General Election July 2024

[carlo996]

Rufus Stone said:

Is Abbot standing at the GE?

Wishy washy Starmer said it'll be decided later...like the rest of his policies

[Blackpuddin]

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

[W124]

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

[oyster]

W124 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

One PM misled Parliament about having some birthday cake.
One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.


One of them was forced to resign not long after.

[oyster]

Mr Penguin said:

poo at Paul's said:

I think the timing of the GE to be a little bizarre, tbh, UK has had a tough few years, but is genuinely turning the corner now, fuel prices down, growth up, inflation down, food prices actually dropping here and there, its making a big difference to millions of people, and will continue to do so. Holding off 6 months toward Xmas, there may be an interest rate drop by then too, where the effect has been felt by more people would surely help the incumbent Govt convince more people that their policies have started to work, and garner them millions more votes.

Just makes little sense to me, timing wise.

The timing is odd, and there are some big European level meetings in London in the days after the election.

I think there are a few reasons why he wants to do it now:

1) If you are on the back foot, doing exactly what your opponent expects you to do just compounds your disadvantage.
2) Inflation may increase over the summer (not sure why, but George Osborne suggested this could happen without going into details).
3) Gets to pick more of the candidates, but this can be a double edged sword.
4) Delaying just increases the chance that something big happens in the SNP investigation before the election, which would cause a complete collapse - better to do it now when the SNP are projected to go back to 30 seats rather than wait for events to push it down to low single digits.
5) Rwanda policy will get stuck in the courts with individual appeals and the summer crossings are not within the government's control.
6) Risk of letters going in and more of the candidates to be the next leader making pitches and undermining him.
7) He's probably just fed up and if he wins then he will be a hero and if he loses then he doesn't have to worry about it any more.

I think it's almost all down to this.

The flagship policy cannot be delivered anyway.


It's a 'no lose now' for Sunak. Either he wins a miracle victory and then doesn't care whether it gets blocked by the courts, or he loses the election and blames Labour for jettisoning it.

[Bill]

oyster said:

One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.

SKS wasn't in parliament then, but called it an illegal war and marched against it...

[ChocolateFrog]

blearyeyedboy said:

Mr E said:

With a very significant majority I do wonder if the schisms in the Labour Party will become more open within a couple of years. If I were Ms Rayner and ambitious, I’d be on manoeuvres pretty early on.

If I were Ms R, I'd bide my time knowing that a leader might choose to leave (or slip up on a banana skin) and knowing that I was Heir Apparent. She'd do better to avoid Conservative-like schisms.

SKS has his flaws but he's smoothly operated to keep the Left in check to stay electable, and AR would do well to do the same.

18/1 to be the next Labour leader suggests its unlikely.

Might be worth a tenner.

[Blackpuddin]

oyster said:

W124 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

One PM misled Parliament about having some birthday cake.
One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.


One of them was forced to resign not long after.

Possibly because of all the other stuff listed a couple of posts earlier that you seem to be dismissing?

[oyster]

Blackpuddin said:

oyster said:

W124 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

One PM misled Parliament about having some birthday cake.
One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.


One of them was forced to resign not long after.

Possibly because of all the other stuff listed a couple of posts earlier that you seem to be dismissing?

By the way I'm not dismissing those other 'scandals' at all. I think his resignation was appropriate.

However, much as we like to moan about how politics has become less honourable, it's always worth pointing out that Blair wasn't forced (or offered) to resign for a much more serious misleading of Parliament.

[Gary C]

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

You forgot Stephen Byers...

Ah wrong side

[Blackpuddin]

oyster said:

Blackpuddin said:

oyster said:

W124 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

One PM misled Parliament about having some birthday cake.
One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.


One of them was forced to resign not long after.

Possibly because of all the other stuff listed a couple of posts earlier that you seem to be dismissing?

By the way I'm not dismissing those other 'scandals' at all. I think his resignation was appropriate.

However, much as we like to moan about how politics has become less honourable, it's always worth pointing out that Blair wasn't forced (or offered) to resign for a much more serious misleading of Parliament.

IMO the scandals listed above add up to a far more comprehensive, ingrained and in the long term far more damaging duffing-up of integrity in public life.

[Gary C]

Blackpuddin said:

oyster said:

Blackpuddin said:

oyster said:

W124 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Blackpuddin said:

119 said:

p1stonhead said:

Coast should be clear in around 6 weeks time;

I can think of one Labour scandal that trumps all of those.


See if you can guess which one it is.

I've had a good objective think about it but you'll have to enlighten us on the one Labour scandal that you believe trumps that lot.

Anything?

Iraq. It doesn’t matter that loads of Tories voted for it. It doesn’t matter. Blair, who was in charge as a Labour PM. He is responsible for our involvement.

It doesn’t change where we are now though.

One PM misled Parliament about having some birthday cake.
One PM misled Parliament about the reasons for going to war.


One of them was forced to resign not long after.

Possibly because of all the other stuff listed a couple of posts earlier that you seem to be dismissing?

By the way I'm not dismissing those other 'scandals' at all. I think his resignation was appropriate.

However, much as we like to moan about how politics has become less honourable, it's always worth pointing out that Blair wasn't forced (or offered) to resign for a much more serious misleading of Parliament.

IMO the scandals listed above add up to a far more comprehensive, ingrained and in the long term far more damaging duffing-up of integrity in public life.

I'm sure Mr Kelly's family would disagree.

[Tom8]

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

[CivicDuties]

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

[Tom8]

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

[CivicDuties]

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

Oh I thought you were saying that Starmer and Corbyn would be competing for Islington North personally. Your post was a bit ambiguous, but I see you just meant Labour will be competing against Corbyn in Islington North now.

[eharding]

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

Your initial post might be interpreted as the news that Starmer will instead stand in Islington North to directly oppose Corbyn.

[turbobloke]

eharding said:

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

Your initial post might be interpreted as the news that Starmer will instead stand in Islington North to directly oppose Corbyn.

Alternatively, that Labour's leader is in Party terms fighting an ex-leader in Islington North.

[Tom8]

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

Oh I thought you were saying that Starmer and Corbyn would be competing for Islington North personally. Your post was a bit ambiguous, but I see you just meant Labour will be competing against Corbyn in Islington North now.

Yes I see, badly worded, or at least awkwardly.

[CivicDuties]

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

CivicDuties said:

Tom8 said:

Today confirms Starmer has effectively expelled Corbyn from the Labour party and now will compete with each other for the seat in Islington North. That will probably be the only interesting thing in this whole election. Funny, Starmer told us all we should vote for Corbyn to be prime minister. HIs judgement and lack of it may haunt him.

Now to see what happens with Abbot, could be the same.

?? Keir Starmer is the MP for Holborn and St Pancras, not Islington North.

Corbyn is Islington North

Oh I thought you were saying that Starmer and Corbyn would be competing for Islington North personally. Your post was a bit ambiguous, but I see you just meant Labour will be competing against Corbyn in Islington North now.

Yes I see, badly worded, or at least awkwardly.

I don't think Starmer will care much either way about Islington North, he's going to have a big enough majority anyway.