Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

[MiniMan64]

All these people concerned about class sizes but quite happy to keep the Tories in power for another 5 years even though they’ve absolutely decimated education for the better part of the last 2 decades…

[turbobloke]

anonymoususer said:

119 said:

Hmmmm LDs have made the biggest gains in our area

It's ok they will lose them again at the next General Election.

The Lib Dems thought they'd get the PCC here but the Conservatives took it. A small crumb for them with the council seats lost nationwide, but it's saved the area from LD ideology.

[Wombat3]

MiniMan64 said:

All these people concerned about class sizes but quite happy to keep the Tories in power for another 5 years even though they’ve absolutely decimated education for the better part of the last 2 decades…

You are joining dots that aren't there.

Explaining why a Labour policy is an accident waiting to happen is no more than that. Nobody has followed it up with "so vote Tory!"

[BikeBikeBIke]

Wombat3 said:

You are joining dots that aren't there.

Explaining why a Labour policy is an accident waiting to happen is no more than that. Nobody has followed it up with "so vote Tory!"

Especially since the Torys have scrapped non dom status which is an identical "self harm" policy.

[AmyRichardson]

s1962a said:

Not just the VAT on school fees. It will be the drip drip of additional taxes for the "rich" (those on higher rate PAYE tax codes) that might push people over the edge to retire early. Of course if you can't afford it you won't retire, but many higher rate taxpayers will have other assets and investments that would have am effective lower tax rate if they didn't have their main income coming in.

Why not go for the ultra rich instead? Too much hard work and stepping on the toes of their mates probably.

It's years since I've looked at it but back in the 2000s most academic opinion was that income-related marginal taxation rates needed to be comfortably north of 60% before additional avoidance and workforce economic withdrawal undermined tax take. We're a fair short just yet...

[Wombat3]

BikeBikeBIke said:

Wombat3 said:

You are joining dots that aren't there.

Explaining why a Labour policy is an accident waiting to happen is no more than that. Nobody has followed it up with "so vote Tory!"

Especially since the Torys have scrapped non dom status which is an identical "self harm" policy.

Yep, stupidity. Poison pill or not, it's still idiotic.

[Wombat3]

Sky news reporting that based on results so far Labour might be some way short of a majority at the GE

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-news-projection-lab...

Hard to believe that's right but if it is SKS has a lot of work to do.

[Hippea]

People saying Khan has lost the London Mayor, how much of a blow would this be to Labour?

[valiant]

Hippea said:

People saying Khan has lost the London Mayor, how much of a blow would this be to Labour?

It’s all to do with turnout.

A low turnout would favour Hall and there’s a small chance that if turnout is low that she may (and I stress may) scrape it. Similar turnouts from previous mayoral elections should have Khan win.

Find out tomorrow in any case.

[p1stonhead]

valiant said:

Hippea said:

People saying Khan has lost the London Mayor, how much of a blow would this be to Labour?

It’s all to do with turnout.

A low turnout would favour Hall and there’s a small chance that if turnout is low that she may (and I stress may) scrape it. Similar turnouts from previous mayoral elections should have Khan win.

Find out tomorrow in any case.

Why do conservatives (here and across the pond) do badly when people go and vote? And often want to suppress votes in various ways.

Because they know old people are the only ones who consistently bother?

[768]

I think the low turnout overall here has been to Labour's benefit.

[anonymoususer]

sparkythecat said:

I live just up the road from you and concur with your views on the PCC candidates. It was scandalous that old ' double dipper ' Grunshaw was able to appoint a crony as his deputy , without anyone else being able to apply for the job. Given the current level of anti -Tory feeling around, the election result will no doubt see Grunshaw with his nose back in the trough again.

And Grunter Grunshaw won it handsomely. Assuming he gets the same pay thar jack in the box Andrew Snowden got........
That's £1703 a week.
I despair I really do £88,600 a year
Unbelievable. I wonder if Grunshaw will be able to cope or if he has a nice patsy deputy lined up after all he had his problems last time.

Hippea said:

People saying Khan has lost the London Mayor, how much of a blow would this be to Labour?

Bad for Labour good for London

[spikyone]

Wombat3 said:

Sky news reporting that based on results so far Labour might be some way short of a majority at the GE

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-news-projection-lab...

Hard to believe that's right but if it is SKS has a lot of work to do.

Not a chance that they'd miss a majority right now IMO, and I say that as someone who won't vote for Starmer.

The analysis is flawed because parties other than the big 3 will take far fewer seats in a GE, FPTP means that even if there are some wards in a constituency that might return a Green or Reform councillor they don't have enough power to return a Green or Reform MP. And that's before you consider that independents have taken more council seats/votes than they ever do in a GE.

I posted on the local election thread: there's near universal agreement in my area that the Labour council are utterly useless. Yet they took seats off the Conservatives here. You can attribute some of that to people wanting to give Rishi a black eye (and doing so in a misguided way that will make things yet worse in the local area), but many of those that have switched sides will be people that have genuinely been turned off of voting Conservative by the shambles currently leading the country.
I don't think even an increased turnout from the <30% in my ward would be enough to get the incumbent Conservative MP re-elected, even though he appears to be of the better ones.

[President Merkin]

Extrapolating GE outcomes from locals is a bit silly imo. Voters are influenced by local concerns & personalities, comparisons are a dodgy game.

[Garvin]

I’m beginning to suspect a bit of knee-knocking from our diehard red-rosette on a pig Labour supporters here! Don’t worry about it, just ignore the local elections, they mean absolutely nothing when it comes to a GE . . . although the initial crowing does seem to have become a bit muted now a bit of analysis is being raised

[Rufus Stone]

Garvin said:

I’m beginning to suspect a bit of knee-knocking from our diehard red-rosette on a pig Labour supporters here! Don’t worry about it, just ignore the local elections, they mean absolutely nothing when it comes to a GE . . . although the initial crowing does seem to have become a bit muted now a bit of analysis is being raised

I'm happy to link then.

Tories to lose 75% of their MP's.

[President Merkin]

Garvin said:

I’m beginning to suspect a bit of knee-knocking from our diehard red-rosette on a pig Labour supporters here! Don’t worry about it, just ignore the local elections, they mean absolutely nothing when it comes to a GE . . . although the initial crowing does seem to have become a bit muted now a bit of analysis is being raised

Yeah, they've clearly been terrible for Labour, No fool like an old fool.

[carlo996]

President Merkin said:

Yeah, they've clearly been terrible for Labour, No fool like an old fool.

Well, you are an authority, on that at least

[Garvin]

carlo996 said:

President Merkin said:

Yeah, they've clearly been terrible for Labour, No fool like an old fool.

Well, you are an authority, on that at least

You can tell the obvious disquiet by the ad-homs that come tumbling out!

Now, if all those Conservative losses had gone directly to Labour then all well and good for our red friends . . . but they didn’t. Which means that Starmer has only convinced somewhaere around half of them to the Labour way.

It’s catastrophic for the Conservatives but it isn’t all rosey red for Labour - a bit light pink at most which means that there is a risk that if Starmer doesn’t come out with some solid, sensible, attractive, workable, costed policies he might well fk up a majority. Oh dear

[turbobloke]

Garvin said:

carlo996 said:

President Merkin said:

Yeah, they've clearly been terrible for Labour, No fool like an old fool.

Well, you are an authority, on that at least

You can tell the obvious disquiet by the ad-homs that come tumbling out!

Now, if all those Conservative losses had gone directly to Labour then all well and good for our red friends . . . but they didn’t. Which means that Starmer has only convinced somewhaere around half of them to the Labour way.

It’s catastrophic for the Conservatives but it isn’t all rosey red for Labour - a bit light pink at most which means that there is a risk that if Starmer doesn’t come out with some solid, sensible, attractive, workable, costed policies he might well fk up a majority. Oh dear

Ad homs are par for the course, they're white flag substitutes every time.

Not long ago the Guardian had an article about Labour's poll lead being fragile, iirc it was when Sunak rightly started the rollback on Not Zero. Then, Labour's media chums did it again very recently. That said, neither they nor anyone including pollsters and 'experts' such as Curtice know what the result of the GE will be.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/22/l...