Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
My views are not very complimentary on Suella. Don’t forget her performance when she was in the cabinet.
But she’s a distraction and problem for Rishi to fail to sort. She’s comedy gold for SKS if he plays it right. No labour votes are going to be lost by some of the tripe she’s coming out with. Quite a few Tory ones could be.
The tories haven’t just been operationally incompetent in messaging (Dom’s specialty I suppose if that’s where DeejRC wants to give credit) they’ve been operationally incompetent in delivering.
Why would anyone be afraid of a labour government when you look at the mess the current lot have repeatedly made?
Anyone suggest voting for more of the same has a tough job on their hands.
But she’s a distraction and problem for Rishi to fail to sort. She’s comedy gold for SKS if he plays it right. No labour votes are going to be lost by some of the tripe she’s coming out with. Quite a few Tory ones could be.
The tories haven’t just been operationally incompetent in messaging (Dom’s specialty I suppose if that’s where DeejRC wants to give credit) they’ve been operationally incompetent in delivering.
Why would anyone be afraid of a labour government when you look at the mess the current lot have repeatedly made?
Anyone suggest voting for more of the same has a tough job on their hands.
cheesejunkie said:
My views are not very complimentary on Suella. Don’t forget her performance when she was in the cabinet.
But she’s a distraction and problem for Rishi to fail to sort. She’s comedy gold for SKS if he plays it right. No labour votes are going to be lost by some of the tripe she’s coming out with. Quite a few Tory ones could be.
The tories haven’t just been operationally incompetent in messaging (Dom’s specialty I suppose if that’s where DeejRC wants to give credit) they’ve been operationally incompetent in delivering.
Why would anyone be afraid of a labour government when you look at the mess the current lot have repeatedly made?
Anyone suggest voting for more of the same has a tough job on their hands.
I don't think anyone is afraid of a Labour government under Starmer. We need to see some policies though.But she’s a distraction and problem for Rishi to fail to sort. She’s comedy gold for SKS if he plays it right. No labour votes are going to be lost by some of the tripe she’s coming out with. Quite a few Tory ones could be.
The tories haven’t just been operationally incompetent in messaging (Dom’s specialty I suppose if that’s where DeejRC wants to give credit) they’ve been operationally incompetent in delivering.
Why would anyone be afraid of a labour government when you look at the mess the current lot have repeatedly made?
Anyone suggest voting for more of the same has a tough job on their hands.
The delivery pt is interesting - well it is to me anyway, but then I thoroughly admit I’m a policy/strategy wonk.
When they have known what they were trying to do and had a plan - it’s worked, they have delivered. See education in England for example. It’s now thoroughly regarded as an outstanding success, because top to bottom there was a plan in place to deliver a coherent, thought out, bought into system.
Rishi/Hunt HAVE restored a semblance of economic order and will actually give SKS a decent economic base. It’s not a raging success, but the repair job has been done.
The rest of it - no. Relatively little has been delivered because nobody had much of a clue what they were delivering because there wasn’t any actual coherent, thought out, bought into plan to deliver something. A lot of that stems from the No10 office having no sodding clue. About anything.
In that context, Braverman wittering on is, well, it’s just nowhere. It’s a nowhere policy and rhetoric.
This is where I give a lot of respect to SKS and the current Labour Party and the alleged greater organisational/logistic ability that Mandy has brought back.
When they have known what they were trying to do and had a plan - it’s worked, they have delivered. See education in England for example. It’s now thoroughly regarded as an outstanding success, because top to bottom there was a plan in place to deliver a coherent, thought out, bought into system.
Rishi/Hunt HAVE restored a semblance of economic order and will actually give SKS a decent economic base. It’s not a raging success, but the repair job has been done.
The rest of it - no. Relatively little has been delivered because nobody had much of a clue what they were delivering because there wasn’t any actual coherent, thought out, bought into plan to deliver something. A lot of that stems from the No10 office having no sodding clue. About anything.
In that context, Braverman wittering on is, well, it’s just nowhere. It’s a nowhere policy and rhetoric.
This is where I give a lot of respect to SKS and the current Labour Party and the alleged greater organisational/logistic ability that Mandy has brought back.
98elise said:
I don't think anyone is afraid of a Labour government under Starmer. We need to see some policies though.
I agree on needing to see policies. Nobody should just vote against something. They should know what they’re voting for.I disagree on the fear point, some do like to throw about unsubstantiated fears about old labour governments and project the next will be the same.
I can understand the don’t interrupt your enemy when they’re making a (many) mistake but at some point they need to present policies. Since Hunt nicked and wasted one of their last major ones I can also understand the reluctance.
