the battle because that is enough to sway a lot of people. It worked for Blair. It worked for Cameron. Johnson didn't even have to try because he was up against the kind of scruffy Geography teacher that has a sleeping bag in the store room for when he's had too much to drink and slightly whiffs of piss.
>> No. 92463 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 9:30 am
92463 spacer
>>92462

Media play a huge role in shaping the idea of who is statesmanlike and who is not. I would say that the support of the media in buying in to your "image" is a huge part of whether you appear to fit the role.

With Johnson, there is a real complicity in the media with allowing him to take on the "bumbling charm" role, as when he wandered out of his house and evaded legitimate questions with a tray of tea.
>> No. 92464 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 9:33 am
92464 spacer
>>92462
Sad to say, I don't think it's ever been much different from that kind of popularity contest. Doesn't matter what sort of shite anybody says, it just has to be the right shite at the right pitch and cadence. Ultimately you're right, I can't stand either Starmer or Johnson on a base, instinctive level of being boring af and a scruffy cunt respectively, and that's all a lot of people have to go on if said candidate is incapable of building that narrative that suits your interests. Not that much really changes anyway.
>> No. 92481 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 1:13 pm
92481 spacer
Watching the budget, if Rishi becomes PM before the next election then Starmer will be completely fucked.
>> No. 92482 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 2:32 pm
92482 spacer
>>92481
Hopefully they're both fucked.
>> No. 92484 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 4:44 pm
92484 spacer
>>92481

Starmer is fucked regardless. Labour are never winning a majority again.
>> No. 92485 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 4:54 pm
92485 spacer
>>92484
I'm tempted to vote Tory or someone in the May local elections to try and give Labour a bit of a wake up call.
>> No. 92486 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 5:18 pm
92486 spacer

DEFEAT.jpg
924869248692486
So Dishi Rishi has done the following:

* Increased corporation tax
* Except for 1.5 million smaller companies with profits of less than £50,000
* Extended furlough
* Widened access to grants for 600,000 self-employed people
* Increased the minimum wage
* Set up a new UK Infrastructure Bank in Leeds

Among other things like funding for domestic abuse victims, art galleries and £150m for community groups to take over pubs at risk of closure

This is what a "Labour are well-and-truly fucked" budget looks like. Next PM confirmed. The Tories will soon be the only party to give us a female PM and an ethnic minority PM. Whodathunkit?
>> No. 92487 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 5:26 pm
92487 spacer
>>92486
Despite the idiotic contribution of Shaun "The poor will just spend any money you give them on drugs, I know this because that's what I would have done" Bailey, both Leeds and London are poised to try out UBI schemes.
>> No. 92488 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 5:47 pm
92488 spacer
>>92486
>Set up a new UK Infrastructure Bank in Leeds

When they advertise jobs do you reckon this will be on the usual Civil Service portal?

https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk
>> No. 92489 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:09 pm
92489 spacer
>>92486

I don't know if I've finally hit the 'tories might be ok' age, or if this is just what a conservative budget is capable of when a world-changing disease blights the land, but I suppose I can't complain.
>> No. 92490 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:13 pm
92490 spacer

EvktBFHXMAUquGL.jpg
924909249092490
>>92489
>> No. 92491 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:19 pm
92491 spacer
>>92489
The Tories aren't really so bad, provided you're not a poor person or a public sector worker. The impression that Starmer gave in his response to the Budget was that Labour are squarely the party for public sector workers and those on benefits, the rest don't matter to them.
>> No. 92492 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 7:08 pm
92492 spacer
>>92488
Yeah, you might want to have a look at the other jobs in the meantime. Last I heard at least DHSC have some converted health centre thing with a swimming pool and that.
>> No. 92493 Anonymous
4th March 2021
Thursday 8:24 am
92493 spacer
>>92491
>The Tories aren't really so bad, provided you're not a poor person or a public sector worker.

Wages have essentially been stagnant for the past 10 years (a drop in real terms, on average) and the NHS is the single largest employer in the UK.
>> No. 92494 Anonymous
4th March 2021
Thursday 8:25 am
92494 spacer
>>92493

Actually, double checking that, the NHS has been listed as the fifth largest employer in the world, let alone the UK.
>> No. 92495 Anonymous
4th March 2021
Thursday 10:01 am
92495 spacer
>>92494
That just leaves the other ~97% of adults in the country that don't work for the NHS.
>> No. 92496 Anonymous
4th March 2021
Thursday 10:02 am
92496 spacer
>>92495
... and their stagnant wages.
>> No. 92497 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 7:29 am
92497 spacer

Evply48WgAMI1eZ.jpg
924979249792497
If this polling was accurate the Tories would end up with a ~92 seat majority.
>> No. 92498 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 9:01 am
92498 spacer
>>92497
Hardly Kier's fault the voters are stupid.
>> No. 92499 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 9:01 am
92499 spacer
I don't think polling is really valuable right now. The question is how they'll hold up three years from now when they don't have the Brexit trump card any more.

Unless that's it now and Brexit will be with us forever, storming to victory on the slogan "KEEP BREXIT DONE"
>> No. 92500 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:34 am
92500 spacer
>>92499
>I don't think polling is really valuable right now

The opposition being so far behind is never a good sign.

I imagine Sunak will become PM and we'll get the usual bounce and momentum that follows it, plus all the mistakes of the past can be blamed on the previous Tory regime; he certainly was under the radar under the Cameron/Osborne and May years so won't be tarnished too much by them. The SNP will also be used as a boogeyman because Labour won't be able to get in power without being propped up.
>> No. 92501 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:38 am
92501 spacer
>>92497
Fucking hell, the Greens are overtaking the Lib Dems.

>The question is how they'll hold up three years from now when they don't have the Brexit trump card any more.

That's probably the same for everyone bar Labour and Plaid Cymru. Scottish independence got a big boost from Brexit but realistically how long can that last.

>>92500
>I imagine Sunak will become PM

I don't rate his odds because his hike in corporation tax is already getting the knives out and to make matters worse he's too green. He's like a Rory Stewart, popular with a broader demographic but rubbish at party politics.

ARE Liz will get it and the rivers will run yellow with melted cheese.
>> No. 92502 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:42 am
92502 spacer
>>92501
The point of announcing tax rises now is to pledge making cuts in your manifesto right before the election.
>> No. 92503 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 2:31 pm
92503 spacer
>>92497
Why Opinion Polls Don't Matter Now That My Guy Is In Charge Even Though I Spent All of 2015-20 Tweeting Bad Opinion Polls With Glee by A. Prick - Labourlist - Mozilla Firefox.
>> No. 92504 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 5:06 pm
92504 spacer
>>92503
Whilst I largely agree with this sentiment, for the majority of those years we were looking down the barrel of an election basically every month. Overall though the hyposcrisy of Labour's centrists is quite baffling. If you and I were mugs for thinking all Corbyn's "ideas" and "policies" were a bad play, then quite why we should think that Starmer's lack of either is a great and brilliant idea is beyond me. Imagine how bad these current polls might be if Starmer was already facing a leadership challenge and constantly being publicly and privately undermined by the left of the PLP too?
>> No. 92505 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 5:09 pm
92505 spacer
>>92504
>constantly being publicly and privately undermined by the left of the PLP too?

The impression I get from Labour is that there is a lot of sniping from the left and that the entire party is still beset by infighting.
>> No. 92506 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 5:22 pm
92506 spacer
>>92504
>Imagine how bad these current polls might be if Starmer was already facing a leadership challenge and constantly being publicly and privately undermined by the left of the PLP too?

So he's got the same polling as the 2019 general, after the Tories posted a broadly popular budget, but he's still managing to keep the party together? Oddly much is being made of Ed Miliband predicting the result:
https://order-order.com/2021/03/05/watch-milibands-unfortunately-timed-polling-prediction/
>> No. 92507 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:53 pm
92507 spacer
>>92505
Sniping, sure, but we don't have weekly broadsides being published in The Mail on Sunday or backbenches standing up and calling Kier a bastard and a traitor.

>>92506
Right, but for the first half of 2019, and I know that's the unimportant half, Labour were ahead. This is why it wasn't so bonkers for left-wingers to think that Labour still had a shot by the time of the election. However, now we've got elections in May and Labour are already in the pits and there's no plan to turn that around, no vision to offer voters. I've said it plenty of times before but you can't win at politics by doing what the other lot are doing, just less so, or even more so, you need to have a direction of travel all of your own. If you don't do this, even if Labour really get into gear before a general election, what you're going have is Joe Bloggs saying things like "well... Labour, they don't stand for nowt these days, do they?", he's not going to give a monkeys about Labour's plans for expanded private-public partnerships or free school meals for the children of single parent essential workers over half-terms.
>> No. 92508 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 8:21 pm
92508 spacer
>>92507
I don't think Labour could ever offer anything to an electorate stupid enough to yield 45% Tory support while said Tories are utterly mismanaging the country.
>> No. 92509 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 8:27 pm
92509 spacer
>>92508
That's not a good reason not to try.
>> No. 92510 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 8:57 pm
92510 spacer
>>92508
There is something to be said about a world where the electorate are simultaneously smart enough to know that Labour's proposed budget deficits carry the risk of creating excessive consumer demand which would force the Bank of England to increase interest rates to cool down the economy and head off inflation, and thick enough that they can't get their head around the fact that more British civilians have been killed by this government's awful Coronavirus response than have been killed by German bomber pilots. (and the pilots were trying!)
>> No. 92511 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 9:15 pm
92511 spacer
>>92510
>simultaneously smart enough to know that Labour's proposed budget deficits carry the risk of creating excessive consumer demand
They're not that smart.
>> No. 92512 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 9:31 pm
92512 spacer
>>92508

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYAuR5bkIlQ
>> No. 92513 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:11 pm
92513 spacer
>>92512
Nice meme. Go on, post it again.
>> No. 92514 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:13 pm
92514 spacer

NFrnt.jpg
925149251492514
>>92513
>> No. 92515 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:27 pm
92515 spacer
>>92511
It's the ultimate sort of thinking behind the assumption that Labour needs to set out a credible budget which necessitates dropping the policy of doing anything but tinkering around the edges. (Really more of a Miliband era problem thanks to Coronavirus, but who knows. Starmer might want to play Mr. Reasonable at the 2023 election.)
If you assume that the electorate are all idiots who don't really know anything about anything, the natural conclusion is that your budget doesn't have to be credible: you can bluff the electorate into voting for anything. The question isn't one of economics at all, it's one of PR.
>> No. 92516 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:56 pm
92516 spacer
>>92515
>If you assume that the electorate are all idiots who don't really know anything about anything, the natural conclusion is that your budget doesn't have to be credible: you can bluff the electorate into voting for anything.
Right. The fact that this has literally happened multiple times in the past 5 years would suggest that it is indeed the case.
>> No. 92517 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:22 pm
92517 spacer
>>92503

The fuck are you on about dickhead, I'm the lad who's always going on about class based socialism and shit.

It's just really quite pointless getting worked up about polls this far away from an election. You've judt got a chip to butty about Keith.
>> No. 92518 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:29 pm
92518 spacer
>>92517
>You've [just] got a chip to butty about Keith.
Sounds like he made something of that bag of spuds.
>> No. 92519 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:40 pm
92519 spacer
>>92517
It's a joke. Would you like me to explain the joke, or now that you know it's a joke can you put together what the joke is?
>> No. 92520 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 12:21 am
92520 spacer
>>92519

I'm a Labour voter, I don't have a sense of humour.
>> No. 92521 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 1:03 am
92521 spacer
>>92519

Oh yeah sure, the classic "it was just a joke" defense. I'm not buying it sonny, you thought you were epically owning a nasty Blairite didn't you. But I called you out, and now I'm the Internet victor.
>> No. 92522 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 2:18 pm
92522 spacer
>Long-term expats 'to get vote in UK elections'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56265898

Most expats I know tend to be fairly right-wing, so this'll probably boost the Tories.
>> No. 92523 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 2:53 pm
92523 spacer
>>92522
>Most expats I know tend to be fairly right-wing

I wouldn't mind seeing the data on this. It's removing the 15 year rule so I'd hazard that by then your political views will match whatever locality you're in, likely Europe or otherwise those living in China or Africa I imagine to be professions more likely to vote Labour (ESL teachers, NGO people). They're obviously not going to have been in favour of Brexit at any rate and will be more educated than the general public (so Lib Dems?).

At any rate, now that they have representation I think it only right that they can have some extra taxation. 150% tax on all forms of income seems a fair number.
>> No. 92525 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 4:48 pm
92525 spacer
Hartlepool by-election: Frontline doctor – and arch-Remainer – to fight totemic seat for Labour

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hartlepool-byelection-labour-paul-williams-b1819452.html

Labour narrowly clung onto Hartlepool in 2019, the incumbent has had to stand down for being a sex pest and they're standing an 'arch-Remainer' in an area that voted ~70% leave. Sounds like they're fucked.
>> No. 92526 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 4:50 pm
92526 spacer
>>92525
But BoJo Got Brexit DoneTM so that shouldn't be an issue anymore. Plus he works in ARE NHS innit.
>> No. 92527 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 4:53 pm
92527 spacer
>>92526
The difference between Labour and the Tories in 2019 was 3,595, with 10,603 voting for the Brexit Party. It's going to boil down to where those BXP votes now go.
>> No. 92528 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 4:57 pm
92528 spacer
>>92525
>Frontline doctor

As opposed to someone with a doctorate in archaeology?
>> No. 92529 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 5:00 pm
92529 spacer
>>92525

Labour's problem is that their politicians are entirely disconnected from the people they're supposed to represent. Even if he's an NHS doctor, that's certainly not working class, and as such his interests and worldview simply don't match theirs.

Someone like Starmer isn't the problem, he's a leadership figure and people don't mind leaders being posh, they see that as well suited to the job. The problem is appointing people like Starmer into regional swing seats and vital Northern strongholds. They can't afford that, they need to keep their poshos in the cozy metropolitan inner London seats they'll get votes in.

Labour as we know it will probably never get over this and we're probably going to live under increasingly half-arsed Tory governments until some kind if drastic sea change occurs.
>> No. 92530 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 5:17 pm
92530 spacer
>>92525
Heard about this a couple of days ago. My brain's in knots every time another Starmer clanger bursts forth and the party's dead silent on it. They were never more than two weeks from stringing Corbyn up to a lamppost, but shite like this is 4D chess, apparently. Not even sure what I'm saying, I don't want another civil war, but what's the point of Starmer if he's got no policies, plan or passion?
>> No. 92531 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 5:38 pm
92531 spacer
My only hope for this byelection is that the Northern Independence Party beats the Lib Dems.
(and in my more wild dreams, gets enough media attention to bootstrap it into a serious political contender, at least the local authority level.)
>> No. 92532 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 5:46 pm
92532 spacer

Ed-Miliband.jpg
925329253292532
>>92530
It's the logical conclusion of where Labour have been heading for some time. They've rested on their laurels and the main case they put forward is "vote for us, we're not the Tories."

In Starmer they've managed to take that to the next level. He won the leadership contest on a platform of "Vote for me, I'm not a crazy Trot like Long-Bailey. Vote for me, I'm not a crazy man-hater like Phillips. Vote for me, I'm not completely up myself like Thornberry." He is absolute nothingness. You name it, he isn't it. Any cause that can be split down the middle and he won't be on either side, so that can't be used against him. Who needs reasons to vote for someone when you can devote your time instead to reducing the number of reasons why someone shouldn't vote for you?
>> No. 92533 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 6:15 pm
92533 spacer
>>92532

"Vote for Me, I'm not a cunt" is actually a noble platform. It's just that... a large portion of voters have been [strike]influenced[/strike]inspired to act like cunts with their votes in pursuit of impelling the phantom adversary of the week.
>> No. 92534 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 6:15 pm
92534 spacer
>>92533

Aww fuck my bbcode and all that.
>> No. 92535 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 6:54 pm
92535 spacer

EwsX7WxWUAAYgJO.jpg
925359253592535
>>92530

Candidate selection is the responsibility of the local CLP. The leader's office don't have a say in the matter. It would appear that the leader of Hartlepool CLP decided to stitch up the selection process before Mike Hill had even tendered his resignation.

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1372217904926765062/photo/1
>> No. 92536 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 7:19 pm
92536 spacer
>>92535
IS TONTY BLAIR BEHIND THIS?
>> No. 92537 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 8:39 pm
92537 spacer

campaign-compnay-e1616172677349.jpg
925379253792537
>An internal briefing to the Labour LGA leaked to Guido admits that “large majorities” are giving the government the benefit of the doubt over its handling of the Coronavirus pandemic. Despite some Labour MPs focusing relentlessly on death tolls, polling commissioned for the Labour Party found that a big majority of the public agree with the statement that:
>“Responding to the Coronavirus would have been hard for any government and on the whole the government has done as well as could be expected”

>The document also warns Labour campaigners in capital letters that “VACCINATION IS POPULAR!” – encouraging local parties to instead be positive about the rollout, and focus on thanking the NHS. Seems the pandemic hasn’t been “a good crisis” for Labour after all… A companion document prepared for LGA Labour by consultancy The Campaign Company, and also leaked to Guido, tells the party that “last year has not fundamentally re-set the terms” of politics. Instead it recommends that the most effective points of attack on the Government are not the lockdown delays, rather messaging should instead focus on bread and butter “services, council tax, development, outsourcing”. Looks like Labour squandered their “great opportunity“…

>The Times’ Patrick Maguire points out that “the firm that drafted this briefing for LGA Labour – The Campaign Company – was founded and until last June run by David Evans, Labour’s general secretary. Also used to employ Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff”. This is Team Starmer’s thinking…

https://order-order.com/2021/03/19/exclusive-leaked-labour-briefing-admits-public-give-tories-benefit-of-doubt-on-coronavirus/
>> No. 92538 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 8:43 pm
92538 spacer

Dr Paul NEW.jpg
925389253892538
>>92525
>A tweet posted by Dr Williams from 2011 referring to “Tory milfs” is also already proving embarrassing.

Seems pretty innocuous really. Who would you lads choose?
>> No. 92539 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 8:54 pm
92539 spacer

splash-penny-mordaunt.jpg
925399253992539
>>92538
She's top MILF even without having kids.
>> No. 92540 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 9:08 pm
92540 spacer
>>92539
Forget Rishi, she is the next PM.
>> No. 92541 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 9:21 pm
92541 spacer
>>92537
>polling commissioned for the Labour Party found that a big majority of the public agree with the statement that:
>“Responding to the Coronavirus would have been hard for any government and on the whole the government has done as well as could be expected”
It is difficult to put into words the contempt I feel for the Labour party over this statement. I'm sure some Labour people will quietly blame the public for being thick, but it's not the public's fault the opposition has failed to draw their attention to the problem.

They let the bastards get off with perhaps the most cack handed response in the world because apparently the only gang of dribbling imbeciles less competent than the government is the so-called opposition. They're going to lose the next election and for the first time since 2010 I can say without ambiguity that they fucking deserve to.
>> No. 92542 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 9:46 pm
92542 spacer
>>92541
How do we know how much of that is the government's fault? The UK is the mostly densely populated country in Europe, has a huge amount of international traffic, a large elderly population and we're one of the fattest people's in the world. We're a dream target for this kind of virus.
>> No. 92543 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 10:02 pm
92543 spacer
>>92542
> The UK is the mostly densely populated country in Europe
u wot m8
>> No. 92544 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 10:17 pm
92544 spacer

EwrgEG-W8AELJo_.jpg
925449254492544
>>92542
We should have entered lockdown sooner rather than letting the likes of Cheltenham Festival go ahead. We shouldn't have let people just walk freely into the country out of airports. Mask usage should have been encouraged much earlier on. Test and Trace has been a complete shambles and the amount of money that has been pissed away or given to cronies is frightening. Arguably there should have been a lockdown towards the end of last year, with their hand eventually forced by the various mutations. The short notice for kids not to go back to homeschool this year was also a farce.

That's just off the top of my head but there's a lot that could have gone better, although who knows how many lives that would have saved. You could say that coronavirus has been worse for Labour than the Tories.
>> No. 92545 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 11:02 pm
92545 spacer
>>92544

>coronavirus has been worse for Labour than the Tories.

Just like Brexit?
>> No. 92546 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 6:43 am
92546 spacer

EwhSOGJWgAAzfQx.jpg
925469254692546
Apparently one of the reasons why support for Starmer has dropped recently is because he misread the public mood and came out in favour of Meghan Markle rather than the royal family after the Oprah interview. Things like that and taking the knee are turning people off.
>> No. 92547 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 10:31 am
92547 spacer
>>92546

It's funny how every time he does something the bleeding hearts on Twitter and Rudgwick approve of, his ratings go down, and vice versa. Yet they remain convinced it's his Blairite Tory in disguise status that will lose him the next election, and if only he listened to their lot he'd be onto a winner.

Half the Labour party's problems are it's own supporters.
>> No. 92548 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 10:36 am
92548 spacer
>>92547
Most posts I see on there about Starmer are criticising his position on trans rights, you know the burning issue that is the top priority for most voters.
>> No. 92549 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 11:24 am
92549 spacer

stop_hand_signal.jpg
925499254992549
>>92547>>92548
What the fuck are you retards moaning about? Shut up, shut the fuck up, you fucking manchildren. Every fucking discussion about politics on here it's "I saw something on Twitter...", "what they're saying on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk is..." and so on. Moronic cunts.
>> No. 92550 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 11:34 am
92550 spacer

twitter vs reality.jpg
925509255092550
>>92549
You would be hard-pressed to find more useless barometers of the electorate's mood.
>> No. 92551 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 12:10 pm
92551 spacer
>>92550
Did I fucking ask, you hopeless cunt?
>> No. 92552 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 12:27 pm
92552 spacer
>>92549

I'm pretty sure I know your rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk username mate. Go get mummy to rub some bepanthen on your eternally inflamed arsehole, christ.
>> No. 92553 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 12:31 pm
92553 spacer
>>92552
Why are you talking about my arsehole, you big carpet-bagger? Stop talking about rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk every fucking time people are trying to talk about politics and maybe I wouldn't have to shout at you, I've asked nicely in the past.

>I'm pretty sure I know your rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk username mate.
I think a lot of people just call you thick wherever you go on the internet.
>> No. 92554 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 12:35 pm
92554 spacer
>>92553

Are you confused and angry because you can't find the downvote button here?

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 92555 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 1:29 pm
92555 spacer
>>92554
What is this "that's what you are but what am I?" nonsense? Talk about rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk and Twitter on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk or Twitter or shut up, that's it.
>> No. 92556 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 2:09 pm
92556 spacer
>>92555
Not him but it's relevant to talk about these sites when they quite clearly are influencing Labour policy. What's popular on a given day on twitter and with the steam-enthusiasts does impact reality as we can see from Hansard suddenly talking about topics that are 'trending'. That's the world we're living in and you have to accept it.

That such a connection is complete nonsense and Labour have entirely misjudged the sway of right-on web2.0 types is a worthy criticism to make.
>> No. 92557 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 2:11 pm
92557 spacer
>>92555

You've got to be really bumsore to ban over that. Someone clearly got up on the wrong side of the bed today didn't they.
>> No. 92558 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 2:52 pm
92558 spacer
>>92556
>Not him but it's relevant to talk about these sites when they quite clearly are influencing Labour policy.
[citation needed]
>> No. 92559 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 3:01 pm
92559 spacer
>>92557
I hate to burst your indignant self-righteous bubble, but I was the one who placed the ban and I haven't contributed to this thread until now or even read it beyond your string of posts. Tedious forum war bullshit is the exact reason the rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk wordfilter exists and you would absolutely be banned for engaging in it by any of us regardless of which side of the bed we woke up on.
>> No. 92560 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 3:02 pm
92560 spacer
>>92555

/r/foundtherudgwicksteamshow.co.ukuser/
>> No. 92561 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 6:20 pm
92561 spacer

Untitled.png
925619256192561
>>92558
Hansard actually hosts a good deal of data analytics on this:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/the-use-of-social-media-by-mps-in-parliamentary-debate/
(Worth pointing out that SkyNews is apparently Labour territory)

RLBs campaign has been highlighted for dropping 'progressive patriotism' in a story that matches what we known of 'One Nation Labour'.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/jeremy-corbyn-labour-twitter-primary/604690/
>> No. 92575 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 2:00 pm
92575 spacer
>>92538
Heidi Allen. She's a babe, plus she's a Remainer who left. A true goddess in every respect.
>> No. 92578 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 2:28 pm
92578 spacer

liz sugg.jpg
925789257892578
Here's my own epic hot take: Labour's base no longer exists. Class war is largely outdated. Terry the car dealer who left school at 14 and owns a chain of BMW dealerships isn't going to vote Labour. Coal miners can't vote for Labour; there are no coal mines left. Pretty much anyone of the traditional Bruce Springsteen class have now been assigned a new place in society, either in call centres or shopping centres, or just on benefits in Middlesbrough. The Labour image of the "workers" is an image of an almost-extinct demographic. Every builder in the country could vote Labour, and it wouldn't be enough. But still, Labour want to be the party of class war. They get the new generation of povvos, Hannah with a Masters degree in French Theatre who now works in Starbucks, but I am arguably one of those as well, and I have never voted Labour in my life (in the three different elections that took place in 2019, I voted Change UK, Women's Equality Party and the Liberal Democrats. My votes are literally worthless lmao).

I also passionately think that the modern left in general needs to abandon its obsession with the moral high ground. People don't like to be lectured by sanctimonious twats. Brexit started out as a bunch of swivel-eyed racists, but everyone listened to them and said, "I don't agree with all of it, but I agree with some of it." I saw countless interviews with Trump voters in America who said the same thing: he's monstrously unpalatable, but he's the only one saying good things as well. So people need to listen before they can form an opinion. Otherwise, they just listen to Rupert Murdoch and the Daily Express because they're not wanky and Labour are.

The really wild corollary to all this is that Labour, and Jeremy Corbyn in particular, would have done a lot better if they'd said they wanted to storm the City of London and go full trial-of-Ceaucescu on any motherfucker in a suit who couldn't outrun them. Obviously calling for violent massacres isn't a good thing, nor is it a vote-winner in itself, but once you've put that idea into the public conversation, you can then accustom people to a less murderous punishment for the bankers. People won't like you, but they'll absorb your ideas, and you'll get elected anyway. It worked for Trump, it worked for Brexit (but not for Nidge the Fridge, admittedly), and a lot of people hate the bankers a lot more than they have ever hated the European Court of Justice. The moral high ground is a hindrance to electoral victory.

Liz Sugg is another Tory MILF.
>> No. 92579 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 2:37 pm
92579 spacer
>>92578
>I voted Change UK
>People don't like to be lectured by sanctimonious twats.
I can think of at least one person.

Whilst you're being hyperbolic and silly, I do tend to agree with the ultimate point of your post. If Labour had a bit more needle and came off a bit less like they wanted the country to be a primary school with more PFI they might be doing quite a bit better. Starmer's going to spend the next few years being called a Great Britain hating, Communist, daft militant wog-lover and his response will be "no, I completely reject that". You're not going to unleash a load of secret neo-Jacobins because you rile up people about flat wages and piss-taking tax-dodgers, so I agree that "they go low we go high" is generally a losing strategy. That's not to say they should become completely amoral, before the lad who thinks they just need to be more racist pipes up.
>> No. 92581 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 2:50 pm
92581 spacer
>>92578

This strikes me as a really naïve accelerationist view of politics. It "worked for Trump" because Trump had the support of a complicit media in being allowed to act as an attention-grabbing, view-gathering clown. Such an approach would not work for Corbyn because his views were intolerable to the establishment, especially to anyone involved in matters of military or foreign policy, and our news media (even supposedly left ones) are embarrassingly pro-war/pro-"intervention".

The idea that class war is outdated because of a bunch of stereotypes you've cobbled together in your head is also absolutely bizarre.
>> No. 92582 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 2:52 pm
92582 spacer
>>92578
>Class war is largely outdated
Class in the class war sense is about economic interest rather than cultural markers. Hannah and Daryl the lad from the call centre are both working class regardless of how refined and sophisticated her taste in French theatre is. Tony the car dealer does not share Daryl's economic interests even though they have the same accent.
>> No. 92584 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 4:39 pm
92584 spacer
Everyone thinks they are the squeezed middle class. Regardless of if they make more than 200k a year or less than 20k.
>> No. 92585 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 5:40 pm
92585 spacer
>>92584
>>92582
>>92578

The problem is "workingclass" now squarely includes people who went to university, whose mams and dads were doctors and barristers.

They don't think they're working class because working class means you're called Gaz, you follow the footy, and you drink Stella down the Four Lampposts. You can't be working class if you eat tapas and watch Big Bang Theory. Working class people go to Benidorm on holiday and lie on the beach getting sunburnt, whereas you go to Amsterdam and visit the Anne Frank museum. You're clearly nothing alike- Except there's a good chance Gaz is earning every penny the same as you, and it doesn't make a blind bit of fucking difference what class you think you are.

Class war is not outdated, it's just been cleverly misdirected and people thinking the way you do about it means it worked. You swallowed the bait.
>> No. 92586 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 6:10 pm
92586 spacer
Class-based party loyalties no longer hold. Labour now represent a mostly urban, mostly young middle-class demographic who like Europe and social justice; the Tories now represent older people who live in towns, have lower levels of education and strongly identify as British or English. People vote based on identity, not self-interest.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/04/25/demographics-dividing-britain
>> No. 92587 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 6:55 pm
92587 spacer
>>92586

Which is largely what people have been saying. Labour is doomed to failure as long as it primarily appeals to those urban student lefty types.

If only there were some way for it to shift its focus and change its image to recapture the demographics it formerly enjoyed huge support from. But sadly there isn't, not without becoming literal Nazis anyway. It's a shame really, we'll just have to live with the Tories forever.

Oh well. Luckily I can afford to be performatively unhappy about this situation from my position of relative privilege.
>> No. 92588 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 6:58 pm
92588 spacer
The only real solution I can see would be deposing Murdoch and replacing his propaganda with pretty much anything else at all.
>> No. 92589 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 7:13 pm
92589 spacer
>>92585
>Except there's a good chance Gaz is earning every penny the same as you, and it doesn't make a blind bit of fucking difference what class you think you are
So maybe Gaz is middle-class? People have been saying "everyone is middle-class now" since the 1990s at least. You still get the occasional prole, like the cleaners at my work, but otherwise we all talk the same and all act the same, and we're posher than some but less posh than others. Sounds to me like we're all in the middle.
>> No. 92590 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 7:23 pm
92590 spacer
>>92589

Well, yes, that''s exactly what ol' Thatcher wanted everyone to think. Anyone who earns full time minimum wage, and cohabits with a partner, can basically afford the baseline signifiers of "middle class" life. You can live in a small semi up north, have two cars on the drive, and still have change for a Nandos every week or two, on a combined income of £40k. The middle class dream come true, right?

Of course it's self evidently absurd to suggest the very baseline of acceptable living is the "middle". You don't have to be a political genius to realise what's wrong with that concept. If the bottom is the middle then where's the real middle, and what on earth is at the top and bottom?

Reminder that the median wage is £25k. The overwhelming majority of people in this country are barely above minimum wage in the grander scheme of things, they've just been conned into thinking that's the middle.
>> No. 92591 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 7:34 pm
92591 spacer

classconciousnessdotjaypeg.png
925919259192591
>>92590

In fact here's a little diagram I made to illustrate the issue with modern conceptions of class.
>> No. 92592 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 7:48 pm
92592 spacer
>>92590

They have conned themselves, no one needed to con them. In 1904 someone made a board game called the landords game that was purposefully cruel and rewarded being ahead to teach the dubious feedback loop inherent in property ownership, rent and a flat rate tax.

It didn't catch on. Then parker brothers bought the licence removed all the pejorative about success in that system and renamed it monopoly, and it is the most successful game of all time. People want to be that winner.

People are aspiration and have ideas above their position, this in many aspects of life is considered a positive it means they advance. It is however shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to shaping public policy. No one wants to be told you are trying your hardest but you still need help, that's a euphemism for you are a failure, to most.
>> No. 92593 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 8:07 pm
92593 spacer

EwiviyiXAAQb_BA.jpg
925939259392593
Lads, if the Labour party is going into the dustbin of history and the Tories are turning into a more northern and state intervention/crony capitalist party then isn't it high time we found a new champion? One that would oppose authoritarianism and support a new capitalism with the living wage ideally?

If only we had a party like that...

>>92579
Not him but Change had some pretty good MEP picks that I remember commenting on at the time.

>If Labour had a bit more needle and came off a bit less like they wanted the country to be a primary school with more PFI they might be doing quite a bit better.

Corbyn lost hard m8. Sorry if I'm the one finally breaking the news in your bubble.

>>92581
Trump didn't have the support of the media at all. You can argue that he eventually had Fox (after the nomination) or that the negative press helped him but the idea that the likes of CNN supported him is laughable.
>> No. 92594 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 8:09 pm
92594 spacer
>>92592

No, there definitely was a concerted effort to con them. It worked quite effectively and now nobody even questions it.

Plenty of people think they're self made middle class products of aspiration and enterprise, when in reality they were just lucky beneficiaries of the right to buy their council house, and in material terms are probably worse off than before. (Back in my day you could buy a deck of fags for 50p! etc)

It might be a hard pill to swallow but people have to stop deluding themselves if anything is to improve. They know something isn't right (BROKEN BRITAIN!) they just prefer comforting lies rather than facing the truth.
>> No. 92595 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 8:17 pm
92595 spacer
>>92593
>If only we had a party like that...
Greens have more momentum, as well as connections to Green parties in other, more significant, countries.
>> No. 92596 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 8:19 pm
92596 spacer
>>92592

>No one wants to be told you are trying your hardest but you still need help

It doesn't have to be about "needing help", it should be about the fact you deserve better.

Of course the classic lefty refrain about making sure nobody starves and so on does sound a bit absurd in a first world country where, by rights, even a doley lives a relatively privileged life compared to, say, a starving Ethiopian. But people should still be angry that their wages have stagnated for the last decade, while in real terms everything else has become more expensive. People should still be angry that their hard work isn't valued appropriately, while some people make millions for doing fuck all. People should still be angry that the government pisses our tax money away on such blatant cronyism, even in the midst of a global crisis.

It's just weird how the Labour party can't seem to tap into that.
>> No. 92597 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 9:01 pm
92597 spacer
>>92594
>Plenty of people think they're self made middle class products of aspiration and enterprise

I read a good post a while back about how it's all the little things across an entire community that help build a person, without many people realising how much it shapes them, but how a lot of this has been lost as society is now a lot more selfish.

>>92596
When Labour do it they have a habit of coming across like a student rabble espousing the politics of envy. They're gonna take your money if you work hard and give it to fucking scroungers.
>> No. 92598 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 9:12 pm
92598 spacer
>>92596
As well as Labour's complete and utter uselessness I get the sense there's an element of "fake it till you make it" felt among some of the more important middle class voters.
To recognise the shitness of their situation is to realise their ascent up the ladder has come to a crashing halt and that it's only downhill from here. If they refuse to recognise that they can at least dream about when they'll be richer. By keeping the dream alive, they give themselves a marginal advantage over those who give up when it comes to actually achieving the dream. (But in aggregate: none of them will.)

Similar to the idea of premium mediocrity (In that case: paying a little more for mediocre "aspirational" products to signal that you're striving upwards, because if you admit that you're broke and buy the apparently more efficient cheap option it shows everyone that you're not really trying, that you think success is a matter of chance rather than work on your own part. And it is, but if you tell people that you think it is, that lowers your chance of success.) but constrained within the mind of your own family. (To a degree. The ballot is private, but lots of people still share their feelings at election time...)
>> No. 92599 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:17 pm
92599 spacer
>>92590
The national median income is over £30,000 now. As someone who earns between £25,000 and £30,000, this upsets me greatly ;_;

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/householddisposableincomeandinequality/financialyearending2020provisional
>> No. 92600 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:31 pm
92600 spacer
>>92599

But why does it upset you. You are in the majority of the population who earns less than £30,001 why would that be something to be ashamed of?
>> No. 92601 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:32 pm
92601 spacer
>>92593
I posted on Facebook in 2010 that I had voted, and I voted Liberal Democrat. I then added, "They'd better not win and ruin the country now."

Obviously I'm glad they had their moment in the spotlight, but they really didn't do much with it. Even the 5p charge for plastic bags; I swear that money was originally meant to go to environmental charities, rather than lining the pockets of the supermarkets. But now, the bags are smaller, worse quality, and you can be charged up to and above 50p for them. It was a great policy, and it's gone wrong now. I'd like to think they could have done a better job with the AV referendum too, although I don't know if they'd have succeeded, given both major parties agree on enforcing the two-party horseshit we currently have. Plus, of course, tuition fees. I have voted for the Liberal Democrats many times, and will probably vote for them occasionally for the rest of my life, but by God, they're not very competent, are they?
>> No. 92602 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:40 pm
92602 spacer
>>92600
I have rich parents, and I had a posh upbringing. My entire childhood consisted not of "Here's how to get a good job and become rich", but rather, "You will get a good job and become rich; here's how to handle it gracefully and with class." I am seething mad about being robbed of what I was told was my birthright, when my birthright is still going to others. The message that I am a failure, honestly, lingers over me like a spooky ghost at all times. Obviously if the commies took over and redistributed everyone's wealth, that would be an acceptable reason for me not to be rich, but when my entire childhood was based on a lie, I feel cheated. It's not great or noble or righteous to feel this way, but I do feel this way and it's perfectly noble and righteous to demand justice when the government is on TV, constantly gaslighting me that everything's fine and I haven't been fucked over at all.
>> No. 92603 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:50 pm
92603 spacer
>>92602
If your posh, rich parents can't sort something out for you then you're not as posh and rich as you think.
>> No. 92604 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 10:59 pm
92604 spacer
>>92603
They worked for the EU. They have no connections in this country at all, so I couldn't network my way into comfy nepotism. They can afford to support me if I don't have a job (and this has happened repeatedly), but for my own emotional wellbeing, I would like to live like a normal person instead of a mama's-boy sponge.
>> No. 92605 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 11:14 pm
92605 spacer
>>92601
I remain convinced that the fact they agreed to a coalition in exchange for AV was utter deranged insanity. The slightest glance at precedent from other countries would suggest that bigger parties tend to eat up their coalition partners. A quick tactical calculation would point out that a disproportionate number of their seats were in Scotland. The best tactical case that can be put forward for coalition is that it shows how responsible they are, something there are other ways to achieve while retaining some control.
I swear that parties make the stupidest decisions when they think they're putting party before country. In the process they wind up fucking both the country and (in the interest of giving the audience some catharsis) themselves. The Lib Dems would've been in a much stronger position if they'd given the Conservatives confidence and supply, or held out until someone broke and offered full PR, but that would've meant not giving in to the hysterical idea that we needed a majority (coalition) government right away because the budget was crying out for an axe and confidence and supply agreements apparently no longer exist.

I don't think there's an upper bound on how much I dislike the Lib Dems for their miscalculation. It's one thing to hurt the country in the name of helping your party, it's quite another to hurt the country in the name of destroying your party, guided only by the sort of orange book idiocy that saw the party totally fail to capitalise on Labour's implosion and actually fall back on the 2005 result in seat terms.
It's honestly enough to make me look back more positively on Cameron. Smart bastard, stealing the credit for the popular policies while telling his base it was the Lib Dems fucking everything up. Say what you will about the idiotic pileup of miscalculation and lessons not learned that was the EU referendum, his party is in government with an increased majority while the Lib Dems are (one hopes) spiraling the drain. The lesson speaks for itself.
>> No. 92606 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 11:34 pm
92606 spacer
>>92604

That's household earnings you div. Posh upbringing my arse.
>> No. 92617 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:50 pm
92617 spacer

yg.jpg
926179261792617
I find it hard to feel anything towards Starmer other than apathy.
>> No. 92618 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 11:44 am
92618 spacer
>>92617
About time for another divisive leadership campaign and pick someone else from the broad pool of electable candidates?
Get your shit together or embrace the wilderness.
>> No. 92619 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:40 pm
92619 spacer
There's nobody the Tories and their mates haven't paid off. Clement Atlee himself could rise from the grave and run for Labour leader, and the papers would still find a way to paint him as incompetent and ineffective.

If Winston Churchill was the Labour leader and Adolf Hitler was running the Conservatives, we'd still be hearing about how Churchill is boring and out of touch.
>> No. 92620 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 1:41 pm
92620 spacer
>>92617

I'd argue that's a good thing for a modern politician. I'd kill for a bland leader. This is why a Miliband should have been the perfect choice.
>> No. 92621 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:32 pm
92621 spacer

MAIN-Liz-Kendall-Army.jpg
926219262192621
>>92617
All you lads had to do was elect ARE LIZ. We warned you that there would be consequences.

>>92619
>If Winston Churchill was the Labour leader and Adolf Hitler was running the Conservatives, we'd still be hearing about how Churchill is boring and out of touch.

I-I well, Churchill was out of touch and the National Government fell for reasons stretching back to the depression and general ham-handedness. Even before then it's commonly accepted that Britain got off lightly in the Great Depression because Churchill had already fucked the economy in the 1920s with a gold-backed currency.

I'm also unsure if the Mirror or Guardian have been paid off by Tory donors. Something about their editorial style. I think it speaks more about the failure of Labour's strategy of stepping back and letting Boris destroy himself which seems to be a classic underestimation that has propped up his entire career.
>> No. 92622 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:37 pm
92622 spacer
>>92617
If Starmer's mum and dad had worn a condom that fateful night I doubt it would be doing much differently were it Labour leader.
>> No. 92623 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:38 pm
92623 spacer
Excuse me, "used a condom". I do just about understand that you don't slide into a condom with your partner like it was a spermicidal sleeping bag.
>> No. 92624 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:03 pm
92624 spacer

uwot.jpg
926249262492624

>> No. 92625 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 11:29 pm
92625 spacer
>>92623
>you don't slide into a condom with your partner like it was a spermicidal sleeping bag
Isn't that what the extra-large ones are for?
>> No. 92626 Anonymous
27th March 2021
Saturday 3:54 pm
92626 spacer
>>92625

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeCmHYDFaog
>> No. 92627 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 10:46 am
92627 spacer
>Sir Keir Starmer is preparing to replace his shadow chancellor, Anneliese Dodds, in a shake-up of his frontbench team. Starmer, who will mark his first anniversary as Labour leader next Sunday, is due to demote several underperforming shadow ministers after the local elections in an attempt to get on the front foot and challenge Boris Johnson.

>Allies of Starmer say Dodds, an Oxford-educated economist, is highly intelligent but has failed to communicate effectively the party’s vision. Rachel Reeves, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, is the favourite to replace her and has become one of Starmer’s closest confidantes. Reeves, who also went to Oxford and is an economist, has won plaudits for exposing Tory cronyism in the awarding of government personal protective equipment (PPE) contracts during the pandemic. However, Lisa Nandy, the shadow foreign secretary, is also understood to be in the frame, according to party insiders. A source said: “Nandy is one of the party’s best communicators and has not been in a role that has enabled her to utilise her talents to the full and needs a more public-facing role.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/starmer-to-axe-shadow-chancellor-anneliese-dodds-after-labour-poll-slump-n55z62dkg

Dodds has been like a rabbit in the headlights but they can't give the Shadow Chancellor job to Nandy; she didn't seem to understand how corporation tax works when interviewed last month.

>Senior Labour MPs want Keir Starmer to bring in a “big figure” to provide greater direction to his leadership, amid concerns within the party that caution and a lack of ambition are holding back his performance.

>Shadow cabinet ministers are understood to be among those who have concerns that Starmer is losing crucial momentum at the end of his first year in office, with several MPs calling for more experience to be injected into his team to spell out “what Keir is for”. It comes as the Conservatives are still enjoying a lead in the polls, with several pollsters suggesting that a “vaccine bounce” has also helped Boris Johnson repair some of his personal approval rating in the wake of major mistakes in his handling of Covid last year.

>Short-term annoyances in the run-up to the budget, during which Labour contrived to have a row over its own position on corporation tax, and shadow business secretary Ed Miliband backed electric cars while conceding he did not own one, have fed into frustrations that have been building over recent months. The emergence of wider unease follows Peter Mandelson’s call for Starmer to begin a review of the party’s policies, in order to adopt measures that are “radical, credible, affordable”. There has also been concern that the party’s main message for the local elections so far has focused on NHS workers’ pay, with some worrying that it may soon be undermined by a higher government pay offer, or that it fails to appeal to other public and private sector workers hit hard by the pandemic. “People do underestimate the mountain of shit Keir inherited,” said one senior MP. “It is a monumental task. But there is a complaint of a lack of grip.” Another said: “There is deep frustration in the shadow cabinet over a lack of direction.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/28/labour-mps-raise-fears-over-keir-starmers-lack-of-grip

He's also had a bit of a hammering in the Tory press for taking a backseat on rebuking Nadia Whittome for refusing to condemn the protestors in Bristol.
>> No. 92628 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:24 pm
92628 spacer
>>92627
>Rachel Reeves, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, is the favourite

She's my favourite too!
>> No. 92629 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:30 pm
92629 spacer
>>92627
Drag the net Kier, get a policy or two!

>>92628
Is this a political thing or did you see her exposed knee on Newsnight and now you're in love?
>> No. 92630 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:40 pm
92630 spacer
>>92629

No, I saw her looking like someone's Mum many moons ago, and this has been going on for a very long time indeed.
>> No. 92631 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:42 pm
92631 spacer

s-24bbdba58057d5c46920a725d59daa28f61f0ff2.jpg
926319263192631
>>92627
>Allies of Starmer say Dodds, an Oxford-educated economist, is highly intelligent but has failed to communicate effectively the party’s vision
This is a baffling charge from allies of a man without vision who leads a party without vision. Did they expect her to somehow become a parliamentary analogue to Eşref Armağan overnight?
>> No. 92632 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:47 pm
92632 spacer
>>92627
>Dodds, an Oxford-educated economist
>Reeves, who also went to Oxford and is an economist

That's all well and good but what were their GCSE results like?
>> No. 92633 Anonymous
28th March 2021
Sunday 12:55 pm
92633 spacer
>>92631
I think that's mainly a polite way of saying "she can't interview for shit."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYO7U4hRw2E
>> No. 92647 Anonymous
31st March 2021
Wednesday 8:22 am
92647 spacer

ks.jpg
926479264792647
Welp.

https://www.jlpartners.co.uk/red-wall-wave-2
>> No. 92648 Anonymous
31st March 2021
Wednesday 10:32 am
92648 spacer
>>92633
She did alright. Even if you think she lost the argument it was hardly 'car crash'. Economics is tough, nuanced stuff.
>> No. 92656 Anonymous
31st March 2021
Wednesday 5:58 pm
92656 spacer
>>92648
It's not good enough when you need to dispel the myth that Labour cannot be trusted with the economy.
>> No. 92668 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 4:50 am
92668 spacer

Qeir.png
926689266892668
Christ they are hopeless.
>> No. 92670 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 10:04 am
92670 spacer
>>92668
How useless of him to call out the obviously whitewashed report as being obviously whitewashed. He should just take their word for it.
>> No. 92671 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 10:15 am
92671 spacer
>>92670
As if Keir Starmer would ever say something as unequivocal or interesting as "obviously whitewashed."
>> No. 92673 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 11:59 am
92673 spacer
>>92668
>>92670
I'm not sure the Labour party whinging about how everyone in Britain is a racist would be a good look ahead of local elections.
>> No. 92674 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 12:05 pm
92674 spacer
>>92673
You're right. They should only talk about white people things.
>> No. 92675 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 1:45 pm
92675 spacer
>>92674
Wellll white people are 85+% of the population, so depending on what you mean by "White people things", you'd be talking about poverty, for example. Or CT or CGT or minimum wage rises or like, really important but unsexy stuff. People shouldn't be racist, that's fairly agreed, but making race a platform just makes Labour unelectable.

But yeah fuck it, who cares about improving education and infrastructure and welfare, let's just talk about race. What a winner.
>> No. 92677 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 2:21 pm
92677 spacer
>>92670
>>92674

Wow, I didn't know his PR team would post on here. Labour are clearly and repeatedly missing the mark with the general public.

The report did say that there is still overt racism in the UK and highlights many areas that need improvement. Knowing that they took a big hit in the last election, largely due to losing their traditional voter base, would it have been so hard to say that the UK does fairly well with race, while there is still much work to do we are at least not institutionally racist?

I know he is largely hemmed in by a party currently acting out their long rehearsed reactions to this report and citing all manner of bias. But, as before, they are utterly hopeless. You couldn't fuck up a political party this badly if you tried. The next GE may as well be Reform UK vs. Tories.

>>92675

Thus, all the effort goes towards tearing the report apart rather than forming a credible opposition. The reports aren't biased if we do them!
>> No. 92678 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 2:38 pm
92678 spacer
Keir Starmer isn't like Jeremy Corbyn, who alienated voters from Labour by going around whinging about the Chagossians or whatever, the sort of issues that key voters don't care about just because he's such a right-on lefty who feels strongly about these issues that he can't hold his tongue and say what the electorate want to hear. Corbyn could never speak to the moderate middle ground average voters who actually think that Britain is a pretty good place that most people would like to live in. Now, Keir Starmer? Keir loves Britain and everything about it. He's a proud, patriotic, electable, proud patriot. He'll have sex with the flag. He just thinks that Britain is also riven with institutional racism and that this is a bad thing, a thing bad enough that he's breaking his policy of hiding in the cupboard to come out and say: "Actually, Britain is racist, and I don't like racism, it disappoints me when people deny the racism", and then returning to the cupboard. With the flags. Which he would fuck, by the way. The sexually attractive flags of the racist country that he's absolutely a viable candidate for prime minister of.
>> No. 92679 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 3:09 pm
92679 spacer
>>92674
Indeed, ethnic minorities don't care about things like housing, jobs, policing, healthcare or any of that guff. They just care about how horribly, inarguably, INARGUABLY institutionally racist Britain is.

Nobody seems to have actually read the report. The GMB secretary Rehana Azam was denouncing it before it had even been released. It doesn't say that racism doesn't exist in Britain or that racial disparities aren't an issue. It carefully makes the point that, given the available data, that there is no evidence for institutional racism, and that confounding variables like class, family structure and income play a much larger role than race alone. Of course if your main thrill in life is basking in your moral superiority over dem racist fockin' tories then you're free to ignore the data and imagine your own, more palatable conclusions to the ones produced by the most racially diverse Cabinet in history.

>>92678
Yes petal, everyone except you is stupid and racist and just loves flags because of how stupid and racist they are. Pat yourself on the back and please, please start working for the Labour party as soon as possible if you don't already.
>> No. 92680 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 3:25 pm
92680 spacer
I just don't understand why you'd spend years trying to undermine and sabotage a leader who's unelectable because he's too much of a wet lefty, and then once you're in charge, carry on being too much of a wet lefty to be electable, just in an altogether more bland manner and devoid of any traces of actual leftism.

It's really not difficult. The British public don't mind a lefty, they just want a lefty who'll say "You know what, I'm sick of hearing about all this racism bollocks, can we change the record." They don't have to have a hard on for the union jack, but it would help if it didn't quite obviously make them physically sick to look at.
>> No. 92681 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 3:40 pm
92681 spacer
>>92679
I am not sure how you've managed to conflate Keir Starmer's positions with my own. I'm not the one who goes on telly saying the country's racist. (Not so far as you know, anyway.)
>> No. 92688 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 6:11 pm
92688 spacer
Labour lost my vote when they drove out Jeremy through nefarious means. My next vote is going to Northern Independence Party. They've got some weird obsession with trannies but once it happens we can do as we like.
>> No. 92694 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 7:09 pm
92694 spacer
>>92679
>It doesn't say that racism doesn't exist in Britain or that racial disparities aren't an issue. It carefully makes the point that, given the available data, that there is no evidence for institutional racism, and that confounding variables like class, family structure and income play a much larger role than race alone.
Right. And we all know that's bollocks, to the point where government advisors are resigning because of how bollocks it is.
>> No. 92697 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 7:55 pm
92697 spacer
>>92694
It's definitely biased to some extent, but the main reason why government advisors are resigning is because they've made careers for themselves advising the government to be less racist.
>> No. 92698 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 8:02 pm
92698 spacer
>>92697
Is that "reason why" something you have evidence of or is it just something you just decided?
>> No. 92699 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 8:05 pm
92699 spacer
>>92697
I see words here, but I'm struggling to parse out any meaning from them. Do you want to have another go?
>> No. 92700 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 8:08 pm
92700 spacer
>>92699

Sounds as though he's saying that now Boris "Watermelon smiles" Johnson is in power, racism is finally defeated.
>> No. 92705 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 9:34 pm
92705 spacer

350full-kevin-darling.jpg
927059270592705
>Right. And we all know that's bollocks, to the point where government advisors are resigning because of how bollocks it is.
>>I see words here, but I'm struggling to parse out any meaning from them. Do you want to have another go?
Not him, it took me two tries but now parses as "government advisors have worked themselves out of the job", presumably through being effective if that's the case. I don't know who's resigned, or why, and I haven't read the report.

>Sounds as though he's saying that now Boris "Watermelon smiles" Johnson is in power, racism is finally defeated.
Sounds like you just want to manifest the first word in a cunt off. They're talking about institutional racism, not hating people who have dark skin. It's fucking ignorant to compare the, which is ironic considering you're obviously coming here from the woke side of the bed.

Institutional racism =/= racism. If you're going to be a twat, would be a darling and at least give us an idea of what specific examples of institutional racism have been glossed over by this report?
>> No. 92706 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 9:43 pm
92706 spacer
>>92705
>They're talking about institutional racism
No he wasn't.
>the main reason why government advisors are resigning is because they've made careers for themselves advising the government to be less racist
>> No. 92707 Anonymous
1st April 2021
Thursday 10:29 pm
92707 spacer
>>92705
>what specific examples of institutional racism have been glossed over by this report?
How about black football managers? Why are there so few, when there are so many black players?
>> No. 92708 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 1:27 am
92708 spacer
>>92707
>How about black football managers? Why are there so few, when there are so many black players?
Sorry for the flurry of questions: Why do top players earn more than top managers? Why are there so few American players when there are so many American athletes? Why are there so many South American players compared to Asian players? Why does the institution one part and not the other?

I just don't know mate. I don't know why there are so few, I just don't think it's any more likely to be cored in racism over any other potential factor.

>>92706
He was. I understand that you'd miss that if you were purposefully ignoring their previous post in favour of seizing on a sentence that turned out a bit of a jumble. Here's what they said.

>Nobody seems to have actually read the report. The GMB secretary Rehana Azam was denouncing it before it had even been released. It doesn't say that racism doesn't exist in Britain or that racial disparities aren't an issue. It carefully makes the point that, given the available data, that there is no evidence for institutional racism, and that confounding variables like class, family structure and income play a much larger role than race alone.
>> No. 92709 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 3:59 am
92709 spacer
>>92707

>How about black football managers? Why are there so few, when there are so many black players?

The average age of a professional football manager is 50. The average age of a professional player is 25. It takes a long time for people to progress through their career to become a professional manager or coach, so they reflect the ethnic make-up of players from two or three decades ago. A report from the Sports Peoples' Think Tank predicted that it could take thirty years for football to achieve equal representation in management and coaching, which sounds damning but is actually exactly what you'd expect if the system is working fairly.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/34589035
>> No. 92720 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 10:36 am
92720 spacer
>>92697 back.
I'm saying they're between a rock and a hard place unless they resign.

If the report is mostly correct and institutional racism isn't significant in this country anymore, then the purpose of their role as advisors on the matter has been greatly eroded.
If the report is truly incorrect, they can't stay in their role and keep a shred of credibility.

Either way whether the report is mostly right or mostly wrong, it has put these advisors into a position where resigning and getting themselves into the spotlight is a much more advantageous position for them to be in right now.
>> No. 92724 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 12:27 pm
92724 spacer
Well you know, it's like drugs innit. If my line of business was researching how to cure cancer, the very last thing I'd want to stumble upon would be an actual cure for cancer. Put me out of a job wouldn't it.
>> No. 92733 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 2:22 pm
92733 spacer
>>92708
>Why do top players earn more than top managers?
Because of the celebrity status of the players. Nobody buys a shirt with the manager's name on it. There is also a perception, whether it's true or not, that top players are better than top managers.
>Why are there so few American players when there are so many American athletes?
American players could be footballers if they wanted to. It's just that culturally, they're not as interested in the sport. It's the same as how Indians all play cricket. There are no Indian footballers because on the whole, Indians don't like football. If they did, they should be able to become footballers.
>Why are there so many South American players compared to Asian players?
See above. Again, it would only be racism if Asians wanted to play football and couldn't. Same as how white people tend not to complain about the total lack of white slaves being sold at slave markets in Libya: white people don't want to be represented there. Of course, it's possible that black people just don't want to be football managers. If that was the case, then it wouldn't be racist that there aren't any. But why don't they want to be managers, when they love being players? The idea that practically every single black player decides, unilaterally, that management just isn't for them, seems incredibly statistically unlikely.
>> No. 92734 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 2:48 pm
92734 spacer
>>92733

>The idea that practically every single black player decides, unilaterally, that management just isn't for them, seems incredibly statistically unlikely.

Have I been shadowbanned or something? >>92709
>> No. 92735 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 3:17 pm
92735 spacer
>>92734
There were plenty of black footballers thirty years ago, though. And if black players from 15 years ago are making their way up to top-level management, wouldn't we see more of them in lower-level management right now? Patrick Vieira and Thierry Henry might do it, but that's about it. I can't think of any others. That's not even enough managers for just the Premier League.
>> No. 92736 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 5:09 pm
92736 spacer
>>92735
Darren Moore, Chris Hughton (mixed race I think), Hasselbaink had a go.
>> No. 92737 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 5:32 pm
92737 spacer
>>92735
>That's not even enough managers for just the Premier League.

Yes but presumably you wouldn't have the entire League being run by black managers or people would call racism for forcing black people into managerial positions. They'd be a special programme to get more black football players out of the managerial career track and into selling carpets and crisps on the telly.
>> No. 92738 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 5:37 pm
92738 spacer
>>92736

Hasselbaink is back in charge at Burton Albion and Jobi McAnuff is interim manager at Leyton Orient. I'm not sure what ethnicity Valérien Ismaël is, but he's definitely non-white.

Where are all the Asians?
>> No. 92740 Anonymous
2nd April 2021
Friday 8:01 pm
92740 spacer
>>92738
Asia
>> No. 92758 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 7:16 am
92758 spacer
>Keir Starmer has ordered the Labour party to prepare to fight an early general election in May 2023 as he pledges today to “take off the mask” and show the British people why he should be the next prime minister.

>After a year as leader – and with some in the party worried that he has yet to define a clear personal vision around which to rally MPs and activists – Starmer told the Observer he has found it deeply frustrating not being able to meet voters and campaign around the country. “We’ve been rebuilding the Labour party and demonstrating that we are under new leadership,” Starmer said. “But it has been frustrating to spend the first year as leader unable to make a speech to a live audience or shake a single voter’s hand.”

>He is now determined to take the fight to Boris Johnson with a new agenda to root out economic inequalities, redefine the purpose of public services and create secure, high-skilled jobs across the country, in the full expectation that Johnson will “go early” and trigger a general election in two years. “I’m now looking forward to taking the mask off and opening the throttle. I’ve instructed the party to be election ready for 2023. The next election, whenever it comes, will be a once in a lifetime chance to get Britain working for everyone,” Starmer said. The Labour leader is convinced that Johnson is gearing up for a May 2023 contest in a short electoral window of opportunity after the economy has undergone an expected, sharp rebound from the Covid crisis but before it begins to flatline.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/03/keir-starmer-ill-take-my-mask-off-and-show-why-i-should-be-prime-minister

We're getting full throttle Starmer, lads.
>> No. 92760 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 8:05 am
92760 spacer
>>92758
>as he pledges today to “take off the mask”
That's just what the Labour front bench needs to whip it into shape: long covid.
>> No. 92761 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 9:39 am
92761 spacer

3252.jpg
927619276192761
>>92760
What if he does it whilst dressed like a proper working bloke?
>> No. 92772 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 5:18 pm
92772 spacer
>>92758
>Keir! Get off the fence, cap'n! She cannae hold it! Pick a side!
>If I die here, tell my wife, "Hello".

>>92761
The Village People have let themselves go.
>> No. 92776 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 6:14 pm
92776 spacer
>>92758
How exactly do you prepare for an election that will be over 2 years from now?

>The next election, whenever it comes, will be a once in a lifetime chance to get Britain working for everyone

As intrigued as I am at by the prediction of a post-covid UK bull run that will last until mid-2023, surely it will be a once in an electoral cycle chance. Why do politicians continue to bullshit us on this given that everyone knows it's not and that in reality Labour isn't looking to win 2023 but instead rebuild its base?
>> No. 92777 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 6:50 pm
92777 spacer

1577124457773.jpg
927779277792777
>>92776
>How exactly do you prepare for an election that will be over 2 years from now?
Four years? You want Kier to lay out his stall for an election that could be three years away? Two years from now no one will remember what was being talked about twelve months ago. And besides how could Starmer have known the election was just around the corner, you can't slate him for not being psychic, 2028, that's what we're working towards now...
>> No. 92780 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 7:33 pm
92780 spacer
I had to look up how to spell Starmer's first name earlier. I won't tell you how to do it. I know he spells it funny, but it's really not a good thing when half of any group can't spell a politician's name.
>> No. 92781 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 7:35 pm
92781 spacer
>>92776
>How exactly do you prepare for an election that will be over 2 years from now?

I think it's his way of telling the party to get its shit together and stop with the constant infighting.
>> No. 92782 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 7:36 pm
92782 spacer
>>92780
It's not my fault I read The Gua... Gaurd... Guardian.
>> No. 92784 Anonymous
4th April 2021
Sunday 10:28 pm
92784 spacer
>>92782
I looked it up. Keir Starmer is named after Keir Hardie (and he went to school with Fatboy Slim!!!!), while "Kier" looks like it's only the Kier Group construction company, and the only person on Wikipedia actually called Kier instead of Keir is Kier Maitland, a Canadian swimmer. Now all I have to do is remember all that next time I need to name the Leader of the Opposition.
>> No. 92913 Anonymous
8th April 2021
Thursday 12:42 pm
92913 spacer

EyPyqS0XEAUfXz6.jpg
929139291392913
>Anger is mounting at the top of the Labour party over a trade union-commissioned poll on the party’s fortunes in the 6 May Hartlepool byelection that has sparked accusations of “betrayal”.

>The Communication Workers Union (CWU) asked Survation to poll residents in the north-eastern town, with the result showing the Conservatives on course to take the seat from Labour next month by 49% to 42%. The union’s general secretary, Dave Ward, referred to it when criticising Keir Starmer’s leadership of Labour and accused him of being “far too timid”.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/08/labour-cries-foul-over-union-poll-showing-tories-on-track-to-take-hartlepool
>> No. 92914 Anonymous
8th April 2021
Thursday 1:20 pm
92914 spacer
>>92913
>7% have not heard of

Ouch. Although considering the CWU Executive is unanimously in the Momentum camp and one of our most militant unions it would only make sense they would be so daft

>a large majority of those surveyed supported investing more in public services, renationalising Royal Mail and providing free broadband

The CWU would say that. I'm curious on what renationalising Royal Mail would actually look like considering it was previously a mess of a public-private partnership.
>> No. 92915 Anonymous
8th April 2021
Thursday 1:23 pm
92915 spacer
>>92913
Insanity. To claim the union is "cosying up to the Conservatives" because they're desperately trying to warn Labour about what's happening is just so ignorant. Is Starmer really going to try to become PM on a platform of "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil"? God, what's the bloody point.

>A CWU spokesperson dismissed the anger as a “piss-take from the Labour right”
Yeah.
>> No. 92916 Anonymous
10th April 2021
Saturday 9:15 am
92916 spacer
I'm not saying Tonty Blair is behind this, but did the huge increase in people going to university accelerate Labour's problems? The movement of young people from towns to cities must have decreased the number of Labour voters in the former and increased it in the latter when cities tend to be Labour strongholds already anyway.
>> No. 92917 Anonymous
10th April 2021
Saturday 1:12 pm
92917 spacer
>>92915

Labour's decline in Hartlepool isn't a left-right thing, there's not a lot Starmer can do about it and that poll is deeply misleading.

Hartlepool is one of the most pro-Brexit constituencies in the country. At the last general election, the Tories and BXP got a combined 54% of the vote; the Labour incumbent won less than 38% of the vote and kept his seat purely because of the Eurosceptic vote being split. The Tories don't need to take any votes from Labour to win the by-election, they just need to mop up BXP votes.

Swinging to the left won't help, no matter what the unions think - as in many other traditional Labour seats, the electorate in Hartlepool have turned their back on politics as usual and are now voting based on populist and nationalist sentiments. Arthur Scargill stood against Peter Mandelson in 2001 and lost his deposit.

Brexit completely shattered old political norms, Corbynism proved itself to be a failed experiment and the Labour Left haven't come to terms with the new reality. Starmer is at least having a crack at selling himself as patriotic and populist, but rehabilitating the image of Labour is a project that'll take at least two electoral cycles.
>> No. 92918 Anonymous
10th April 2021
Saturday 1:20 pm
92918 spacer
>>92917
I appreciate in my brevity it will just look like Corbynite cope but Starmer taking a crack at wrapping himself in the flag to win back Brexit voters is a bit rich when he's surely the individual with the most blame for Labour's inane and unpopular Brexit position. (Even if Corbyn didn't help matters much by making the mistake of communicating it.)

Not that there were any easy solutions to Labour's zugzwang on the issue. At best I suppose we can hope it killed off the last chance to revive the Lib Dems.
>> No. 92919 Anonymous
10th April 2021
Saturday 2:10 pm
92919 spacer
>>92918
>zugzwang
Sometimes, I see or hear something from an opponent of the Conservative Party and I think, "There is no way these people will ever be relatable to The People™". It's normally when I learn a new word or concept, and think I'm super-smart for knowing what it is, and then one of these people drops it casually in conversation. It's like when Jo Swinson talked about a "political Dutch auction" during one of the 2019 election debates. I don't think I've ever heard anyone mention Dutch auctions out loud, ever, apart from that one time.

(For any of my fellow philistines reading this: zugzwang is a situation in chess, where it's the other player's turn and they have to make a move, but every move they are able to make would worsen their position.)
>> No. 92960 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 2:54 pm
92960 spacer
>A recent poll suggesting Labour could lose next month’s Hartlepool byelection sent tremors through the party. Defeat would further cement the Tories’ authoritarian populist grip on the country – but remains unlikely: constituency polling is notoriously unreliable, Labour’s get out the vote operation gives it a formidable edge, and the government has only taken a seat from its opponents twice in the past half century.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/12/keir-starmer-labour-leader-crucial-byelection

There we have it, the Owen Jones kiss of death. The Tories taking Hartlepool is almost inevitable now.
>> No. 92962 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 3:25 pm
92962 spacer
>>92917

>Brexit completely shattered old political norms, Corbynism proved itself to be a failed experiment and the Labour Left haven't come to terms with the new reality. Starmer is at least having a crack at selling himself as patriotic and populist, but rehabilitating the image of Labour is a project that'll take at least two electoral cycles.

What neither side of the Labour party realises is that those things are two halves of a whole they need both of to stand a chance. Corbynism was a failed experiment, but not for the reasons the right thinks; and the right will never out-Tory the tories, but not for the reasons the left thinks. They've both got completely the wrong conclusions of each other.

What Labour needs to be, in order to become compelling to these lost heartland northern voters, is really rather more like what the old BNP were back before UKIP wiped them out of all relevancy or discourse. It's a truth neither side wants to hear but it's the truth nevertheless.
>> No. 92965 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 3:56 pm
92965 spacer
>>92960
>Starmer’s team believe they deserve credit for reversing a huge polling deficit.
Are they on crack? Labour is still around the margin of error of the dismal 2019 result and the Conservative poll lead has been growing since January, not shrinking.
At this time in 2018 and 2019 (under Saint Corbyn the useless) Labour were polling about even with the Conservatives. Now you might say "Ah, but there wasn't a pandemic on" but it should hardly matter at this point in the electoral cycle. Anyone who isn't living in a state of Eden-like bliss should be saying they'll vote for the opposition when we're still 2-3 years away from an election.
>> No. 92968 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 4:49 pm
92968 spacer
>>92962
>What Labour needs to be, in order to become compelling to these lost heartland northern voters, is really rather more like what the old BNP were back before UKIP wiped them out of all relevancy or discourse. It's a truth neither side wants to hear but it's the truth nevertheless.

I see what you're saying but at the same time not. The Tories already crushed the BNP-UKIP appeal by adopting the policy and rhetoric (if not action) of putting money into the left-behinds, euroscepticism, reformed immigration and attacking the kind of PC bullshit that annoys people. We'll see how that goes once rubber hits the road with Treasury and backbenchers shitting themselves over public debt but for the time being, Borisism is the winning strategy for a Labour election manifesto that appeals to the working man.

My suspicion is that a Labour counter would instead be about money into pockets with eye-watering tax rises in our future and lots of talk of spending that has been curtailed - Northern Powerhouse to Northern Shithouse.

>> No. 92969 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 5:54 pm
92969 spacer
>>92968
The whole "Labour shouldn't try and out-Tory the Tories" seems like a complete red herring to me, perpetuated by the vocal minority who want to make Labour as unelectable as possible by saying that things like objecting to gypsies illegally pitching up is racist.

You don't need to try and out-Tory the Tories, you've just got to stop fucking alienating large swathes of the country and making them feel like you have nothing in common with them.
>> No. 92970 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 6:14 pm
92970 spacer
>>92969
The problem is that the equally vocal majority of Labour MPs are just as out of touch with the country as anyone on the left. When you say "stop being out of touch" they will absolutely take that as their cue to fuck off and do something completely out of touch which, in their own minds, makes them look more Tory and therefore more electable.

The problem with being an MP from a Labour party stuffed with useless chaff who've rarely worked a proper job in their lives and who were usually the public sector office weirdo when they did is that you genuinely do not have anything in common with ordinary voters. Labour does a terrible job of covering that up because none of them really accept that they're overpromoted weirdos who need to be deported to acting school, they all still think they're a bit normal, or that they can at least fake being normal.
(Tories have it easy, everyone knows they're out of touch born to rule posh cunts. They don't have to be normal, they can coast in on the fact that by default people would rather entrust the stewardship of the country to the 19th Baron Grabbypaws of Inbred than to a lanky former sociology lecturer from Dampton Poly)
>> No. 92974 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 11:58 am
92974 spacer
>>92969

The problem is that Labour takes very seriously stuff that nobody really cares about, which gives people the impression lefties are obsessed with things that nobody really gives a shit about.

Nobody ever asks the opinion of normal people- British democracy is based on programming people's opinions and then holding a dismal competition every five years to test how successful that programming has been.

When media outlets report "outrage" out of something MPs have done or said, it is to signal to their readers/viewers the emotions and opinions they ought to have, rather than to report on real feelings and opinions. The public aren't supposed to have those, anyway, so they mustn't be encouraged.

Take "antisemitism". Nobody cares about jews either way, except jews and nazis, where it's absolutely more one way than the other, and either way affects and is of interest to only a tiny proportion of the population. You wouldn't exactly get that impression from the media coverage of it.
>> No. 92976 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 12:17 pm
92976 spacer
>>92974
>You wouldn't exactly get that impression from the media coverage of it.

On the other hand, I have heard from more than one person who has been to a Labour CLP meeting they've been shocked by how much the likes of Israel/Palestine and expressing solidarity with Venezuela gets discussed rather than, you know, things that might actually matter to voters.
>> No. 92977 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 12:43 pm
92977 spacer
>>92969
I'm not really arguing on that point. I agree that it's a cop-out made by the kind of people who view everything Tory, nationalist or outside their basic cult-like worldview as evil. But Labour does need it's manifesto hooks for the next election to recover votes and actually represent a choice. For reasons I cannot fully grasp you can't beat Boris on charisma alone and that goes double on the kind of voters Labour lost.

