|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 10, 2020 8:00:55 GMT
He says "its not working and needs to be reformed" I can only assume that means by not having a 22:00 curfew anymore unless he wants to add extra caveats? You say his strategy is clear, I say to a lot of people it's just procrastination and will do him no favours long term....... Procrastination is the perfect strategy for folk in opposition. On the basis the Governments lose elections, oppositions don’t win them, your main job is to do as much as you can to help the Government lose. Which means keeping schtum about anything that might make you look anything other than awesome (in other words keeping schtum period). And Starmer is pretty darn good at saying not very much. Remember Tony Blair’s theme from 1997 - things can only get better. In politics vacuousness can be a winner. Particularly if your opponents keep digging themselves into holes - as Major’s mob did back in the day which is something this current Government is also doing. Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Oct 10, 2020 8:13:38 GMT
Procrastination is the perfect strategy for folk in opposition. On the basis the Governments lose elections, oppositions don’t win them, your main job is to do as much as you can to help the Government lose. Which means keeping schtum about anything that might make you look anything other than awesome (in other words keeping schtum period). And Starmer is pretty darn good at saying not very much. Remember Tony Blair’s theme from 1997 - things can only get better. In politics vacuousness can be a winner. Particularly if your opponents keep digging themselves into holes - as Major’s mob did back in the day which is something this current Government is also doing. Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM. Agree with the first part of this, that's essentially what you say in opposition. However I think the change in the polls is more to do with the government's unpopularity
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 10, 2020 8:21:47 GMT
Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM. Agree with the first part of this, that's essentially what you say in opposition. However I think the change in the polls is more to do with the government's unpopularity It'll be lots of things, lord. We're in the middle of a national crisis (although usually electorates rally round behind the govt at these times, so that's a sign of the way Bluffer's lot have been performing). The government is not handling it well. Bluffer has been seen through to a large extent. Starmer is not Corbyn. His performances (and coverage of them) at PMQs have been more impressive than Bluffer's. He is not seen as left-wing as Corbyn so by default neither is his party. He doesn't have any of the baggage that it was easy for right-wing papers to bash Corbyn with. All of these, and more, will be contributing to these poll results.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Oct 10, 2020 8:24:02 GMT
Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM. Agree with the first part of this, that's essentially what you say in opposition. However I think the change in the polls is more to do with the government's unpopularity Hardly rocket science is it, it's the way it works always has the only surprise is how easily Labour were trounced in December considering how useless the Tories were, probably down to the rejection of Corbyn and his socialist comrades that have infested the Party.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 10, 2020 9:20:16 GMT
Agree with the first part of this, that's essentially what you say in opposition. However I think the change in the polls is more to do with the government's unpopularity It'll be lots of things, lord. We're in the middle of a national crisis (although usually electorates rally round behind the govt at these times, so that's a sign of the way Bluffer's lot have been performing). The government is not handling it well. Bluffer has been seen through to a large extent. Starmer is not Corbyn. His performances (and coverage of them) at PMQs have been more impressive than Bluffer's. He is not seen as left-wing as Corbyn so by default neither is his party. He doesn't have any of the baggage that it was easy for right-wing papers to bash Corbyn with. All of these, and more, will be contributing to these poll results. Starmer, from what I’ve seen, is performing better in polls than his party. That is his biggest challenge. Can he convince folks that voted Tory that his party is up to the challenge. Going back to Blair he made two big decisions to address possible concerns in the electorate he needed to convince (ie folk who had voted Tory). First was abandoning clause 4, the second was to tie spending in line with current Tory plans. The first was to reassure people concerned about how “left” his part would be, the second about their fiscal responsibility. Blair, in other words, wasn’t relying entirely on the incompetence of the Tory government. I wonder if Starmer has any similar plans up his sleeve.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2020 12:39:03 GMT
It'll be lots of things, lord. We're in the middle of a national crisis (although usually electorates rally round behind the govt at these times, so that's a sign of the way Bluffer's lot have been performing). The government is not handling it well. Bluffer has been seen through to a large extent. Starmer is not Corbyn. His performances (and coverage of them) at PMQs have been more impressive than Bluffer's. He is not seen as left-wing as Corbyn so by default neither is his party. He doesn't have any of the baggage that it was easy for right-wing papers to bash Corbyn with. All of these, and more, will be contributing to these poll results. Starmer, from what I’ve seen, is performing better in polls than his party. That is his biggest challenge. Can he convince folks that voted Tory that his party is up to the challenge. Going back to Blair he made two big decisions to address possible concerns in the electorate he needed to convince (ie folk who had voted Tory). First was abandoning clause 4, the second was to tie spending in line with current Tory plans. The first was to reassure people concerned about how “left” his part would be, the second about their fiscal responsibility. Blair, in other words, wasn’t relying entirely on the incompetence of the Tory government. I wonder if Starmer has any similar plans up his sleeve. If you look at the polls overall, it shows pretty much that the Tories have remained around the 40% mark, and that Labour have essentially picked up the Lib Dem tactical voters from the last election. Starmer can’t win an election without the voters on the left or by making traction in Scotland as it stands, unless he encourages some of the millions currently disenfranchised to come out and vote. But I don’t see that somehow. Starmers best chance is if the Murdoch and Tory press get behind him, which is a real possibility as someone part of the establishment who won’t rock the neoliberal boat too much. He’s getting a complete free ride at the moment whereas Corbyn was hammered from day one.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Oct 10, 2020 14:05:26 GMT
Starmer, from what I’ve seen, is performing better in polls than his party. That is his biggest challenge. Can he convince folks that voted Tory that his party is up to the challenge. Going back to Blair he made two big decisions to address possible concerns in the electorate he needed to convince (ie folk who had voted Tory). First was abandoning clause 4, the second was to tie spending in line with current Tory plans. The first was to reassure people concerned about how “left” his part would be, the second about their fiscal responsibility. Blair, in other words, wasn’t relying entirely on the incompetence of the Tory government. I wonder if Starmer has any similar plans up his sleeve. If you look at the polls overall, it shows pretty much that the Tories have remained around the 40% mark, and that Labour have essentially picked up the Lib Dem tactical voters from the last election. Starmer can’t win an election without the voters on the left or by making traction in Scotland as it stands, unless he encourages some of the millions currently disenfranchised to come out and vote. But I don’t see that somehow. Starmers best chance is if the Murdoch and Tory press get behind him, which is a real possibility as someone part of the establishment who won’t rock the neoliberal boat too much. He’s getting a complete free ride at the moment whereas Corbyn was hammered from day one. Seems like Murdoch et al are keeping theircpoweder dry. Thet are quite happy with the direction of Labour. If Labour makes any noises unfavourable to them, tax avoidance/ media ownership etc then I fully expect the issue of immigration to take centre stage again and Mr Free Movement to come under all sorts of pressure. It'll be dinghies at dawn for weeks on end.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 13:14:48 GMT
Labour peer Lord West discussing immigration over the weekend on Radio 4:
"we need to deal with them in a concentrated place, whether it's a camp or whatever..."
I wonder what name we could give to these camps?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 12, 2020 13:21:58 GMT
Labour peer Lord West discussing immigration over the weekend on Radio 4: "we need to deal with them in a concentrated place, whether it's a camp or whatever..." I wonder what name we could give to these camps? Good fucking God.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 14:45:04 GMT
The first challenge to Starmer's "constructive opposition" strategy?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 16:02:43 GMT
I am a huge supporter of Sir Keir, his particular brand of inoffensive centrism got me interested in politics. And whilst I admire his refusal to give an opinion on any given subject and abstention tactics in parliament, the fact that he's not 20 points ahead in the polls leads me to believe it's time for a new leader. It's pains me to say it but he must go......
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Oct 12, 2020 18:02:33 GMT
I am a huge admirer of Sir Keir, his particular brand of inoffensive centrism got me interested in politics. And whilst I admire his refusal to give an opinion on any given subject and abstention tactics in parliament, the fact that he's not 20 points ahead in the polls leads me to believe it's time for a new leader. It's pains me to say it but he must go......
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 13, 2020 9:06:28 GMT
I wonder if Andy Burnham is finished with Westminster politics?
Would certainly add political weight to the Labour front bench and be a big draw for the traditionally Labour north of the country, and probably help to attract back those who deserted to the Tories under Corbyn's Labour leadership.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 13, 2020 12:19:18 GMT
I think one of the problems starmer will face is the more people see his shadow cabinet and MPs the more it will come across that they are there as quota fillers rather than there because of ability
Watching the daily politics this afternoon There was a stupid bint representing labour saying we should of followed they way New Zealand got to zero coronavirus with much harsher restrictions
So she was asked you would of advocated shutting borders since March She wasn’t even aware this is what they had done then when asked again said well no we should test everyone coming in They truly have no clue
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 13, 2020 12:28:23 GMT
I think one of the problems starmer will face is the more people see his shadow cabinet and MPs the more it will come across that they are there as quota fillers rather than there because of ability Watching the daily politics this afternoon There was a stupid bint representing labour saying we should of followed they way New Zealand got to zero coronavirus with much harsher restrictions So she was asked you would of advocated shutting borders since March She wasn’t even aware this is what they had done then when asked again said well no we should test everyone coming in They truly have no clue Any less of a clue than the lot you voted for? Actually, I agree that he needs more impressive performers in the shadow cabinet. It will take a fair few decent shadow cabinet performers to persuade the electorate that the entirety of the opposition is suitable for government. That's why I mentioned Andy Burnham - he's seen as soft left, probably not especially threatening to the majority of right-wing England and would bring a lot of the north back with him if he were to rejoin. Manchester presumably has a five yearly mayoral cycle? Which would mean he'd become available in 2022. All hypothetical of course, he may be perfectly content outside of the Westminster bubble...
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 13, 2020 12:35:51 GMT
Procrastination is the perfect strategy for folk in opposition. On the basis the Governments lose elections, oppositions don’t win them, your main job is to do as much as you can to help the Government lose. Which means keeping schtum about anything that might make you look anything other than awesome (in other words keeping schtum period). And Starmer is pretty darn good at saying not very much. Remember Tony Blair’s theme from 1997 - things can only get better. In politics vacuousness can be a winner. Particularly if your opponents keep digging themselves into holes - as Major’s mob did back in the day which is something this current Government is also doing. Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM. He has not turned it around. Covid has done it for him. As soon as covid goes his fence sitting may back fire
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 13, 2020 13:56:20 GMT
Every opposition does it. I can remember back in 2009, Osborne and Cameron were constantly being pressed to deliver their alternative policies and consistently refused to do so until a few months before the election. I'm sure other oppositions have acted in just the same way. In the meantime, allow an inept government to continue to destroy itself with its own incompetence. Makes sense politically. Regardless of whether some folk on here want to acknowledge it, tacitly or otherwise, Starmer is clearly doing a good job as leader of the opposition, whose primary job is to provide an alternative government in the eyes of the electorate. So far, he's turned a 26% deficit into a tie, and currently rates higher than the incumbent in terms of preference for PM. He has not turned it around. Covid has done it for him. As soon as covid goes his fence sitting may back fire We're in the middle of a national crisis (although usually electorates rally round behind the govt at these times, so that's a sign of the way Bluffer's lot have been performing). The government is not handling it well. Bluffer has been seen through to a large extent. Starmer is not Corbyn. His performances (and coverage of them) at PMQs have been more impressive than Bluffer's. He is not seen as left-wing as Corbyn so by default neither is his party. He doesn't have any of the baggage that it was easy for right-wing papers to bash Corbyn with. All of these, and more, will be contributing to these poll results. As I said to lordb, it'll be lots of things, see above. Usually, national crises see the electorate rally around the government, as it did re Bluffer's popularity when he got sick - obviously a sympathy vote, but there you have it. But anyone who argues that going from 26% behind in your first opinion poll after taking over to parity in six months isn't a sign that you've turned the party round in the eyes of the electorate to make it more electable is indulging in wishful thinking. Whether that translates at the next election, we'll have to wait and see. Lots will happen in the next four years, who knows who will be leading the Tory Party by then? Anyway, surely Covid is never going to go? It's not real in the first place, so why would "they" decide to allow us all to get back to normal when it's such an effective tool to march us all (more or less willingly) into the totalitarian dystopian future you and Starkiller have been going on about for months?
|
|
|
Post by foster on Oct 14, 2020 15:38:43 GMT
He has not turned it around. Covid has done it for him. As soon as covid goes his fence sitting may back fire We're in the middle of a national crisis (although usually electorates rally round behind the govt at these times, so that's a sign of the way Bluffer's lot have been performing). The government is not handling it well. Bluffer has been seen through to a large extent. Starmer is not Corbyn. His performances (and coverage of them) at PMQs have been more impressive than Bluffer's. He is not seen as left-wing as Corbyn so by default neither is his party. He doesn't have any of the baggage that it was easy for right-wing papers to bash Corbyn with. All of these, and more, will be contributing to these poll results. As I said to lordb, it'll be lots of things, see above. Usually, national crises see the electorate rally around the government, as it did re Bluffer's popularity when he got sick - obviously a sympathy vote, but there you have it. But anyone who argues that going from 26% behind in your first opinion poll after taking over to parity in six months isn't a sign that you've turned the party round in the eyes of the electorate to make it more electable is indulging in wishful thinking. Whether that translates at the next election, we'll have to wait and see. Lots will happen in the next four years, who knows who will be leading the Tory Party by then? Anyway, surely Covid is never going to go? It's not real in the first place, so why would "they" decide to allow us all to get back to normal when it's such an effective tool to march us all (more or less willingly) into the totalitarian dystopian future you and Starkiller have been going on about for months? Weren't most Stokies labour voters before all this brexit bollocks came around? ... And wasn't the main reason for voting Tories in to get the Brexit process started? In which case, considering Brexit is a foregone conclusion, and that Boris and chums are an absolute embarrassment, and that Corbyn and Co are gone (no more of these jew hater excuses), wouldn't it be logical that the previously loyal Labour voters would return to their roots. Seems obvious to me.
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Oct 14, 2020 17:48:25 GMT
As I said to lordb, it'll be lots of things, see above. Usually, national crises see the electorate rally around the government, as it did re Bluffer's popularity when he got sick - obviously a sympathy vote, but there you have it. But anyone who argues that going from 26% behind in your first opinion poll after taking over to parity in six months isn't a sign that you've turned the party round in the eyes of the electorate to make it more electable is indulging in wishful thinking. Whether that translates at the next election, we'll have to wait and see. Lots will happen in the next four years, who knows who will be leading the Tory Party by then? Anyway, surely Covid is never going to go? It's not real in the first place, so why would "they" decide to allow us all to get back to normal when it's such an effective tool to march us all (more or less willingly) into the totalitarian dystopian future you and Starkiller have been going on about for months? Weren't most Stokies labour voters before all this brexit bollocks came around? ... And wasn't the main reason for voting Tories in to get the Brexit process started? In which case, considering Brexit is a foregone conclusion, and that Boris and chums are an absolute embarrassment, and that Corbyn and Co are gone (no more of these jew hater excuses), wouldn't it be logical that the previously loyal Labour voters would return to their roots. Seems obvious to me. I think actually if you look at the numbers, you see the decline of Labour in Stoke starting quite a bit before Brexit. Since the early days of Blair really. It was a steady downward decline which Corbyn failed to arrest, but was by no means the instigator of.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 15, 2020 12:25:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Oct 15, 2020 12:33:17 GMT
If nothing else its cleansing his shadow cabinet of any traces of integrity over loyalty. Probably cleansing a few members too, and the NEC elections are on.
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Oct 15, 2020 12:34:32 GMT
Weren't most Stokies labour voters before all this brexit bollocks came around? ... And wasn't the main reason for voting Tories in to get the Brexit process started? In which case, considering Brexit is a foregone conclusion, and that Boris and chums are an absolute embarrassment, and that Corbyn and Co are gone (no more of these jew hater excuses), wouldn't it be logical that the previously loyal Labour voters would return to their roots. Seems obvious to me. I think actually if you look at the numbers, you see the decline of Labour in Stoke starting quite a bit before Brexit. Since the early days of Blair really. It was a steady downward decline which Corbyn failed to arrest, but was by no means the instigator of. I believe 2017 was the only year the "red wall" vote went up this side of the millenium.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 13:25:42 GMT
I think actually if you look at the numbers, you see the decline of Labour in Stoke starting quite a bit before Brexit. Since the early days of Blair really. It was a steady downward decline which Corbyn failed to arrest, but was by no means the instigator of. I believe 2017 was the only year the "red wall" vote went up this side of the millenium. It's almost like Brexit and a vicious campaign from the MSM and more shockingly his own PLP did for Corbyn rather than his original manifesto..........
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 13:35:29 GMT
Agree. Well done Dan Carden.....
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Oct 15, 2020 13:35:57 GMT
I believe 2017 was the only year the "red wall" vote went up this side of the millenium. It's almost like Brexit and a vicious campaign from the MSM and more shockingly his own PLP did for Corbyn rather than his original manifesto.......... Agreed. Remain disappointment and the peoples vote campaign was used by many who wanted to sink the left. It worked. The everyday PVers ended up with Tory Brexit and so much dissonance they'd rather continue to blame Corbyn than admit they were used.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 13:42:15 GMT
It's almost like Brexit and a vicious campaign from the MSM and more shockingly his own PLP did for Corbyn rather than his original manifesto.......... Agreed. Remain disappointment and the peoples vote campaign was used by many who wanted to sink the left. It worked. The everyday PVers ended up with Tory Brexit and so much dissonance they'd rather continue to blame Corbyn than admit they were used. Correct. People talk about "winners and losers" after the election like it's a match between two football teams, but apart from the elite that continue to hoard wealth even during a global pandemic we're all losers with this clown in charge......
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 15, 2020 15:18:19 GMT
I believe 2017 was the only year the "red wall" vote went up this side of the millenium. It's almost like Brexit and a vicious campaign from the MSM and more shockingly his own PLP did for Corbyn rather than his original manifesto.......... So did Labour get Brexit wrong or did the electorate?
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Oct 15, 2020 15:53:31 GMT
It's almost like Brexit and a vicious campaign from the MSM and more shockingly his own PLP did for Corbyn rather than his original manifesto.......... So did Labour get Brexit wrong or did the electorate? Nobody knows yet if Brexit is right or wrong until the trade deal emerges eventually? Economists will pore over the deal and give a pretty good assessment of its value or non value to Joe Public? Whether Joe Public is interested is another matter?!If Ole gets sacked by Man U how many fans will be chewing over the consequences a few months afterwards? Hardly any?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 15, 2020 16:11:54 GMT
So did Labour get Brexit wrong or did the electorate? Nobody knows yet if Brexit is right or wrong until the trade deal emerges eventually? Economists will pore over the deal and give a pretty good assessment of its value or non value to Joe Public? Whether Joe Public is interested is another matter?!If Ole gets sacked by Man U how many fans will be chewing over the consequences a few months afterwards? Hardly any? No one will ever know if Brexit is " right or wrong"....too many variables, perspectives, angles, unknowns if we stayed in / leave....no one can predict the future or what a particular route will involve compared to a different one. The conovirus could not be predicted. Simply the Labour party policy on Brexit did not reflect grassroots opinion.....it seems that " they " got it wrong.....the electorate wanted a party that stood for what they believed....Labour didn't.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Oct 15, 2020 16:29:00 GMT
Nobody knows yet if Brexit is right or wrong until the trade deal emerges eventually? Economists will pore over the deal and give a pretty good assessment of its value or non value to Joe Public? Whether Joe Public is interested is another matter?!If Ole gets sacked by Man U how many fans will be chewing over the consequences a few months afterwards? Hardly any? No one will ever know if Brexit is " right or wrong"....too many variables, perspectives, angles, unknowns if we stayed in / leave....no one can predict the future or what a particular route will involve compared to a different one. The conovirus could not be predicted. Simply the Labour party policy on Brexit did not reflect grassroots opinion.....it seems that " they " got it wrong.....the electorate wanted a party that stood for what they believed....Labour didn't. Nonsense! Labour wanted to negotiate a better deal and put it to the electorate! Look what Bluffer’s oven ready deal looks like? Well 11 months after the general election and we still don’t know! Even Bluffer doesn’t know? All Bluffer did was bounce the electorate into voting for this oven ready deal that didn’t exist?
|
|