98elise said:
I don't think anyone is afraid of a Labour government under Starmer. We need to see some policies though.
We do need to see some meat as 'not the tories' wlll appeal to Labour's rump and activists, that's about it.Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
turbobloke said:
We do need to see some meat as 'not the tories' wlll appeal to Labour's rump and activists, that's about it.
Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
Q.E.D.Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
W,r,t my point - I disagree on the fear point, some do like to throw about unsubstantiated fears about old labour governments and project the next will be the same
Edited by cheesejunkie on Monday 6th May 13:40
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:DeejRC said:
Stewie - did you actually read what I wrote?
Yes I did.You wrote "Braverman isn’t hated by the electorate, they/we simply don’t understand her".
The two things aren't mutually exclusive.
She's despised other than by some weirdos.
Who apart from weirdos and activists - how much difference is that, really - would 'despise' any politician? Politicians are amorphous apart from PMs and are disliked by many people purely as oily politicians. Intravenous bbc / mirror / guardian plus strongly opposing views to Braverman's could help some to despise her but that's strong stuff, and is redolent of tribalism in a person doing the despising.
Trying hard here but not remembering any politician of any Party with views worthy of being despised including far-lefties. Disagreeing isn't despising.
cheesejunkie said:
turbobloke said:
We do need to see some meat as 'not the tories' wlll appeal to Labour's rump and activists, that's about it.
Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
Q.E.D.Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
W,r,t my point - I disagree on the fear point, some do like to throw about unsubstantiated fears about old labour governments and project the next will be the same
Edited by cheesejunkie on Monday 6th May 13:40
IMF, winter of discontent, cash for honours, no money left, and the rest, it's a matter of record and experience.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Never hear a peep from you about the filth on the Abbott or Rayner threads do we Turbo.
Grow a pair and call some of that out and I might have a bit more time for all that word salad about poor old misunderstood Braverman.
You're flapping around with a side salad of your own. I don't look at politicians and get the strong urges / reactions of activists and tribalists, don't expext it and you won't need to fake disappointment in an ad hom as above.Grow a pair and call some of that out and I might have a bit more time for all that word salad about poor old misunderstood Braverman.
turbobloke said:
cheesejunkie said:
turbobloke said:
We do need to see some meat as 'not the tories' wlll appeal to Labour's rump and activists, that's about it.
Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
Q.E.D.Regarding a Labour gov't under Starmer, will he survive for long enough in hock to the unions which got him elected? He may come under serious pressure to be more extreme. If he refuses and is ousted, a gov't under the likes of Rayner wouldn't be the same thing. Vote Blair, get Brown. Vote Boris, get Truss. I was impressed by John Smith in the early 90s but my voting history goes further back and Labour haven't been much use overall.
We may well see soon enough, but having prepared for Miliband, then a bit more prep for Corbyn, there's nothing significant left to do for Starmer, so it won't make much differece personally either way, and there's somewhere warm and friendly and low-cost to retire to if it gets really bad. Those with few or no options will be hit far more if Labour go udders up and take the country along.
W,r,t my point - I disagree on the fear point, some do like to throw about unsubstantiated fears about old labour governments and project the next will be the same
Edited by cheesejunkie on Monday 6th May 13:40
IMF, winter of discontent, cash for honours, no money left, and the rest, it's a matter of record and experience.
Garvin said:
Originally penned by George Santayana and this similar expression subsequently used by Winston Churchill - “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
We’re learning from history right now, the last 14 years.But I understand and almost agree with your point. Every last government has a bad record. What were they bad on and what did they prioritise?
I prefer this thread as the Rishi one is just a bash fest. Being in the opposition (I’m not) allows for debate.
Seriously, what have I failed to learn? Because I suspect I have learned lessons you’d prefer I didn’t and who’s to blame other than lived history?
I agree labour need policies, I don’t agree they should put them to a Tory voting agenda. Is there anything wrong with that?
The fears put about labour can be eliminated in seconds by maggie’s job loss record but whatever. We don’t live in the 80’s now. Unlike some Tory mps and voters.
cheesejunkie said:
Garvin said:
Originally penned by George Santayana and this similar expression subsequently used by Winston Churchill - “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
We’re learning from history right now, the last 14 years.But I understand and almost agree with your point. Every last government has a bad record. What were they bad on and what did they prioritise?
I prefer this thread as the Rishi one is just a bash fest. Being in the opposition (I’m not) allows for debate.
Seriously, what have I failed to learn? Because I suspect I have learned lessons you’d prefer I didn’t and who’s to blame other than lived history?