>>92970
It wasn't so much of a problem during the Blair-Brown years, what's changed?

>>92974
>Take "antisemitism". Nobody cares about jews either way, except jews and nazis, where it's absolutely more one way than the other, and either way affects and is of interest to only a tiny proportion of the population. You wouldn't exactly get that impression from the media coverage of it.

Okay George Galloway.
>> No. 92982 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 3:38 pm
92982 spacer
I wonder how many Palestinians have had their covid vaccine, come to think of it.
>> No. 92984 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 5:03 pm
92984 spacer
>>92976

This was really the worst effect of Corbynmania. in 2014, most people at most CLP meetings were fairly dull local government types. Outside of an election campaign, most of the discussion was about mundane local issues - bins, dog fouling, flytipping, that sort of thing. They were doing precisely the thing that the grassroots are supposed to do, addressing minor but easily fixable quality-of-life issues and building trust with the wider community.

Party membership more than doubled in 2015, but these new members were of a fundamentally different stripe. They hadn't previously been involved in local politics which is ostensibly a good thing, but they weren't interested in working for or with the CLP, they wanted to take it over. My own CLP (in a safe northern seat) was completely transformed in a matter of months, entirely for the worse.

Those of us who had been doing the dog-work of canvassing and running parish councils for years or decades found ourselves massively outnumbered by SWP and CND members, pro-Palestine and anti-Israel campaigners, people who hadn't been involved in the Labour movement since Militant got booted out, people who saw the party as a vehicle for their own hobby-horse. They were always there when someone tabled an irrelevant motion about international geopolitics, but they were never there when the call went out for volunteers to do some actual work.

I know it might sound bitter, but it was just utterly heartbreaking to be part of. We were an effective team who gave up huge amounts of our own time for the party, but we were being castigated as traitors by people who had only just joined the party. The breaking point for me was the Brexit referendum - the newbies outnumbered the old guard by four or five to one, but precisely zero of them ever came out leafleting and canvassing. We were out talking to pensioners about the benefits of EU membership, they were bickering among themselves on Facebook, but we were just Blairite scum who were holding back the movement. Unsurprisingly, a lot of us decided that we had better things to do with our spare time than be insulted by people who were supposed to be on the same side.

This is the absolutely critical factor for Labour that the statistics and opinion polls fail to capture. The effectiveness of the grassroots of the party was utterly devastated by Corbynmania. A generation of experience, skills and goodwill was completely squandered and will take many years to rebuild. People who were well-known and well-liked in their local communities were pushed out of the party by absolute arseholes, the infrastructure needed to run an effective campaign was left to rot and in many parts of the country we're now basically starting from scratch.
>> No. 92985 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 5:31 pm
92985 spacer
>>92977
The Blair-Brown years were full of cringeworthy attempts at this sort of thing. Remember when Gordon Brown was going to give us a national day and force kids to do volunteering to celebrate Britishness? Or how about Labour's decision to introduce "Australian style points based immigration system" to our national consciousness with the 2001 and 2005 manifestos? That definitely marked Labour out as the party of sensible controls on immigration in the long term... Then there was the regular emphasis to "British values" (all of which were, naturally, inoffensive non-values like "fair play" and "tolerance") of the sort which the current government still makes, but which somehow seem more pathetic and more liberal when now-opposition Labour trots out the exact same thing.
The upshot of it all was that Labour was in government and it's hard to moan about their stupid PR stunts or their tedious phrasemongering when staring down the much more pressing issues of NHS reform, an ongoing war, ID Cards and + day detention, and a global recession.

I mean give Blair his due. His PR team was much better and he, personally, is not an awkward ex public servant. He's a slippery barrister descended from a literal Tory. Keir Starmer is only one of those things, so instead of getting Blair's question-diffusing smile you're going to get a mug that says "Controls on Immigration".
Also, whether it helped or not I'd like to say that Blair was willing to put unpopular ideas out there because he believed they were good for the country, like Euro membership or closer ties to Europe in general. He'd even make the case that it was unpatriotic to be anti-Europe and patriotic to be pro-Europe because that was the national interest. The party had utterly dreadful mixed messaging on a lot of this, but give Blair his due - when he advocated a stupid, wrong policy he genuinely believed in it. When Keir Starmer advocates austerity it'll be because Mandelson has told him to act like a Tory.
>> No. 92988 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 5:58 pm
92988 spacer
>>92984
Am I too much a cynic for thinking that if Labour doesn't collapse, perhaps some CLPs starting from scratch might not be the worst thing?
I find myself disliking both groups you describe. The 20-something foreign policy wanker squad who'd turn down a re-run of Atlee because it'd mean swallowing the existence of Israel and the team of older people who fair enough go around doorknocking and can get your bins fixed for the council, but who vote for the worst kind of bastards for the NEC, MP selection, and leadership backing because they're a self-selected crew of people who could stomach the worst of the Blair years and old enough to remember Militant from the last time and think that gives them the right to conflate every vaguely left-wing student type they find with an actual Trotskyist. (Let's not forget there are people in the party who think Ed Miliband is-was "a Trot")

All I want is a man who'll fix my bins when he's a friend of the local Councillor and who'll bring back British Rail when he's the minister for transport. I don't see why I have to pick between nutters who can't make a phone call about my bins because they've got to vandalize Israel's wikipedia page and nutters who'll fix my bins right after they're done submitting a CLP motion proposing a law requiring balanced national budgets or saying we should invade Syria or god knows what else.

I'm not making any accusation of being a Blairite or right-wing or whatever against you personally, mind. I've simplified for effect: the average Labour person I've met is usually "soft left" and perfectly nice. It's just that in practice the squishy soft left seem to let themselves break rightwards in a crisis, since they're the only wing of the party actually willing to compromise and the right still has some lingering intellectual and organisational strength to win them over with. It's no use being a bleeding heart lefty deep down if Lyle Lanley can still talk you around to voting David Miliband for leader...
>> No. 92991 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 6:56 pm
92991 spacer
>>92988

The question is where those people would come from to reboot Labour. Universities? The unions? "Civil society", whatever that means in the 21st century? The broader left-wing movement is so intellectually and institutionally denuded that I don't think anyone but the Labour party is in a position to bring people from the left together and cultivate a class of savvy left-wing activists and leaders.

I think there's a dichotomy between too much and too little ideology. The Momentumites only care about ideological purity and don't really give a toss about people; the old Labour grassroots mean well and do a lot of good locally but don't really stand for anything in a broader political sense. Blair was able to mobilise the latter so effectively (and bring a lot of politically apathetic people into the fold) because he had the charisma to unite people around an optimistic vision for the future, even if that vision was at odds with traditional Labour values. Labour needs people who can guide the party between those extremes - people who are ideological enough to know what should be done, but pragmatic enough to actually get things done.

It's a shite situation, I fear we're in for another decade of Tory domination, but the only thing I can suggest is that people like you get involved in the party to the greatest extent possible. If sensible people hold their nose, get behind Starmer and do the unglamorous work required to get the Tories out and rebuild the Labour movement, we might stand a half a chance of delivering some meaningful outcomes for ordinary people.
>> No. 92992 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 8:54 pm
92992 spacer
>>92984
>the newbies outnumbered the old guard by four or five to one, but precisely zero of them ever came out leafleting and canvassing.
Or voting, for that matter.

It's a terrible idea to base your politics around ideological purity, because there's no way that doesn't lead to extremism. Everyone has to do bad things occasionally, and a political party that can never, ever do anything bad is a party that is frankly hamstrung. I still think a banterous communist would have been better than the avuncular geography teacher you all had last time. But then, I'm never going to vote Labour anyway because I oppose the two-party system and believe everyone should vote for nutters exclusively.
>> No. 93007 Anonymous
14th April 2021
Wednesday 1:13 pm
93007 spacer
>Keir Starmer jokes Line of Duty's AC12 is needed to sort out Tory lobbying scandal

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-jokes-line-dutys-23911782

Such a fookin' ledge, referencing Line of Duty in PMQs to show he's a man of the people.
>> No. 93011 Anonymous
14th April 2021
Wednesday 6:54 pm
93011 spacer
>>93007

In fairness though that's exactly the sort of thing MPs need a bit more of, especially Labour ones, as we've been over.

Of course he was probably fed that line by an advisor, but you get the point. Just being able to visualise an MP watching telly at all without feeling like it's a ridiculous fantasy probably makes them twice as electable.
>> No. 93069 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 1:41 pm
93069 spacer

EzFMRnDWQAAldOs.jpg
930699306993069
Oh dear, oh dear.
>> No. 93070 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 1:59 pm
93070 spacer
>>93069
Vaccine bounce for the Tories, Lib Dems, Greens, and Reform UK. Starmer will start making ground soon.
>> No. 93071 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 2:29 pm
93071 spacer

EzFkAFtXAAEf4lQ.jpg
930719307193071
>>93070
Seems to have been on a bounce for a while now.
>> No. 93073 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 3:01 pm
93073 spacer
>>93069
Yet Labour will retain London*, SNP will continue to rule unopposed in Scotland and Wales won't have a big enough abacus to count the votes. It feels like a myopia has taken hold in the British political establishment that even as an Englishman I can see where parties are focused on winning the wrong elections.

For what it's worth I reckon SDP might be our party this year. The one where I'm nodding my head yet thinking in the back of my mind "hang on I might get called a fascist for this".
https://sdp.org.uk/new-declaration/
>> No. 93076 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 7:22 pm
93076 spacer
>>93073
It occurred to me recently that I'm going to struggle to find someone to vote for. I am your typical "Liberal Democrat / Green" metropolitan elitist champagne socialist, but any good thing achieved by the Liberal Democrats when they were in power has turned into a bad thing now, and my work is having a minor conflict with a Green councillor so I want to stick it to him. I would honestly vote for saville if Reform UK were actually about electoral reform, as they said they would be, rather than whatever coronaspiracy bollocks they have now espoused.
>> No. 93079 Anonymous
17th April 2021
Saturday 8:20 pm
93079 spacer
>>93076
I reckon you can pick any third party you want for electoral reform in England. Although if we're talking local councillors then they might as well be promising a trip to the Moon for cheese for all the relevance it has.

This time I'm tempted to vote Tory for my local councillor purely on grounds that he seems to be the most qualified as a urban planner. My other two votes are going for Lib Dem as they seem to have a forward thinking policy of using a corporation to turn empty London offices into housing although how that is going to work in practice is anyone's guess given those building won't be selling for nothing.
>> No. 93082 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 10:25 am
93082 spacer
https://the-free-press.co.uk/2021/03/28/keir-starmers-10-socialist-pledges-forensic-gaslighting/
>> No. 93084 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 10:28 am
93084 spacer
>>93076
>my work is having a minor conflict with a Green councillor so I want to stick it to him
Hah that's amusing, who is he?
>> No. 93086 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 10:46 am
93086 spacer
>>93079
>corporation

As in "what Councils used to be called until the 80s"?
>> No. 93088 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 11:15 am
93088 spacer
>>93084
I don't actually know his name; I'm not involved. There are houses right next to our building and car park, and we have been expanding and one of the houses keeps complaining. The great irony is that we added some giant power generator which stores excess power and uses it later on, which not only saves us money but is also much better for the environment. All our changes are hugely green. But whoever it is in one of the houses keeps complaining to our local Green councillor, claiming the generator makes a noise (that none of us can hear), and the Green councillor would rather side with this resident than with us. So in a way, that's nice, but on this particular occasion I would prefer it if he fucked off.
>> No. 93089 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 11:30 am
93089 spacer
>>93082
Is this a website devoted to fighting against biased news reporting, publishing a one-sided hatchet job against someone they personally dislike? That's not very righteous of them.
>> No. 93091 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 11:50 am
93091 spacer
>>93089
It's not one sided, they just decided to be more efficient than the traditional media and skip the phone-call to Starmer's office "for balance" because they know he'll stick to his tradition of declining to comment on political matters.
>> No. 93092 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 3:46 pm
93092 spacer
>>93086
Corporation is a catch-all term, in this instance they're looking at adopting the model used in Rotterdam. Separate body.

If we're talking about corporations and residential conversions then I do wonder how the actual City of London Corporation is going to handle all this WFH lark. It's pretty unique in that businesses can vote and far outnumber the local residents but that metric could shift to bring in more residents to live in a cyber-punk dystopia.
>> No. 93093 Anonymous
18th April 2021
Sunday 7:32 pm
93093 spacer

ENbC5EjWwAA6gwj.jpg
930939309393093
I've been watching Watching "Labour: The Wilderness Years" again and despairing.
Most people who watch it seem to take it as a sort of chronicle of why Blairism was necessary. Perhaps went too far, but was ultimately necessary because the only alternative was the craziness of the far-left in the early 1980s. They usually go further and frame Labour's current struggles in terms of those struggles. But every time I watch it two men stand out: Peter Shore and Bryan Gould.
And the tragic thing is, if we're re-running the 1980s we're re-running it without their participation, and they are the two people Labour really should've gone with.

Take Gould: An Oxford Lawyer and a Labour moderniser, he wrote a book building on Crosland's "The Future of Socialism" about the failures of the postwar consensus that lead people to back Thatcherism and he strongly opposed the plan to put up taxes in the 1992 election because he thought (correctly) it was a vote loser. Instinctively you feel he must be a Blairite kind of guy, but then one of the last things in the documentary is him saying this:
"I think it's been a painful process, a painful withdrawal from hope and idealism. It may or may not have been necessary, I don't believe that it was, and I believe we have simply given up. We will secure power but I don't think we'll make much of it and we will - as soon as the voters recover their confidence in the Tories we'll be removed to make room for the real thing."
Because the reality is that he wasn't anything like a Blairite, he was the sort of Keynesian egalitarian moderniser with Southern appeal that Labour desperately needed but never got. Someone who was prepared to try and change society, rather than just adapt Labour to the way others had changed it. He and Shore were people who managed to remain in contact with both political and economic reality instead of surrendering one or both of them to expediency. Both were also Eurosceptics, though Gould probably wouldn't have taken us out of Europe as PM. But they weren't good faction builders, so tragically they have no legacy in the party today. Bennites, Brownites, Blairites, and the Borderline apolitical ought to have been condemned to the dustbin of history as the discredited ideas of wrong people, but instead they continue to dominate a Labour party that no longer even has the capacity to come up with anything new. There are no Bryanites and there are no Baron Shore of Stepneyites, nor is there much chance there ever will be: Shore is dead and Gould wisely retired to his homeland of New Zealand in the mid-1990s. He still writes about the British economy, but I've yet to see any evidence that someone in Labour is reading...
>> No. 93097 Anonymous
19th April 2021
Monday 5:20 pm
93097 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoDJ1Fk47E
>> No. 93098 Anonymous
19th April 2021
Monday 10:21 pm
93098 spacer
>>93097

That lad is mental, but Starmer's bodyguard having the same haircut as him is very Kim Jong-un vibes.
>> No. 93099 Anonymous
19th April 2021
Monday 11:06 pm
93099 spacer
>>93097
Why do pub landlords always act so entitled, you'd never get this childish behaviour from a faceless corporation.

>>93098
Most of the men in the country have that haircut at the moment.
>> No. 93100 Anonymous
19th April 2021
Monday 11:08 pm
93100 spacer
>>93098
>>93099
Stewart Lee's looking well.
>> No. 93101 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 7:31 am
93101 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXjLVHKaKLE

He's a loon, alright. He's been drinking from the coronavirus conspiracy kool-aid.
>> No. 93102 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 12:28 pm
93102 spacer
It's strange behaviour for a pub landlord to be voting Labour full stop.
>> No. 93103 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 12:35 pm
93103 spacer
>>93102
Why?
>> No. 93106 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 1:47 pm
93106 spacer
>>93102
Ian Murray used to be a pub landlord
He also supposedly considered joining The Independent Group, but decided against throwing the safest seat in Scotland away.
>> No. 93107 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 1:59 pm
93107 spacer

almurray.jpg
931079310793107
>>93106
>Ian Murray used to be a pub landlord
Beautiful British name.
>> No. 93108 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 2:51 pm
93108 spacer
Is that combined AC Milan-Inter badge in the OP legal?

>>93102
If Phillippe Egalite can vote for the execution of King Louis XVI then I don't think we should assume a pub landlord voting Labour is somehow showing incredible disregard for unassailable sectarian norms. If we start to think in such blinkered terms then those norms could well come to be, not be a complete doom-monger or anything.
>> No. 93109 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 3:51 pm
93109 spacer
>>93102

Is this a humorous misunderstanding about the word landlord, or an actual idea that running a pub is somehow incompatible with socialism (or whatever labour does now)?

Bear in mind a lot of people who run pubs don't own them, they rent them from breweries.
>> No. 93269 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 5:18 pm
93269 spacer

YouGov.jpg
932699326993269
Proper fucked.

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-whats-gone-wrong-for-sir-keir-starmers-party-since-december-12291340
>> No. 93270 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 5:34 pm
93270 spacer
>>93269
Any other Labour leader would be 20 points behind.
>> No. 93271 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 6:50 pm
93271 spacer
>>93269
Who are you lads voting for then?
>> No. 93272 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 7:05 pm
93272 spacer
>>93271
That depends entirely on how strongly Are Nige's party campaign on electoral reform.
>> No. 93274 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 7:22 pm
93274 spacer
>>93272
They're not interested in it at all, I'm afraid, at least as far as I can tell. Besides, local elections are counted differently and are less in need of reform. I get to vote twice for the Mayor of Greater Manchester! A favourite and a second-choice backup guy. How delightfully progressive.
>> No. 93275 Anonymous
30th April 2021
Friday 7:30 pm
93275 spacer
>>93274
Oh, local elections. Yorkshire Party for West Yorkshire mayor.
>> No. 93278 Anonymous
1st May 2021
Saturday 8:07 pm
93278 spacer
I heard Angela Rayner speaking on the telly earlier. Is she legitimately retarded? The way she spoke, like she had a load of marbles in her mouth, made her sound extremely thick.
>> No. 93279 Anonymous
1st May 2021
Saturday 8:32 pm
93279 spacer
>>93278
Since when has it been acceptable to use ablest slurs around here?
>> No. 93280 Anonymous
1st May 2021
Saturday 10:05 pm
93280 spacer
>>93279

fuck off peg leg.
>> No. 93284 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 7:09 am
93284 spacer
>>93278

You'd still bite her bum.
>> No. 93285 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 7:34 am
93285 spacer
>>93284
I'll need to see evidence to back up such a bold statement.
>> No. 93289 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 1:02 pm
93289 spacer
>>93285

>>/x/40421

Me and the other lad would never describe a woman as "too fat", so you must have posted that. QED.
>> No. 93290 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 1:16 pm
93290 spacer
>>93289
I still don't see her arse.
>> No. 93293 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 12:58 pm
93293 spacer

E0hWefZX0AIh7qg.png
932939329393293
Welp.
>> No. 93294 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 1:11 pm
93294 spacer
>>93293
How can 50% of Hartlepool people be so stupid?
>> No. 93295 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 1:22 pm
93295 spacer
>>93294
This is the finest bait I've ever seen in my life. Expertly done, I really do mean that.
>> No. 93296 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 1:33 pm
93296 spacer
>>93294
You can't expect all 100% to vote Tory, but they probably would after watching this:

https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=4223227574362150&id=711227022228907
>> No. 93297 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 3:33 pm
93297 spacer
>>93295
Dunno what you mean, reads like a pretty standard anti-Tory comment t- oh I see.
>> No. 93298 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 4:20 pm
93298 spacer
>>93297
Is being against corruption and lies seen as anti-tory yet? Seems like we're getting there.
>> No. 93299 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 4:29 pm
93299 spacer
>>93298
Still, I guess that means at least 50% of Hartlepool voters are pro-corruption.
>> No. 93300 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 4:57 pm
93300 spacer
>>93298
I think you're being myopic and suffering from the recency effect.

The trend for Labour's vote share in the North East has generally been downwards because they felt they'd been abandoned and their votes taken for granted whilst refusing to actually listen to them.

Meanwhile, the Tory mayor of Tees Valley has come in and he's actually getting shit done like getting Teesside Airport back into public ownership exactly as he campaigned on, introducing the Tees Flex bus service and turning the former SSI Steelworks site into a major new business park. If they do win in Hartlepool he will have been a considerable influence on the result.

You can harp on about Boris and his wallpaper or whatever else he's done in the past year, but the distaste towards Labour has been festering for decades.
>> No. 93301 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 5:18 pm
93301 spacer
>>93300

Not sure if it's right to say the person who's concerned about the government of the whole country is myopic, relative to people who're just worried about their own backyard. But otherwise, reasonable points.
>> No. 93302 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 5:30 pm
93302 spacer
>>93293
I hope Sam and Thelma are neighbours who bitterly hate one-another and are only running because they discovered an obscure law that let's the mayor exile people.

Thelma's put up signs all over the place with Sam's face and written 'Sam Lee convicted pedo' underneath.
>> No. 93303 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 5:37 pm
93303 spacer
>>93301
Thinking people should base their vote solely over how the Johnson government have behaved since 2019 and ignoring the wider context of how they feel they've been treated over generations seems rather short-sighted to me.

No matter how bad Johnson has been many people over there feel Labour are much worse because of how they've been maligned by them over a very long period of time.
>> No. 93304 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 5:47 pm
93304 spacer
>>93303
It's a vote for the UK Parliament. The behaviour of the UK Government is absolutely relevant.

But no, you're right. They should disregard the shitshow of the past 18 months because of hurt feelings. That's a totally normal and rational thing to do.
>> No. 93305 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 6:06 pm
93305 spacer
>>93304
>It's a vote for the UK Parliament. The behaviour of the UK Government is absolutely relevant.

It's a vote for who they want to represent them in Parliament. Clearly many don't feel like they want to be represented by Labour.

>But no, you're right. They should disregard the shitshow of the past 18 months because of hurt feelings. That's a totally normal and rational thing to do.

You're almost there. Look at how the Tories have been under Johnson and understand that for many living in Hartlepool that's still a better option than voting for Labour.

Once you get your head around that you may be able to grasp the scale of the problem. You can't ignore people for decades and then expect them to listen and come running back to you because of Johnson's views on John Lewis.
>> No. 93306 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 7:24 pm
93306 spacer
>>93304

There's a lot of irony in the sentiment you're expressing here, and it's a common one on the left. You think the voter's choices are irrational, but your own perspective is exactly as irrational, because you're the one expecting them to be rational.

Labour is between a rock and a hard place unfortunately, and there's really nothing it can do to turn its situation around over night. It's certainly got an uphill struggle in for it under Blairite management; let's not forget it was Blair's government that put Labour in the mess they find themselves in today, and people haven't forgotten. Their neo-liberal fetishisation of free movement and the service sector is what lead us to Brexit and the political quagmire of modern Britain, and Sir Kier doesn't seem likely to do things any differently if he was in charge.

The voters aren't as thick as you think they are. The fact they think the Tories are still a better choice than Labour should tell you how badly Labour has fucked it.
>> No. 93307 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 7:27 pm
93307 spacer
>>93305
Sure it makes sense, but it's still absolutely stupid and short-sighted to ignore what the Tories have done as a party at large, and will continue to do, because you think someone else did something to you years ago so you're going to spite them forever. Also we really need to stop this American bollocks of "If you're not voting for one party you're voting for the other".
>> No. 93308 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 7:35 pm
93308 spacer
>>93305
>You're almost there. Look at how the Tories have been under Johnson and understand that for many living in Hartlepool that's still a better option than voting for Labour.
I'm just curious if this has anything to do with the Tories allotting council money based on whether the area voted for them or not?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/10/labour-calls-for-investigation-over-funding-for-robert-jenricks-constituency
>> No. 93309 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:15 pm
93309 spacer
>>93293
Hold on a minute.
>John Prescott, Reform UK
???
>> No. 93310 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:30 pm
93310 spacer
>>93309
It's not that John Prescott. There's a few choice photographs on here; the one for Ralph Ward-Jackson is my favourite.

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/19276372.hartlepool-by-election-candidates-share-pledges-get-vote/
>> No. 93311 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:34 pm
93311 spacer

somegreybloke.png
933119331193311
>>93310
Adam Gaines looks familiar.
>> No. 93312 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:38 pm
93312 spacer
>>93311
Wait until you scroll down to Chris Killick and read his profile.
>> No. 93313 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:39 pm
93313 spacer
>>93312
Best of luck to him.
>> No. 93314 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 8:57 pm
93314 spacer
>>93312

Ralph Ward-Jackson definitely looks like he's done some unsavoury things in a lay-by.

The Green Party candidate is quite fit.
>> No. 93315 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 9:05 pm
93315 spacer
The comments section of every single Keir Starmer post on Facebook is full of angry replies from Labour supporters. He's doing a fucking appalling job. He inspires nothing but disinterest in Tory voters and anger at him from his party. It's like he goes out of his way to seem aloof, patronising, disingenuous and deceptive.

I know there are Starmer supporters out there but I find it hard to believe Starmer has any positive qualities apart from not being Jeremy Corbyn. This blind focus on "electability" without having any qualities that make a person worth electing, of "getting in a few good jabs in" in the Commons as if it mattered one whit- it's depressing. He's one bacon sandwich away from the dole queue at this rate.
>> No. 93316 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 9:21 pm
93316 spacer
>>93313
A bit too rapey for my liking.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-who-woke-up-next-22492262
>> No. 93317 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 9:21 pm
93317 spacer
>>93315

From what I can tell, his biggest weakness is what the party faithful believe to be his biggest strength. People see him as a Blair type figure, the comparisons are constantly drawn, and while it's true that he's not Corbyn, he also needs to not be Blair.

Blair is the one who got Labour into its current mess after all. Even if it wasn't really directly his fault and a lot of media manipulation went into controlling the narrative, the political quagmire we find ourselves in today is an almost direct consequence of the Blair years and all that built up resentment from people who felt their concerns about mass migration were being ignored. People still associate Labour with that kind of disconnection from their voters.

He can't win on that front, they need someone new and different, an outsider who won't immediately be laughed off like Milliband's "tough on immigration" mug.
>> No. 93318 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 9:50 pm
93318 spacer
>>93317

>Blair is the one who got Labour into its current mess after all.

Labour was in a far worse state before Blair took over. The Labour left like to blame the party's malaise on Blair, but they don't put forward a credible alternative. We've tried "proper socialism" under Foot and Corbyn, resulting in the worst general election performances since the war.

The real problem IMO is that the Labour movement has been unable to construct a compelling counter-narrative to Thatcherism. Blair gets blamed for just offering Thatcherism-lite, but Labour's attempts to offer something else have all failed miserably. There's a void at the heart of the Labour movement that the left keep trying to fill with an offer that the electorate rejected in 79 and have repeatedly rejected since.
>> No. 93319 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 10:15 pm
93319 spacer
>>93310
Is it just me or are there a lot more SDP candidates this year? I could've sworn the party had been disbanded.

>>93315
What is Keir Starmer actually supposed to do though. There doesn't seem to be any action he can take to come across as strong and stable that won't send people frothing at the mouth when he's always going to be the leader of the opposition trying to save the party from extinction.

Although, maybe if he even was a Blair he would still be the man who ends up turning the lights off on the Labour party if the SNP get their wish.
>> No. 93320 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 10:21 pm
93320 spacer

1997graph2.jpg
933209332093320
>>93318
>Labour was in a far worse state before Blair took over.
They were only... (oh ha ha, very funny lads) ~20 points ahead in the polls when Smith died.

The alternative was Bryan Gould, or at least John Smith. One quit and one died.
Smith would've been a steady pair of hands who would've easily become prime minister. It is difficult to imagine him doing anything to trash Labour's reputation the way Blair did. It is even difficult to imagine that he would've gone into Iraq, especially given he was always more inclined to Europe. But it is easy to say this about Smith: He died, and people tend to idealise lost leaders like him. (When they aren't egregiously writing them out of history to pretend the only thing before Blair came along and straightened things out was Neil Kinnock yelling "we're all right!")

But Gould is the more impressive figure - Labour really made the wrong choice with Smith. Smith's pro-European attitudes often lead him down dead ends like endorsing the catastrophe that was ERM membership. Gould on the other hand actually understood economics. As a result he could put together an ideal counter narrative to Thatcherism (he ironically lost in part because he cut a Blair like figure in the leadership election he stood in, wanting to get the party to change things up where Smith was the "One more heave" candidate), bringing together an acceptance of personal aspiration with macroeconomic Keynesianism and a genuine commitment to egalitarianism. He even had Euroskepticism, but I've written my Paean to him before and it didn't get much interest. ( >>93093 )
>> No. 93321 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 10:38 pm
93321 spacer
It gets worse.

>Fewer than half of recent Labour voters in Hartlepool say they will back the party in Thursday’s crucial byelection, according to internal data based on the canvassing of more than 10,000 people, leading activists to fear a historic Conservative victory.

>Labour insiders said polling from its ground campaign in the town showed only about 40% of the party’s previous supporters had pledged to vote for its candidate, Paul Williams. Such an outcome would deal a significant blow to Keir Starmer’s leadership and a decisive Conservative win in a north-east England seat that has elected a Labour MP at every parliamentary election since 1964.

>Labour sources said they were in “huge trouble” in Hartlepool and also in danger of losing control of Sunderland and Durham councils for the first time in half a century. Voters across England, Scotland and Wales will go to the polls on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”, in the biggest set of local and devolved parliament elections since 1973.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/04/internal-polling-suggests-labour-heading-for-defeat-in-hartlepool-byelection
>> No. 93322 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 11:00 pm
93322 spacer
>>93320
I read your post and it was interesting, please post more thoughts if you have them. I just didn't have anything to add.
>> No. 93323 Anonymous
4th May 2021
Tuesday 11:01 pm
93323 spacer
>>93321
>on what has been dubbed “Super Thursday”

The worst part is someone in the Guardian newsroom thought that up, folded their arms and felt proud of themselves.
>> No. 93324 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 12:17 am
93324 spacer
>>93320
I read the post as well and pretty much had the same reaction as >>93322. It was a good post but I generally stay out of political threads on principle. I do often still read them though.
>> No. 93325 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 1:12 am
93325 spacer
>>93318

>Labour was in a far worse state before Blair took over.

What does that have to do with it? Blair was the one in charge when all the immigrants flooded the country, and that's the reason nobody votes Labour any more. It's that simple.

The problem with people who actually like politics is that you overcomplicate things, and start looking at things normal people don't give a fuck about or even know about. You can prattle on about "constructing a compelling counter-narrative to Thatcherism" all you like, the fact is the voters Labour has lost simply remember it was them in charge when saying you're English was made illegal and you had to give your spare bedroom to an asylum seeker.

Those voters aren't coming back, because as far as they can tell, Labour hasn't changed its mind about renaming Birmingham to New Islamabad.
>> No. 93326 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:38 am
93326 spacer
>>93325
>Blair was the one in charge when all the immigrants flooded the country, and that's the reason nobody votes Labour any more. It's that simple.

Is it?

>saying you're English was made illegal
>you had to give your spare bedroom to an asylum seeker.
Neither of these things are or have ever been true. Nor has Labour ever wanted to rename Birmingham. Even ignoring the hyperbole.

Those are all nonsense coming from a certain sort of billionaire newspaper owner.

I don't particularly care to defend Labour, certainly not Blair. But fault, in this context? I'd rephrase that first sentence.

Blair was the one in charge when people were subjected to heavy propaganda claiming that immigrants were flooding the country, and that's the reason nobody votes Labour any more. It's that simple.

Having said that, I don't know if it makes any material difference. It's an obstacle that hasn't been avoided, dealt with.
How do you solve a problem like Murdoch et al?
>> No. 93327 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:42 am
93327 spacer

UK_Migration_from_1970.svg.png
933279332793327
>>93326
>people were subjected to heavy propaganda claiming that immigrants were flooding the country

It wasn't propaganda. Sage because we're not going over this again.
>> No. 93328 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:53 am
93328 spacer
>>93327

Can you explain how your chart proves that saying you're English was made illegal and that you had to give your spare bedroom to an asylum speaker?
>> No. 93329 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:57 am
93329 spacer
>>93328
No. The graph showing that immigration rapidly accelerated during the Blair years, which apparently is just lies and propaganda, has fuck all to do with otherlads exaggerations about the English language being made illegal or having to house asylum seekers.
>> No. 93330 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:11 am
93330 spacer
>>93329

Nobody said immigration rates going up were lies and propaganda, how fucking slow are you?
>> No. 93331 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:19 am
93331 spacer
>>93329

What does it look like for the last 5 years? I feel like that might be a key detail to consider.
>> No. 93332 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:22 am
93332 spacer
>>93330
>Nobody said immigration rates going up were lies and propaganda, how fucking slow are you?

">>93326 people were subjected to heavy propaganda claiming that immigrants were flooding the country"

we have always been at war with east asia.
>> No. 93333 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:24 am
93333 spacer

Screenshot.png
933339333393333
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

>Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser
>> No. 93334 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:28 am
93334 spacer
>>93332

Were immigrants flooding the country or did immigration rates go up?
https://webfiles.uci.edu/eloftus/LoftusPalmer74.pdf
>> No. 93335 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:30 am
93335 spacer
>>93333

Thanks that screenshot of one of the newspapers I was accusing of propagandising immigration sure proves that they weren't doing it.
>> No. 93336 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:43 am
93336 spacer
>>93334
Total immigration was c. 600,000 a year with the number of net British citizens falling by c. 100,000 a year during this timeframe.

The population of Britain in 2000 was just shy of 59 million, so in a decade you have around 6 million migrants and 1 million British migrants. I would call the demographics of over 10% of the population changing over a decade to be fairly substantial, particularly as these changes tend to be concentrated in particular parts of the country rather than spread out.

It's a bit of a moot point, really. Immigration may not have been high in your opinion but it may have been high in someone else's. That doesn't mean either of your opinions are wrong as you'll have different barometers and experiences, but it sure as shit means the person who thinks it was high will be wary of voting Labour. You can argue until you're blue in the face that you're right but it doesn't change anything.
>> No. 93337 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:56 am
93337 spacer
>>93336

I don't disagree with that. Not even saying it wasn't high. Just saying that the Murdochian media's response to it was of a certain deliberate choice intended to make people view it in a certain light. Even this conversation is evidence of that, where I've said it's propaganda and the assumption is I'm saying it didn't happen, instead of realising it's to do with how it's spun.
It could have been a relief column, incoming reinforcements to help the NHS, more young people to bolster our rapidly ageing population. It could have been a war effort, plucky Brits providing shelter to people escaping from the atrocities that [our] parents faced in WWII. Could have been a cold, passionless statement of figures. Could have been all sorts of things that I personally haven't come up with off the top of my head. But no. It's swarms this, flooding that. It's here's a news article where the Telegraph is doing the thing you were saying they were doing as proof you're wrong while I accuse you of doublethink.
>> No. 93338 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 11:19 am
93338 spacer
>>93337
Labour never really made a compelling case for immigration and even admitted they grossly underestimated how many would move from the likes of Poland. It didn't really help that when it was brought up the response was "shurrup, you racist" and they gladly buried their heads in the sand until the Brexit train couldn't be derailed.
>> No. 93339 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 11:39 am
93339 spacer
>>93337
>It could have been a relief column, incoming reinforcements to help the NHS, more young people to bolster our rapidly ageing population. It could have been a war effort, plucky Brits providing shelter to people escaping from the atrocities that [our] parents faced in WWII.

Or Labour could've been tough on immigration. It could've been the party of social cohesion, asking why the natives can't afford to have children and why we need low-skill workers flooding into London. You 'know, the actual working class perspectives of old rather than gaslighting us that it's all the press and mean words changing our perception of reality.

I know for a fact that I'm never voting Labour again and it's sharing exactly the same fate as social democrats across Europe for good reason.
>> No. 93340 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 1:08 pm
93340 spacer
>>93339

It could but you're still basing your premise on the presupposition that you were given.
>> No. 93341 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 2:45 pm
93341 spacer
>>93339
>Or Labour could've been tough on immigration. It could've been the party of social cohesion, asking why the natives can't afford to have children and why we need low-skill workers flooding into London.
It could, but then that would kind of violate the labour movement's historic commitment to progressive anti-racism, because those positions are regressive and racist.

But you knew that already, because you're a racist. In before white fragility kicks in and someone gets offended for being called a racist.
>> No. 93342 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 2:50 pm
93342 spacer
>>93340
>>93341
What will be the next election day Labour will lose horribly after this one, will that be the one where the SNP become the official UK opposition party?
>> No. 93343 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 2:53 pm
93343 spacer
>>93342

I hope so, it'll be fun to see you try to blame them for everything.
>> No. 93344 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 3:27 pm
93344 spacer
>>93337
>Murdochian media
Surely if Rupert has never backed the wrong horse in any election ever, his newspapers will have been pro-Labour at the time that Labour were forcing white people to give their kids gay sex changes and burning down schools to make room for more mosques or whatever? Right?
>> No. 93345 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 3:40 pm
93345 spacer
>>93344
>Surely if Rupert has never backed the wrong horse in any election ever
Please point to the <s>place on the doll where the man touched you</s> post that says anything even remotely to that effect.
>> No. 93347 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 5:16 pm
93347 spacer
I would like to repeat the irony that Labour were the ones who decided to bring "Australian style points based immigration system" into the national consciousness.
Also I have a burning memory of watching a question time episode from 2000 or so on YouTube (it was either in the buildup to Iraq, or the immediate aftermath of the Kosovo war) and seeing this very obviously vile Tory bastard going on about asylum seekers in a pretty nasty dog-whistling sort of way and thinking, "bloody hell, this is a bit on the nose" only to subsequently discover he was a Labour MP.
>> No. 93348 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 6:45 pm
93348 spacer
>>93326

>Neither of these things are or have ever been true.

Lad... I knew it would go right over your head, so let me say it slowly.

That's the point.
>> No. 93349 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 6:51 pm
93349 spacer

ba14cb204429aead824c4883dc5151b9524e802f0800e2fa5a.jpg
933499334993349
>>93348
>> No. 93350 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 6:54 pm
93350 spacer
>>93348

Let me add to this.

It doesn't matter whether it's true or not that Labour wanted to make burkhas mandatory or build mosques on top of war memorials. The basis in reality for these things is absolutely immaterial and not even worth arguing about.

What matters is that that's the image Labour has to somehow shed. That's the popular conception of the party that destroyed it's support in its former heartlands. That's what it needs to somehow fix.

Frankly though I have my doubts if it even can until a new generation of voters replaces the existing over-40s base. Swinging to the right will never be taken seriously, swinging to the left leaves them too vulnerable to a double down of right wing media slander.

>>93349

No, lad.
>> No. 93351 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 7:07 pm
93351 spacer

Blairism failures.png
933519335193351
I always found this an interesting left-wing analysis of Blairism and why they perceive it to have failed.
>> No. 93352 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 8:32 pm
93352 spacer
>>93351
What's the source there?
>> No. 93353 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:16 pm
93353 spacer
>>93352
https://www.compassonline.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Compass-Reclaiming-Modernity-Beyond-markets_-2.pdf I believe. It's the essay "Blairite modernization: Not the only way" (starts page 12) with the last paragraph cut off for whatever reason.
>> No. 93354 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:26 pm
93354 spacer
>>93345
It hasn't been posted here, but it is true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)
>In 1979, the paper endorsed Margaret Thatcher in the year's general election at the end of a process which had been under way for some time, though The Sun had not initially been enthusiastic about Thatcher.
>During the general election of 1983, The Sun ran a front page featuring an unflattering photograph of Michael Foot, then aged almost 70, claiming he was unfit to be Prime Minister on grounds of his age, appearance and policies, alongside the headline "Do You Really Want This Old Fool To Run Britain?"[53]
>During the 1987 general election, The Sun ran a mock-editorial entitled "Why I'm Backing Kinnock, by Stalin".[60]
1992: It's The Sun Wot Won It (but there isn't a handy quote from the Wikipedia page for this one)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_The_Sun_Wot_Won_It
>The Sun switched support to the Labour party on 18 March 1997, six weeks before the General Election victory which saw the New Labour leader Tony Blair become Prime Minister with a large parliamentary majority, despite the paper having attacked Blair and New Labour up to a month earlier.
>Despite being a persistent critic of some of the government's policies, the paper supported Labour in both subsequent elections the party won. For the 2005 general election, The Sun backed Blair and Labour for a third consecutive election win
>on 30 September 2009, following Brown's speech at the Labour Party Conference, The Sun, under the banner "Labour's Lost It", announced that it no longer supported the Labour Party:[136] "The Sun believes – and prays – that the Conservative leadership can put the great back into Great Britain".[137]

After all my bastard research into this, I now see that there is another section on Wikipedia devoted specifically to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sun_(United_Kingdom)#United_Kingdom_general_elections
>> No. 93355 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 9:35 pm
93355 spacer

image-20150501-23852-5r02zd.jpg
933559335593355
>>93354
They did manage to get it wrong in Scotland once, which was quite funny.
>> No. 93356 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 10:31 pm
93356 spacer
>>93354
Question is, are they influencing the public or just sensitive to shifts in its mood? People do not generally buy media whose viewpoints they disagree with. Thatcher was popular in '79 for reasons that had nothing to do with the Sun newspaper.
>> No. 93357 Anonymous
5th May 2021
Wednesday 11:44 pm
93357 spacer
>>93356

Both, in a feedback loop. They're both very good at following the trends, better than official pollsters in some cases, and they move in line with the trends they notice, which contributes to continuing that trend. It's like an analogue print version of the online echo-chamber effect.
>> No. 93439 Anonymous
7th May 2021
Friday 9:10 pm
93439 spacer

0017.jpg
934399343993439
https://www.jlpartners.co.uk/local-elections
>> No. 93457 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 2:08 am
93457 spacer

E0zSLF4XMAEuKWi.jpg
934579345793457
Khalid Mahmood has figured out the problem with Labour! He heard you OP, he answered your hue and cry and sent forward his reply; "tech utopianism"! Hark, a new dawn for Labour approaches, whence we rid ourselves of the transhumanists amongst our ranks.

I honestly think I'd be better off spending my Labour membership fees on bleach and then drinking that bleach and then dying than this insane bollocks. Is he angling for a peerage or something? Fucking cretin. He resigned from the front bench, which apparently he and his very weird fucking teeth were a member of.
>> No. 93460 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 6:15 am
93460 spacer
>>93457
Maybe he's hoping to trigger a wave of resignations like when everyone left Corbyn's shadow cabinet.
>> No. 93461 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 6:48 am
93461 spacer
As a disconsolate Sir Keir Starmer trudged under an overcast sky, his dark overcoat spattered by rain, one of his aides rushed across the street past a boarded-up shop in Hartlepool to talk to two women laden down with shopping. Would you like to meet Keir Starmer?’ said the young male canvasser wearing a red rosette. The reply from the women, who were trying to escape the rain, was crushing: ‘Who?’

The same scene was played out repeatedly on Starmer’s three visits to the town as he battled not only a lack of recognition but also enthusiasm from people who should have been natural Labour supporters. Even those who knew who he was muttered inaudibly about having no time to talk. The same fate was suffered by Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, on her three visits to Hartlepool, and by the ten shadow cabinet ministers ordered into the town to try to drum up support. But when Boris Johnson arrived the reverse was true. His officials and police protection officers had to gently push people away as they tried to throng around him. ‘Boris wanted to play the crowds but we had to respect social distancing,’ said a Tory minder.

By the time Starmer’s team turned up at Mill House Leisure Centre for the count, the only issue was how many votes they would lose by. Jenny Chapman, Starmer’s chief of staff, spent most of the early hours on a stack of gym mats in the corner of the sports hall. As the Tory votes piled up, she became increasingly ashen. She had ridden roughshod over the views of local party members who warned against holding the by-election, triggered by the resignation of a Labour MP, on the so-called Super Thursday – the biggest set of local elections in half a century. The locals were desperate to avoid holding the poll on the same day as the hugely popular Tory Ben Houchen was running for re-election (successfully as it turned out yesterday) as Metro Mayor in Tees Valley. They feared his campaign could damage Labour’s in Hartlepool next door.

There was also concern about the way Chapman and Starmer ruthlessly imposed their preferred candidate, presenting the local party with a ‘long-list’ of one. Paul Williams is not only not from Hartlepool, which voted 70 per cent Leave in the Brexit referendum, he is also a fanatical supporter of the EU and never accepted the result. He made this all too plain as MP for pro-Brexit Stockton South – before he was rejected by voters for the Tories in the 2019 election. And yet Starmer still put him forward as Hartlepool candidate, a decision that shows the Labour leader has no comprehension of the anger people feel towards a political class that tried to overturn 17.4million votes to leave the EU. ‘His selection was a slap in the face of Hartlepool people,’ said one party official. ‘Why would they now trust Starmer who picked him?

The inquest into the disastrous campaign will focus on why it was dominated by one theme: Tory sleaze. Labour MPs alerted Starmer’s office that the message was not cutting through on the doorstep – yet Starmer ploughed on. One Labour peer told me: ‘It was negative, vacuous and raises serious questions about Starmer’s strategy, credibility and electability.’

>> No. 93464 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 8:12 am
93464 spacer
>>93461

>Paul Williams is not only not from Hartlepool, which voted 70 per cent Leave in the Brexit referendum, he is also a fanatical supporter of the EU and never accepted the result.

Boggles the mind how they find this so difficult to understand. It's really not hard.
>> No. 93465 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 8:54 am
93465 spacer
>>93464
It sounds like Labour were doing what they could to throw the by-election.

Foisting a completely unsuitable candidate against the wishes of the local party. Timing the by-election with the council and mayoral elections when the Tory Tees Valley mayor is very popular in the region and has been building up momentum. A completely incoherent message of what the party's vision actually is.

It's pure incompetence.
>> No. 93466 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 9:01 am
93466 spacer
>>93464
Seems like Starmer owed him a favour.
>> No. 93489 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 7:37 pm
93489 spacer
>Keir Starmer has sacked Angela Rayner from her roles as Labour’s party chair and national campaign coordinator, after the humiliating loss of the Hartlepool byelection.

>The worse-than-expected defeat in Hartlepool, which saw the Conservatives take the seat with a majority of almost 7,000, shocked Starmer’s team and led to recriminations at the top of the party. Rayner’s status as deputy Labour leader is safe as that is a directly-elected post. But the move has reignited Labour’s civil war, as MPs and activists reacted with shock and dismay.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/08/angela-rayner-sacked-as-labour-chair-after-hartlepool-byelection-loss
>> No. 93490 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 7:40 pm
93490 spacer

starmer.png
934909349093490
>>93489

>Keir Starmer has sacked Angela Rayner from her roles as Labour’s party chair and national campaign coordinator, after the humiliating loss of the Hartlepool byelection.
>> No. 93492 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 9:54 pm
93492 spacer
>>93490

She'll be back
>> No. 93493 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 10:04 pm
93493 spacer
>>93492
She's still deputy leader. I guess there'll be a few awkward meetings in the future.
>> No. 93494 Anonymous
8th May 2021
Saturday 10:17 pm
93494 I worked very hard on this BE NICE.
ResponsibilityTaken.png
934949349493494

>> No. 93500 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:28 am
93500 spacer
>>93494
It's fantastic!
>> No. 93502 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 1:48 am
93502 spacer
>>93494
What's the source pic? Hitler and Eva?
>> No. 93503 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 2:14 am
93503 spacer
>>93502

It's a famous picture of Stalin and one of his ministers. The left picture is the original, the right picture is the doctored image after the minister in question was un-personed and Stalin wanted any evidence of connection between them erased.

It's notable both for its impressive pre-digital photomanipulation, and for being a concrete example of the kind of totalitarian grip on information itself Orwell would go on to write about in that book nobody has actually read.
>> No. 93507 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 9:22 am
93507 spacer

xbox.png
935079350793507
>>93503

Wasn't it a required reading around GCSE age? I distinctly remember thinking how silly it was that all their TV screens came with cameras and microphones installed just as a plot device. Obviously this was pre-smartphone.
>> No. 93508 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:37 am
93508 spacer
>>93507
All I remember reading for GCSE was To Kill A Mockingbird, part of Far from the Madding Crowd and possibly some Shakespeare.
>> No. 93509 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:42 am
93509 spacer
Labour would do well to highlight how the Tory's arrogant Us v Them politics is threatening the very Union itself. It's a good way to look patriotic without reducing it to pointing at a flag and going "eh, eh, you like that don't you", whilst having the added benefit of being completely true. Might not seem like enough to turn this all around overnight, but it's infinitely more policies than they have right now so I'm hoping to be appointed the top SPAD in the party by Friday.
>> No. 93510 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:46 am
93510 spacer
Should have been "Tories'", sorry.
>> No. 93515 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 11:48 am
93515 spacer

mamories.png
935159351593515
GCSE you say?

>>93508
Was Mice and Men year 9 or something? I remember everyone except the one black girl in the class laughing when someone had to say 'coon'.
>> No. 93516 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:26 pm
93516 spacer
>>93515

God, everything in that book was shite.Out of all the English language's wonderful authors, why did they teach us the most tepid shite? It's like their intention was to actively make people hate reading and writing.
>> No. 93517 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:28 pm
93517 spacer
>>93507
Your school must've been brave to do that considering it features actual carpet-baggerry of a 15 year old girl by a much older man.

>>93515
It was Year 10 for me. I remember it being the year after you both get sorted into sets in upper school and could choose media studies instead of literature.

Mice and Men is a questionable pick if you ask me. It's not the greatest novel ever written and Flowers for Algernon seemingly covers issues of mental retardation much more impactfully. Same with Blood Brothers in GCSE Drama with its tired class stereotypes and talk of destiny. I'm not saying we should replace Shakespeare with Harry Potter but if the edumacation system is like I remember then it's in dire need of a clean out.
>> No. 93518 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:35 pm
93518 spacer
>>93517

Between Blood Brothers, John Godber and An Inspector Calls, GCSE drama is probably responsible for turning me into the raging commie I am today.

Only took it because it was ripe with gash (I was one of two lads in a 20 student class) and look what happened.
>> No. 93520 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:44 pm
93520 spacer
>>93515
GCSE English for me was of Mice and Men, an Inspector calls and Romeo and Juliet.
>> No. 93521 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 12:46 pm
93521 spacer
>>93518

"Come for the pink, stay for the red"?
>> No. 93524 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 1:25 pm
93524 spacer
>>93518
Surprising as Blood Brothers shows a toff (although, let's be honest) being the most morally upright and intelligent individual being led astray. This being contrasted with the working class who are shown as subhuman in familial relations and largely responsible for their situation. Not to say that Dennis the Menace wasn't fucked by his situation but his character is clearly shown as the working class producing violent and uncouth people by its culture. Nature in this context is that he likes his brother for reasons (?) and that free will doesn't exist because twins only have one soul.

I thought it was going to be ace too but then it was 4 lads in a class, two of which were gay and constantly tried to fuck me and the other was absolutely insufferable. 0/10 would pick Spanish and that extra science GCSE next time.
>> No. 93527 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 1:51 pm
93527 spacer

E04_s2FXsAIneMg.jpg
935279352793527
>>93494
>> No. 93533 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:16 pm
93533 spacer
https://twitter.com/DaftLimmy/status/1391394432319164418

This is good TV, but a little bit astonishing.
>> No. 93534 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 3:47 pm
93534 spacer
>>93533
In fairness, he could just be talking about local issues that he feels the MP has failed on. There's something to be said of getting what the local community wants by turning your constituency into a battleground if they stop working for you and especially when the Tories have ostensibly committed to funding for the Norf.
>> No. 93539 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 4:13 pm
93539 spacer
>>93534
A few years back there were plans to demolish Huddersfield Royal Infirmary and replace it with a smaller hospital without an A&E service; the Clinical Commissioning Group didn't feel it was necessary to have A&E departments in both Huddersfield and Halifax due to their proximity and population sizes. The plans were eventually shelved and the local MPs played a key role in that.

Contrast that with Hartlepool where Paul Williams was on the Clinical Commissioning Group that recommended the closure of their intensive care unit and the Labour MP at the time, Iain Wright, was fully on board with it. The trouble with looking at things through the lens of national politics is that you can miss what happens at a localised level.
>> No. 93541 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 4:27 pm
93541 spacer
>>93533

He's daft, but he's sort of done the tactically correct thing by accident. For the Tories, neglecting ex-industrial northern towns was a bit of a no-brainer, because there's no point wasting money on a constituency that you're never going to win. Now that the Red Wall is turning blue, they're chucking money about to try to win and keep seats that previously weren't in play.
>> No. 93548 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 7:35 pm
93548 spacer
>>93527
If nobody else is going to say it, I think this image is hilarious and I commend you for making it.
>> No. 93549 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 8:40 pm
93549 spacer
>The reason the Labour reshuffle isn’t happening is because the shadow ministers Keir Starmer’s team are trying to demote are refusing to move, and are betting the house on the fact Starmer no longer has any political authority.

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1391437993748148229
>> No. 93550 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 9:19 pm
93550 spacer
>>93549
The man lost one single by-election and he's gone to absolute shit. I'm trying not to do this thing where I draw constant comparisons to Corbyn's tenure, but I don't remember him having this weird of a reaction even when he couldn't so much as pull up a turnip without someone from the PLP calling him a bastard and a traitor who ought to be focusing on the parsnips. Quite reasonably you might not have liked the level he was on, but he did mostly remain on that level. Starmer's bottomed out after a single seat went away and for reasons that are clear for everyone to see; we've got Emperor Commodus without the physique or the ability to keep a clear head. Or the political power.

Having said all that, I really don't want another leadership contest. Burnham's not going to run, Jarvis is too busy being the Yorkshire Batman or whatever the fuck and every other sod who might have a go is an idiot or already ran in the past five years, and was an idiot. As importantly as that they take ages and create a whole new whirlwind of shit. Rayner could run, but I don't really want her as leader, plus it looks like sour grapes from being demoted or sacked or whatever the line is on her right now. Surely, inspite of recent events, Starmer has the brains to see what mistakes have been made and the actions that must be taken to resolve them? At least in part?
>> No. 93551 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:01 pm
93551 spacer
>>93550
>Surely, inspite of recent events, Starmer has the brains to see what mistakes have been made and the actions that must be taken to resolve them? At least in part?

He's been busy consulting with his inner sanctum of advisers. I've read that he's bringing in more New Labour people to join Mandelson.
>> No. 93552 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:04 pm
93552 spacer
Reckon we can get "Punished" Dave Miliband to return and save us?
>> No. 93553 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:17 pm
93553 spacer
Labour's defunct as a party or so I've been told by my Old Labour father. His reasoning is that, back in the old days, Labour introduced a lot of the Health and Safety stuff, improved the conditions for the working man so much so as to render the party now obsolete.
I don't fully agree with him, I still think there are a lot of issues facing working people that need to be addressed and a good Labour party is needed to be the vanguard against complete tyranny of the bossmen but it's hard not to draw comparisons between my father's analysis and third-wave feminism certainly.
>> No. 93554 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 10:33 pm
93554 spacer
>>93551
I've heard similar things. Of course I have, I assume we're both just plebs watching the same car crash on the same media sources. Maybe we can get Brian Cox back on the keyboard while we're at it?

>>93553
No disrespect to your father, but if this is what he thinks as good as it gets looks like he might be the most depressed bloke this side of Helsinki. Him and millions of others anyway.
>> No. 93557 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 11:36 pm
93557 spacer
>>93550
>The man lost one single by-election and he's gone to absolute shit

He's outfoxed you there by having gone to absolute shit even before the by-election.

>Having said all that, I really don't want another leadership contest

I reckon Starmer could bluff on his, if people don't do as he says then just threaten to call a leadership election at which point the PLP will realise they have no alternative. Starmer isn't wanted in the building but he's smeared both himself and the seat in shit so nobody wants to remove him. Not with his gut biome anyway.
>> No. 93558 Anonymous
9th May 2021
Sunday 11:56 pm
93558 spacer

we are not the party of the unemployed.png
935589355893558
Rachel fucking Reeves, Rachel fucking Reeves, Rachel fucking Reeves.

I am one Harold MacMillan biography away from embracing Britain's drift towards a Japan style monopoly on politics where internal factions of the ruling party matter more than the irrelevant opposition parties. (Go Heisei Research Council, go!)
>> No. 93559 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 12:01 am
93559 spacer
Meanwhile, all "gains" in terms of reduced CO2 from the early lockdown have been more than ruined by record CO2 increases. Lets argue more about party politic infighting.
>> No. 93561 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 12:12 am
93561 spacer
>Shadow Secretary of State for Child Poverty: Wes Streeting
Have they checked weather he's pro or anti? Sodding Reeves as Chancellor too, she's practically a Reaganite. Christ, I'm going to bed.

>>93557
Did he actually sack Rayner though, that's what I want to know? I'm so confused.
>> No. 93563 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 12:31 am
93563 spacer
>>93558
Aside from having said some seemingly Pritipatelian things, is there anything else that's wrong with her? I saw her on TV once and thought she came across really well. But then I also thought that about Mike Pence in America and I wouldn't vote for him. Nevertheless, it has been shown that you can say whatever the bloody fuck you want and nobody's listening, so is there any other reason to despise her?
>> No. 93570 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:57 am
93570 spacer
>>93563
So immediately my fear is that at best she's willing to say anything and has no convictions, or at worst she actually thinks those Pritipatelian things and we're going to repeat the sins of the past. Those sins being becoming indistinguishable from the Conservative Party on too many issues as Labour did during the Great Recession. Either way it seems that if you want to see any kind of overhaul to how the economic systems of this country operate you're flat out of luck with Reeves as Chancellor, assuming we ever get that far. I don't think having someone who won't fundementally disagree with the Conservatives on the economy is a good idea when it comes to winning votes either. Not because I like arguing, but because we just saw the consequences of not having a bold policy proposal or a strong communicator in Hartlepool, you end up getting blamed for ten years of Tory Party austerity and by all appearances are too frightened of the voters to correct them. Can we really see Reeves standing at a lecturn bellowing out the misdeeds of the Conservatives and the promises of Starmer's Labour? And as Shadow Chancellor she's going to be the prism by which all other policies have to go through.
>> No. 93571 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 11:15 am
93571 spacer
>>93570
It's like Corbynism never happened. Just fucking vote Green. Bring the Labour Party down, it's unsalvagable and needs to die.
>> No. 93573 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 11:32 am
93573 spacer
>>93571
Err... no. I'm not sure your distant second in Bristol West is quite the spark that starts the revolution you think it is, pal.
>> No. 93575 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 11:52 am
93575 spacer

BristolWest.png
935759357593575
>>93573
u wot m8?
>> No. 93577 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 12:22 pm
93577 spacer
>>93575
I was talking about parlimentary results.
>> No. 93578 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 12:53 pm
93578 spacer
>>93577
So am I.
>> No. 93579 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 1:21 pm
93579 spacer
>>93578
Then where's you MP for Bristol West?
>> No. 93580 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 2:13 pm
93580 spacer
>>93570
To assume the Conservatives will nick Tory economic policy seems too optimistic these days. That they're appointing useless hasbeen cunts like Mandelson to advise them and promoting people like Reeves and Streeting suggests that the 2025 election might well expose us all to the farce of Labour promising a more right-wing budget than the government because mondeo man doesn't want a populist building train lines in search of a legacy, he wants a dial up modem and John Major's 1998-9 spending plans.
>> No. 93582 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 2:52 pm
93582 spacer
>>93579
Judging by Labour's distant second in Bristol West this year, there will be one at the next general election.
>> No. 93583 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 3:19 pm
93583 spacer
>>93582
Well fingers crossed your two MPs will be backing up a Labour majority by then.
>> No. 93584 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 3:23 pm
93584 spacer
>>93583
Not if Rachel 'tougher than the Tories on benefits' Reeves is still Chancellor, what the fuck would be the point?
>> No. 93586 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 3:57 pm
93586 spacer

tory-logo_600x600.jpg
935869358693586
>>93584
Blue-Green coalition deal ahoy:
1. Deficit expansion, to be funded by spending increases - not tax cuts.
2. Build lots and lots of houses, at least some of which are to be affordable at the time the foundation is laid.
3. Declare a climate "crisis" (compromised down from an "emergency", as the Tories have far more experience with crises.)
4. Plant a billion trees, especially in places where they'll block out the sunlight from the conservatories of Labour MPs.
5. A commission on a new voting system which will go nowhere, but as a sop to the greens, will be done entirely electronically rather than wasting paper like the Jenkins report.
6. Keep the ban on selling pure petrol cars so that a future government will take the hit for delaying it.
7. Expand the railway network massively, create British Rail Plc as a for-profit state owned enterprise to run it.
8. Bring back the Department of the Environment and fold local government back into it.
9. Classify the Labour Party as a proscribed organisation due to its extremist economic views.
10. Tories to bring back the tree logo for the duration of the coalition.
>> No. 93591 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 7:51 pm
93591 spacer
>As a party, we must learn from both our challenges and successes to turn this situation around, so that people feel we speak for them again, and trust us with their votes. That is the lesson from places like Wales, where the first minister, Mark Drakeford, set out policies that will transform people’s lives – like a pay rise for care workers and a guarantee of work, education or training for all under-25s. That is the lesson from Greater Manchester, where Andy Burnham showed the difference that Labour makes in power: he connected with people and showed that he was on their side.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/10/voters-labour-angela-rayner

That's a very thinly veiled dig about leadership from the tattooed tart.
>> No. 93593 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 8:13 pm
93593 spacer
>>93591

Given that she was running the election campaign, it's a bit of a self-own.
>> No. 93594 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 8:17 pm
93594 spacer
>>93591
Who writes her stuff? It seems so disconnected from the words she says out loud.
>> No. 93595 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 8:22 pm
93595 spacer
>>93593
I read somewhere that she was pretty much set up to fail and despite the title didn't actually have much say.
>> No. 93596 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 8:36 pm
93596 spacer
>>93594
>It seems so disconnected from the words she says out loud.
That's normal for us Brummies.

>>93593
>Given that she was running the election campaign, it's a bit of a self-own.
In theory yes, but how many decisions was she allowed to make for herself.
>> No. 93597 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 9:23 pm
93597 spacer

1620676567974.png
935979359793597
Well oh well oh well...
>> No. 93598 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 9:27 pm
93598 spacer
I'm interested in hearing more about Rachel Reeves's views on driving your scrote mother into prostitution so she can buy you beans on toast with my filthy jizz-stained money that I wiped my cock on. On the one hand, I'm a big fan of the social safety net. I've read Atlas Shrugged and it was shit. I read it while I was unemployed, possibly, and it took months because it's so shit. So without rich parents, I myself would have needed dole money to stave off death. But on the other hand, I now have two friends who claim at least some bennies from the desiccated and coppery teat of the government. Good for them. But they also get extra money due to mental health problems. What the shitting hell is that about? Just give them the regular benefits that everyone else gets; don't declare that some scroungers are more deserving than others. Especially when of the two people I know in this situation, one of them doesn't deserve additional help.

If Rachel Reeves wants to turn off the taps on the people at the very bottom of society, then fuck that bitch. If she wants to give everyone regular benefits but you don't get a special depression bonus for being one of the good ones, I can imagine that might actually win some votes. Or alternatively, depressed people with jobs could get the bonus too.
>> No. 93599 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 9:58 pm
93599 spacer
>>93597
That's a very suspect looking image. What's the source and is there a version without the zoom? For what it's worth I'd like to say that I would quite like to see a boycott of Israeli products and services given what's currently happening in the country.
>> No. 93601 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:03 pm
93601 spacer

camden-palestine-solidarity-25-data.jpg
936019360193601
>>93599
https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/general-election-candidates-urged-to-support-sanctions-against-israel-3491986
Has a different version of it without the zoom, revealing Natalie Bennett.
>> No. 93602 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:12 pm
93602 spacer

bing.png
936029360293602
>>93599
>Camden Palestine Solidarity Campaign public meeting at St Pancras Community Centre on 25.03.15. Speaker Keir Starmer. Picture: Polly Hancock - Credit: Archant
https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/general-election-candidates-urged-to-support-sanctions-against-israel-3491986
What I find particularly interesting is that in my search for the original, I discovered bing has working facial recognition.
>> No. 93603 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:28 pm
93603 spacer
>>93602
Welcome to 2012.
>> No. 93604 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:36 pm
93604 spacer
God, I wish Labour would stop actually saying "working class". Barely any cunts call themselves that these days, even if it's true.

>>93601>>93602
Can you even slate this kind of thing? Natalie Bennett is sat right next to him and she's normal and we've had four days of state violence against Arabs in Israel, still on-going, plus those fascist riots the other week. It's not like he's godfather to one of Mahmoud Abbas' kids. I'm sure someone will, but Israel's gone apeshit lately so is anyone even writing stories on this right now?
>> No. 93605 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 10:39 pm
93605 spacer
>>93604

It's the hypocrisy that's the thing but no I don't think less of him for it and I didn't think less of Corbyn for it either. Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism.
>> No. 93607 Anonymous
10th May 2021
Monday 11:49 pm
93607 spacer
>>93604
The only time the al-Jazeera news channel has behaved in a way that I did not consider to be flawlessly impartial, they had a documentary about the pro-Israel influence on American media, and how incredibly suspect it is that American politicians are so unquestioningly pro-Israel. The whole thing was factually true, as far as I could tell, but it felt like a lunatic's YouTube video simply because it blamed the Jews for absolutely everything.
>> No. 93608 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 12:02 am
93608 spacer
>>93607
There's one on British politics as well, it's called The Lobby. Was still on youtube last time I checked. It's quite eye opening.
>> No. 93609 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 12:32 am
93609 spacer
>>93586
This is something people seem to forget with a declining Labour. Just as when the Lib Dems rose so too would any other parties rise mean another decade at minimum of Tory government and if they stuck around a National Government.

>>93601
Looking at this image physically pains me because you can just tell it's 7pm in some drafty old building where everyone just wants to go home. I bet nobody left being more educated than before or changed their opinion on something. A group of students found out about the meeting and proceeded to sit at the back nattering to each other while the speakers were talking. I've attended too many think tank talks for my own good.

>>93604
>Natalie Bennett is sat right next to him and she's normal

On what planet is she normal? It wouldn't surprise me if she has Mr Blobby in her polycule.
>> No. 93610 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 1:23 am
93610 spacer
>>93607

The Israeli state and zionists are the ones manipulating the media and foreign governments, not "the jews", and conflating Israel with the Hebrew people is a part of their playbook. The fact that it's clearly harmful to the reputation and safety of the Hebrew people just exposes how cynical and dangerous zionism is.
>> No. 93611 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 3:37 am
93611 spacer
>>93610

The whole thing is incredibly cynical and unspeakably evil. Just the fact that it's so easy to see through, but you can't say anything because then you're an anti-semite too, and then you can't even reference "them" without it being a dogwhistle and evidence of your latent Nazi tendencies. I can't think of another example of such blatant misdirection working so perfectly.
>> No. 93612 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 7:42 pm
93612 spacer

E1GgjW5WYAACXDY.jpg
936129361293612
Starmer now has a net approval rating of -48. Was it ever that low for Corbyn?
>> No. 93614 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 8:19 pm
93614 spacer

Favourability tracker Mar 2019-01.png
936149361493614
>>93612
Corbyn's worst was -56 if I remember correctly, though the oldest graph I can find is -53.
That said, it would be very wishful thinking to think this is as low as Starmer can go.
>> No. 93615 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 9:44 pm
93615 spacer
>>93609
>This is something people seem to forget with a declining Labour. Just as when the Lib Dems rose so too would any other parties rise mean another decade at minimum of Tory government and if they stuck around a National Government.
With the announced voter suppression and removal of a fixed-term it seems as though the Tories are worried that alone isn't enough.
>> No. 93616 Anonymous
11th May 2021
Tuesday 11:07 pm
93616 spacer
>>93615
Honestly I respect the Tories on this. When they're miles ahead of Labour and certain to win the next election, they don't start handwringing and going "Ohh, what if we look too powerful? Ohh, what about democratic principles?" like Labour does. They think: Right, how can we use this to make sure that we'll become this powerful again in the future? How can we use this to screw our opponents over for the long term?

Where Labour spends political capital in office, the Conservatives invest it into staying there. From Thatcher buying the Conservatives a new class of voters using public assets while breaking the spine of the labour movement by regulating it into pointlessness to Shirley Porter having the homeless bused out of marginal wards while selling council houses to would-be Tory voters in order to maintain control of Westminster City Council, to Cameron banning charities from pointing out the government's policies are hurting the poor to Boris doing voter registration and the cynical repeal of the (honestly pretty shit) fixed terms parliament act just in case they feel like an early election, the Tories don't mess around. Being born to rule isn't enough for them, they want to make sure.
>> No. 93617 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 10:04 am
93617 spacer

E1GU4JwX0AAFz95.jpg
936179361793617
>>93616

Yes, you can make pretty much anything sound aspirational if you frame it right, even despotism.
>> No. 93618 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 11:03 am
93618 spacer
>>93616

That sort of thing is harmful to the functioning of government in the long term as it empowers incompetent parties to stay in power permanently. Well, that's what happens when a country doesn't have a constitution and the party in charge doesn't respect rule of law.
>> No. 93619 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 11:08 am
93619 spacer
>>93615
>voter suppression

You mean bringing us in line with every single other democracy in the world?
>> No. 93620 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 11:58 am
93620 spacer
>>93619

No, I mean voter suppression.
>> No. 93621 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 11:58 am
93621 spacer
>>93619
You wouldn't be telling lies on the internet, would you?
>> No. 93622 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 1:37 pm
93622 spacer
Calling voter ID 'suppression' is the most teenladdy thing I've read since five minutes ago.
>> No. 93623 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 1:44 pm
93623 spacer
>>93622
Can you explain why?
>> No. 93624 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 1:44 pm
93624 spacer
>>93622
Give we have no fraud, we have never needed them before and there is already a system in place to make sure everyone gets one vote and one vote only what other reason is there?
>> No. 93625 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 1:48 pm
93625 spacer
>>93623
Pretty much every other democracy on the planet uses it, including our own in Northern Ireland. The Electoral Commission recommends it. The general public support it. ID to be made freely available. ID already extremely widespread. Not a significant hindrance in any capacity. A reasonable safeguard against the risk of personation. Nobody would cite the use of voter ID in other countries like Norway or the Netherlands as evidence of a broken democracy. Nobody says a thing about rescinding it in its use within our own country.

For the record I'm against it in principle, but the reaction is fucking laughable, and symptomatic of the childish kneejerk reaction to it being from the Tories and not my team.
>> No. 93626 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 1:58 pm
93626 spacer
>>93625
>ID to be made freely available
No it isn't, in fact Boris has voted against it 12 times.

>ID already extremely widespread.
No it isn't.

>Not a significant hindrance in any capacity.
Estimates are of 2 million people who'll be unable to vote.
>> No. 93627 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 2:11 pm
93627 spacer
>>93626
Yes it is, it's part of the Queens Speech yesterday.

Yes it is, 93+% of the population has some form of acceptable ID currently. This obviously does not include those who would apply for and receive the new free one. Current pilots, from non-hevaily advertised local schemes, have recorded between 0.03 and 0.7% rejection rate. This is not disenfranchisement, it's 'come back later'. I turned away someone on Thursday because they couldn't provide me with enough information to tell me where they lived. It is not unreasonable to have to show you are who you say you are - it's a normal pert of civic life by and large, elections are an unusual exception.

No, they would be perfectly able to vote if they bothered getting an ID. This is not significant, any more than not having someone come to your house to pick up your ballot is, and expecting people to get off their arsed and walk to a polling station.

Only Brits could look on something like this and be so up our own arse about it. British exceptional ism indeed. We're a nation of whiny children.
>> No. 93628 Anonymous
12th May 2021
Wednesday 2:17 pm
93628 spacer
>>93627

It's absolutely significant, turning around and saying "they&