labour

[crosswaters]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Apologies if my comments fall into this category.  No offence meant, and we do have plenty of 'discussions' which can be quite robust, but (the vast majority anyway) are intended in good faith and I hope don't get too personal.  We all hold different views.

Thanks John,

No need to apologise and I do understand what you say and I also do enjoy reading some of the posts but not the nasty ones.

ATB.

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, crosswaters said:

I also do enjoy reading some of the posts

Thank you.  Keep enjoying.  ATB to you as well.

[WalkedUp]

27 minutes ago, crosswaters said:

I normally never get into this off topic talk as I see the a lot of pushing and shoving by certain posters  to try and gain a advantage and in some instances to belittle the other person.

Crosswater, thank you for your comments. Even if we do not completely agree on this topic (Labour) it is good to have a range of different opinions. We are a diverse bunch and it is better to see other’s perspective rather than exist within an echo chamber.

I do agree with you that there should be no animosity in disagreement, mutual respect should reign.

Edited May 7, 2020 by WalkedUp

[Raja Clavata]

22 minutes ago, crosswaters said:

I normally never get into this off topic talk as I see the a lot of pushing and shoving by certain posters  to try and gain a advantage and in some instances to belittle the other person.

So I've made my comments and will stick with them and not be swayed  by anyone...thank you.

On you go now !!!!!!!     

Fair enough. It's certainly not for everyone. I never set out to offend anyone but we are often discussing important topics which does lead to robust debate and can at times be somewhat, shall we say, emotive. There are some people here who express views that are petty much the exact mirror opposite of my own but whose opinions I respect and believe to be decent people. If you operate on the basis of not posting something you wouldn't be prepared to say face to face then I think all is well....

[Vince Green]

4 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

To be fair to Labour ........ they are the 'opposition', so  it is natural for them to 'oppose'.  They have had a lot of practice at it in recent years.  So long in opposition has entirely focussed them on being 'negative'.  Any policies they had themselves were soundly rejected by the electorate.

As opposition, they are focussed on making sure nothing they ever do or say could be construed as support for the government.  Starmer is a lawyer by training, so he will be practised in courtroom style performances ........ such as looking for 'chinks in evidence' to exploit to support 'his case'.

When the crisis of WW2 was over, the grateful electorate threw Churchill out on his ear and Labour took power.  I think Starmer is waiting for a repeat of that.  Who knows, he may get it ........

There is opposition and there is just peeing in the wind to see who it lands on. 

[Mice!]

If nothing else Labour having a new leader who doesn't look and sound like he's just arrived from the 70s should keep the Cons on their toes.

[TRINITY]

I look at the labour v conservative contest another way. It's like two sports teams. You should look beyond who has the best captain it's the quality of squad and its depth that count. 

Some people in my opinion are giving starmer more credit than he deserves but if he is better than I think he is ,one player dosn,t make a team. If starmer has an off day ,who has he got behind him and what other talent is in his team? Absolutely very little in my opinion. 

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, TRINITY said:

I look at the labour v conservative contest another way. It's like two sports teams. You should look beyond who has the best captain it's the quality of squad and its depth that count. 

Some people in my opinion are giving starmer more credit than he deserves but if he is better than I think he is ,one player dosn,t make a team. If starmer has an off day ,who has he got behind him and what other talent is in his team? Absolutely very little in my opinion. 

That's absolutely true but it won't stop him tearing Boris & Co. into ribbons on the despatch box.

[lancer425]

Starmer is all they had, anybody labour had capable of any kind of leading them on  a turn around of the magnitude needed they need, is no longer in office.

  Labour are a non entity currently, and i do not see a Phoenix from the ashes stunt happening any decade soon.  Any noises from labour are just digestive tract issues that are likely to leave the inevitable for those that can to wade through.  More an annoyance for the conservatives and nothing of substance for them to actually climb over. Labour Are to all intents and purposes History.

Like druids a few about but never to be mainstream. Lib dems got more chance of getting a person in no 10  than Labour.

[TRINITY]

Another factor that seriously hinders labour's chance of getting an electoral majority is the SNP. They currently hold about 40 seats that the previous labour governments held that gave them an overall majority. If Scotland ever get independence they are toast. If the SNP hang around and hold on to those seats they are still toast. Thirdly there is another factor. Prior to the Brexit fight and this pandemic, there was a plan to re draw constituency boundaries and reduce the MP total. Again labour have many smaller inner city seats that could go as a result of boundary changes. I am sure when things settle down, the boundaries will be re drawn for the next election.

[Danger-Mouse]

30 minutes ago, TRINITY said:

Another factor that seriously hinders labour's chance of getting an electoral majority is the SNP. They currently hold about 40 seats that the previous labour governments held that gave them an overall majority. If Scotland ever get independence they are toast. If the SNP hang around and hold on to those seats they are still toast. 

Starmer is already targeting Scotland but it's difficult to see how he can make up a lot of ground north of the border. The irony being that the fault lies with Blair's government.

Starmer himself, clearly smart and driven but also bloody boring. That shouldn't matter but the fact is, in today's media driven world, it does. He also has the problem of dealing with his party's internal divisions in the form of Momentum.

Edited May 7, 2020 by Danger-Mouse

[JDog]

Starmer targeting Scotland? That's an early mistake in his leadership if he is.

[Raja Clavata]

I don't think I'd ever vote Labour and I don't think I want a Labour Government but I do want to see a strong opposition party with a credible leader who holds the current government to account during these interesting times. I believe Labour now have a credible leader and someone who could fulfil the role of PM but that's about as far as it goes...

[JohnfromUK]

3 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I believe Labour now have a credible leader and someone who could fulfil the role of PM but that's about as far as it goes...

Starmer - as Labour's Brexit lead was dull and wooden - and set a series of tests - that were simply never going to be met (from recollection one was "exactly the same trading relationship as GB enjoyed before leaving".  After that point he was clearly both out of step with his 'party grass roots' and also his (then) party leader's 'official line' (which was to sit on the fence).

He is intelligent - and a typical lawyer (dull detail).  Whether he was a good lawyer, I don't know.  Would he make a good Prime Minister - no - never.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Now Starmer has said we are correct to maintain the lockdown but should be discussing the way out and then Harriet Harman spouting concerns about the coronavirus App!

Let the Government get on with it!

[Raja Clavata]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

He is intelligent - and a typical lawyer (dull detail).  Whether he was a good lawyer, I don't know.  Would he make a good Prime Minister - no - never.

Re. Lawyer - I guess it would depend on how you define good but unless you aren't from the "only type of good lawyer is a dead one" camp, I think his titles probably provide a clue - Sir Keir Rodney Starmer KCB PC QC. No?

Re. PM - on what basis do you say that? Many thought the same of Boris a while back (and a good number still do).

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Raja Clavata said:

I think his titles probably provide a clue - Sir Keir Rodney Starmer KCB PC QC. No?

He was appointed by Blair/Brown - and seems to have had a slightly 'rocky ride' as head of the CPS.  I think he hasn't severely 'blotted his copybook' as a lawyer, but his titles I suspect came through his political connections (his work as head of CPS and DPP) rather than competence.  I'm not suggesting he is no good as a lawyer - but I think most of his 'fame' has been as a politician/CPS/DPP rather than a QC.  To me - he is simply dull and plodding.

9 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Many thought the same of Boris a while back (and a good number still do).

I'm not one of Boris's fans either, but he did win a decent majority in an election - so he does have that spark that people will vote for.  I don't see that in Starmer at all.  Until he comes up with a new set of policies, (and manages to get his party's approval for through it's Union and NEC dominated system) - we don't really even know what he stands for.

[Raja Clavata]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

He was appointed by Blair/Brown - and seems to have had a slightly 'rocky ride' as head of the CPS.  I think he hasn't severely 'blotted his copybook' as a lawyer, but his titles I suspect came through his political connections (his work as head of CPS and DPP) rather than competence.  I'm not suggesting he is no good as a lawyer - but I think most of his 'fame' has been as a politician/CPS/DPP rather than a QC.  To me - he is simply dull and plodding.

I'm not one of Boris's fans either, but he did win a decent majority in an election - so he does have that spark that people will vote for.  I don't see that in Starmer at all.  Until he comes up with a new set of policies, (and manages to get his party's approval for through it's Union and NEC dominated system) - we don't really even know what he stands for.

I'm not a big fan of either Boris or Starmer but believe they are probably the best each side has at present and in the big scheme of things probably only what we deserve.

If you don't mind me asking, do you associate the Blair/Brown era as a particularly bad time for you personally or is it just that you don't think they acted in the best interests of UK PLC (and beyond)?

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

If you don't mind me asking, do you associate the Blair/Brown era as a particularly bad time for you personally or is it just that you don't think they acted in the best interests of UK PLC (and beyond)?

For me personally - it was a pretty good time. 

My big problem with Blair/Brown was that Blair was a cynical liar (and I suspect ultimately a crook) - Weapons of mass destruction, David Kelly, a whole raft of things all based on spin carried out by Campbell and Mandleson, - two other shady characters, releasing IRA convicted murderers, relations with Gadaffi, hugely increasing immigration (as a result of which we have current housing shortages), devaluing higher education by introducing a mass of so called Universities ........ and preaching soft socialism and greater equality and social mobility for all - whilst lining his own nest and building his own property empire and fortune.  Knighthoods and honours to his cronies (mind you he wasn't alone in that).

Brown was deceptive - being so careful to tell us how prudent he was being with the finances - and in reality committing us to VAST debts under the cover of PFI - which basically meant debt with much higher interest than normal - but crucially didn't appear on the books.

Politics has never recovered from the Blair years as it was (perhaps not the start, but the enormous growth of) the era of the 'triumph of spin and make believe over reality'.  Everyone since has followed his bad example.

[lancer425]

I do not think Labour will make any headway in Scotland, and i do not see starmer  putting much effort in up there, Nichola is the best help for the conservatives and Even labour . No need to do anything In Scotland just let Nichola be herself and the rest will just happen as if by magic. She is way too good at being a failure  to succeed at anything. Her downfall will be here inbuilt devolution suicide mission. only this time it will be terminal for her.

[sitsinhedges]

11 hours ago, WalkedUp said:

No he really isn’t. 

I really disagree. In fact I would go so far as to say that Labour electing Sir Kier Starmer leader is much more of problem for us as than that fool Packham. From humble beginnings, Starmer is clearly incredibly intelligent, driven and dedicated. I imagine he will be the next Prime Minister, I just hope that Labour are sorted out before then otherwise it is going to be a disaster for field sports. 

Not a chance. Best of a dreadful field of candidates but still awful.

[Danger-Mouse]

33 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

I do not think Labour will make any headway in Scotland, and i do not see starmer  putting much effort in up there, 

Starmer declares war on Sturgeon as he plots to crush SNP in his fight to transform Labour

https://allmybiznews.com/politics/starmer-declares-war-on-sturgeon-as-he-plots-to-crush-snp-in-his-fight-to-transform-labour/

[WalkedUp]

BREXIT is done. Corbyn is done. Next election is anyone’s guess. The last election was surprisingly ‘close’ if you consider just how much of a disgrace Labour were.

If Starmer can sort out his party (a big ask) he would easily have the beating of Johnson. I’m not welcoming it, just warning if it. All the parties are devoid of front bench talent, no big beasts left. The interesting thing for the next election will be the north. Many have broken the habit of a life time to vote Tory, it’s make or break if this 5 year period rewards them with prosperity. Fate has handed the administration a bad hand I feel. With CV-19 the economic recovery will be tedious rather than the courageous battle with the outbreak itself. 
 

Remember, the remain alliance won the popular vote in this last election. Anyone who doesn’t see the strength of Starmer is deluded and will get caught sleeping. I have a feeling he will prioritise PR electoral reforms, which makes sense to the politician but most average men do not care about it. His big chance would be to broker an electoral pact on the promise of a PR referendum. SNP, LD etc would be wise to suffer short term loss of % vote share for a long term gain.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, WalkedUp said:

BREXIT is done. Corbyn is done. Next election is anyone’s guess. The last election was surprisingly ‘close’ if you consider just how much of a disgrace Labour were.

If Starmer can sort out his party (a big ask) he would easily have the beating of Johnson. I’m not welcoming it, just warning if it. All the parties are devoid of front bench talent, no big beasts left. The interesting thing for the next election will be the north. Many have broken the habit of a life time to vote Tory, it’s make or break if this 5 year period rewards them with prosperity. Fate has handed the administration a bad hand I feel. With CV-19 the economic recovery will be tedious rather than the courageous battle with the outbreak itself. 
 

Remember, the remain alliance won the popular vote in this last election. Anyone who doesn’t see the strength of Starmer is deluded and will get caught sleeping. I have a feeling he will prioritise PR electoral reforms, which makes sense to the politician but most average men do not care about it. His big chance would be to broker an electoral pact on the promise of a PR referendum. SNP, LD etc would be wise to suffer short term loss of % vote share for a long term gain.

No way Labour will not be a force to be reckoned with at the next election.  His war on the SDP is Just words, The SNP have their own in house Nemesis without involving Starmer in their downfall. We are seeing a little bit of tail feather fluffing strutting and some crowing. But It means nothing, What starmer says and what happens are worlds apart. I can not see labour ever recovering. Too much Corbyn running in their bloodline, to ever get real credibility again. I think the best starmer can hope for is the occasional sympathy vote but no thinking voter will ever touch labour again. And i dont think they have anywhere near enough time to build any trust before the next elections .

They needed a big rethink , they were warned by their own party faithfull, but were so  busy standing open mouthed at corbyn they never saw the train wreck coming. No even Labour folk are Not feeling it. Starmer is the best of a bad lot but too little and too late.

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

but no thinking voter will ever touch labour again.

That should be the case .......... but I doubt it will be.  The next 4 1/2 years (i.e. until the next election) are going to be economically 'lean'.  Just how lean remains to be seen - but the government in power at the time (presumably still Boris) will cop the blame and there will be none of the more relaxed spending that was planned to help those former Labour voters in the north.  Labour said when Brown left office "Sorry, no money left".  We are back in just that position again .........

Boris will have to pull some magic out of the hat to get things going again really quickly - and that assumes we get a vaccine  soon.  If we continue to have repeated flare ups/second, third waves etc. of Covid - then public opinion will need someone to blame - and the government will be the one to get the blame ........ regardless whether it is their fault or not.

Remember - the opposition cannot really ever be blamed.