I agree labour need policies, I don’t agree they should put them to a Tory voting agenda. Is there anything wrong with that?
The fears put about labour can be eliminated in seconds by maggie’s job loss record but whatever. We don’t live in the 80’s now. Unlike some Tory mps and voters.
turbobloke said:
You're flapping around with a side salad of your own. I don't look at politicians and get the strong urges / reactions of activists and tribalists, don't expext it and you won't need to fake disappointment in an ad hom as above.
Braverman appears to be widely regarded as an embarrassing politician with some weird, and very unpleasant, views.I doubt that many people have strong views about her in the way that they did about, say, Margaret Thatcher. Sue-Ellen Braverman is nowhere near as capable or influential, and will hopefully leave the public arena very soon.
MC Bodge said:
Braverman appears to be widely regarded as an embarrassing politician with some weird, and very unpleasant, views.
I doubt that many people have strong views about her in the way that they did about, say, Margaret Thatcher. Sue-Ellen Braverman is nowhere near as capable or influential, and will hopefully leave the public arena very soon.
Presumably the LDs will be taking a close look at her constituency? Must be a strong candidate for some election night champagne corks to pop!I doubt that many people have strong views about her in the way that they did about, say, Margaret Thatcher. Sue-Ellen Braverman is nowhere near as capable or influential, and will hopefully leave the public arena very soon.
MC Bodge said:
Braverman appears to be widely regarded as an embarrassing politician with some weird, and very unpleasant, views.
On the BBC, in The Guardian, the Mirror and from social media posts by government detractors, yes, but that's not Mr Mondeo Man or Ms Wolseley Woman. What's widely regarded needs to be something going beyond the right-on echo chamber.Some people disagree with Braverman's views for sure, that's a different matter and isn't the same as the vilification seen even in this thread. Responding to different viewpoints with intolerance is a curious phenomenon over on the 'tolerant Left' and might just be thst baseless sense of moral superiority shining through.
cheesejunkie said:
We’re learning from history right now, the last 14 years.
But I understand and almost agree with your point. Every last government has a bad record. What were they bad on and what did they prioritise?
I prefer this thread as the Rishi one is just a bash fest. Being in the opposition (I’m not) allows for debate.
Seriously, what have I failed to learn? Because I suspect I have learned lessons you’d prefer I didn’t and who’s to blame other than lived history?
I agree labour need policies, I don’t agree they should put them to a Tory voting agenda. Is there anything wrong with that?
The fears put about labour can be eliminated in seconds by maggie’s job loss record but whatever. We don’t live in the 80’s now. Unlike some Tory mps and voters.
Indeed. We've heard it all before.But I understand and almost agree with your point. Every last government has a bad record. What were they bad on and what did they prioritise?
I prefer this thread as the Rishi one is just a bash fest. Being in the opposition (I’m not) allows for debate.
Seriously, what have I failed to learn? Because I suspect I have learned lessons you’d prefer I didn’t and who’s to blame other than lived history?
I agree labour need policies, I don’t agree they should put them to a Tory voting agenda. Is there anything wrong with that?
The fears put about labour can be eliminated in seconds by maggie’s job loss record but whatever. We don’t live in the 80’s now. Unlike some Tory mps and voters.
HMS Labour Project Fear is full steam ahead and we've not even started the election campaign yet.
I fear a Starmer lead government as much as I fear a Sunak or Braverman lead government, which is to say not much. Eeyore-ing about the UK potentially going down the tubes under Starmer fails to reflect on it already being down the tubes under Sunak.
I'll be staying here and watching on with bemusement. Whoever gets elected will probably not make a great deal of difference either way. We are stuck in a general malaise as a nation and I've not seen anyone give concrete ideas about how we get out.
turbobloke said:
MC Bodge said:
Braverman appears to be widely regarded as an embarrassing politician with some weird, and very unpleasant, views.
On the BBC, in The Guardian, the Mirror and from social media posts by government detractors, yes, but that's not Mr Mondeo Man or Ms Wolseley Woman. What's widely regarded needs to be something going beyond the right-on echo chamber.Some people disagree with Braverman's views for sure, that's a different matter and isn't the same as the vilification seen even in this thread. Responding to different viewpoints with intolerance is a curious phenomenon over on the 'tolerant Left' and might just be thst baseless sense of moral superiority shining through.
I would suggest that Nadine Dorries, Priti Patel and Braverman are amongst that rare breed of non-PM (sort of) female politicians that have become known in the mainstream, but not for good reasons.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff