British Politics
Been on holiday for a few weeks, surprised to find no general discussion of British politics so though I'd kick one off.
Tory leadership contest is quickly turning into farce. Trump has backed Boris, which should be reason enough for anyone with half a brain to exclude him.
Of the other candidates Rory Stewart looks the best of the outsiders. Surprised to see Cleverly and Javid not further up the betting, but not sure the Tory membership are ready for a brown PM.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri...
Regarding the LD leadership contest, Jo Swinson is miles ahead of any other candidate (and indeed any of the Tory lot). Should be a shoe in.
Finally, it's Groundhog Day in Labour - the more serious the anti-Semitism claims get, the more Corbyn's cronies write their own obituary by blaming it on outlandish conspiracy theories - this week, it's apparently the Jewish Embassy's fault...
the 2017 elevated vote share for the two main parties had more to do with lib dem radioactivity + the lack of a serious ukippy option than anything else imo
but if we put that aside, the corbs got 40% of the vote thing is only one side of the coin
yea loads of people voted in the affirmative for him and his policies, but theresa may, whom everyone hated, got the biggest tory vote share since 1979 because of who she was facing
Doesn't matter. Labour's vote share, though static in England, was much better distributed and more 'efficient' than under Corbyn, who preached to the choir, so instead of piling up surplus votes in safe seats they were able to expand and take Tory seats, given that Deform UK seized the racist vote and undercut the Tories. 2017 was in any case an anomaly because it was a Brexit election and people mistakenly believed that Corbyn (about whom they generally knew nothing and therefore projected the
Interesting snippet in that article that the SNP hold 7 of the most marginal seats in Scotland now. Only 2 of their seats can be considered 'safe'. Pretty incredible that the result could easily have been worse than it was.
Lots of sides to these coins but nothing turns 34% into anything reliable for future elections. Labour can build on it or they are likely to get into big trouble far sooner than the majortity suggests. And nothign makes 34% a strong popular mandate for anything.
He does have power. Our job (the left etc) is to hold firm. Starmer needs more support and while I expect he will seek and find more tory support for a while, at some point he or his successors will need us. Or maybe he will prove us wrong - we dont care what he says because he lies so easily but maybe actions and developed policies will demonstarete he is left wing by the next election (I wont hold my breath).
the 2017 elevated vote share for the two main parties had more to do with lib dem radioactivity + the lack of a serious ukippy option than anything else imo
but if we put that aside, the corbs got 40% of the vote thing is only one side of the coin
yea loads of people voted in the affirmative for him and his policies, but theresa may, whom everyone hated, got the biggest tory vote share since 1979 because of who she was facing
True it's hard to compare the two elections when in 2017 the two leading candidates were centre-left and centre-right with very little in common, thus polarising and always likely to divide voters down the middle. I do remember Labour at the time feeling that if they'd had a few more weeks of May TV they'd have won it.
Now it's been firm right versus centre-right which is very different and personalities are more likely to play a big role, which was a shame for Labour given who their leader is.
Lots of sides to these coins but nothing turns 34% into anything reliable for future elections. Labour can build on it or they are likely to get into big trouble far sooner than the majortity suggests. And nothign makes 34% a strong popular mandate for anything.
He does have power. Our job (the left etc) is to hold firm. Starmer needs more support and while I expect he will seek and find more tory support for a while, at some point he or his successors will need us. Or maybe he will prove us wron
Seems to me that Starmer sees himself as some sort of mistaken unifying centre-right PM the way he's welcomed bad Tory MPs into the fold and deselected most of the left.
If that's the case then only getting 34% of the vote is a disaster for that idea, and I hope that's clear to him and his circle (though I'm sure they'll find other ways to look at it eg tactical voting).
He's like someone who's sold his soul to the devil only for the devil to then turn around and tell him to **** off...except Starmer doesn't have a political soul.
It's not yet clear whether it will work. If farage feast on the tory corpse than labour will scavange a lot. The tragedy is that he sold his soul for power and he didn't need to.
His biggest lie of all is the 'putting country before party'. He has done totally the reverse with everything being about getting his party in power.
We don't know how much difference tactical voting and the low turnout made to Labour votes (everyone assuming the large Labour win was coming), though some of the tactical voting would have seen LD voters voting Labour.
Starmer does need to get on with extending votes to 16 year olds, though Farage has anticipated this somewhat by getting his message out to a wide audience on tiktok apparently. It's so much easier for fascists because they have no scruples about telling the most egregious lies about other people, in fact it's pretty much their MO, and social media is tailor made for that.
True we never know but enthusiastic people do tend to vote. Maybe more so when they're going to win.
There's also Gaza which obviously hurt Labour badly. I dont expect KS to change but hopefully that will be resolved to a large extent long before the next election. Voter anger fades and KS has no trouble saying the rights things when it doesn't matter.
Also interesting is that with such a reduced PCP, under their existing rules it will only take ~20 MPs to send letters to trigger a leadership election. So with a likely new leader more to the extremes of the party potentially alienating the Tory centre-right MPs, things could become quite fragile there and said leader will have possibly an even trickier balancing act to do than the one that their predecessors failed.
Meanwhile Farage will be waiting in the wings.
I think the fact that Labour had very large negative vote swings in some stronghold constituencies (-15% in mine) is quite telling of how the actual left views the current state of the party. This might be the least impressive and stable "landslide" victory of all time - if the right-wing parties stop cannibalising each other's votes then Labour in its current state is a sitting duck.
If, come the next election, Labour find that the Tories and Reform have joined forces in one way or another to defeat them, I hope they'd do the same with the Lib Dems and Greens rather than plough on down the centre-right regardless.
just impossible to forecast so far out
i was watching the 2019 election coverage a while back, and the only thing all the pundits on the left and right agreed on was that labour were definitely out of power for at least a decade
wouldn't be that surprised if the next pm is farage, or some younger version of corbyn, or anything in between
Forecasts are weak but the dangers are clear and we're not helpless.
Also the most certain thing about parties being finished or out of power for .. . etc etc is that the the person saying it is being an idiot.
As the once genius said. "I never predict anything, and I never will"
If there was a younger version of Corbyn we'd know about them by now.
Forecasts are weak but the dangers are clear and we're not helpless.
Also the most certain thing about parties being finished or out of power for .. . etc etc is that the the person saying it is being an idiot.
As the once genius said. "I never predict anything, and I never will"
Something to savour at least, for a few years.
SNP have used today to put out their response to the Cass Review. All the talk of humility, listening etc and yet it's the same old cynical actions just a few hours later.
Unfortunately for me, the deliberate waste of such a rare desperately needed golden opportunity makes me feal nauseous
and I can't feel good about a plan to basically continue with tory policy with more competence and no opposition
Being beaten in one thing - we live to fight another day. Joining them is close to hopeless.
(or with more pith - you see a sea of red, I see a sea of blue)
Posted earlier, from the horse's mouth. Anyone offering us what we want is systematically shredded day after day if it conflicts with billionaires' financial interests:
Rachel Reeves has issued a damning assessment of the state of the UK’s finances.
The new chancellor of the exchequer said she was inheriting a depleted economy from the Conservatives that would create a “challenge” for the new Labour government.
“There’s not a huge amount of money there,” Ms Reeves told the BBC. “I know the scale of the challenge I inherit.”
Ms Reeves said she would lean on the private sector to cover the shortfall.
“Private-sector investment is the lifeblood of a successful economy. We need to unlock private-sector investment,” she said.
Well what a puking suprise
That’s what six years at the Bank of England does to someone.
I don't think it is that .
It's a consequence of starmers determination to put party before country. That meant ruling out tax rises and ruling out borrowing
Private finance is what's left. And it's really easy
Well what a puking suprise
One of the major issues for the UK economy over the last 15 years or so has been the lack of private sector investment and it's part of the reason that we are lagging in terms of productivity in comparison to similar nations.
Results of the recount today for the Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire but the SNP have already conceded so it's yet another seat for the Lib Dems. Been a good election for them.
I don't think it is that .
It's a consequence of starmers determination to put party before country. That meant ruling out tax rises and ruling out borrowing
Private finance is what's left. And it's really easy
Starmer doesn’t see it that way. By not borrowing/printing more money he believes he’s being financially prudent and looking after the pound and interest rates, which is 101 BoE thinking that the dreadful Reeves has brought with her.
The next Labour leader will probably be either Reeves or the equally abominable Streeting so don’t hold your breath while you’re waiting for good things to happen.
Could be but I don't think that fits as well
'Financially prudent' is to appease the tories, press and fina bcial backers. It's purely about party and the strategy of offering a minimal target.
