UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[RandoEFC+]

Tories getting another hammering. I keep seeing people say Sunak isn't going to call an election until the latest time because why would he call one when his party is 20% behind in the polls? I find it a weird take. Unless it comes out that Starmer is a literal paedophile or something with photo evidence then the polls aren't going to get any better for the Tories over the next few months. People have made up their minds. It's in their own interests to get it over with and start to rebuild. But they're morons so they probably genuinely do think they can turn it around. All the while the country decays.

Like many, I have no great enthusiasm for Starmer but Labour will clearly be a hundred times better than the current shower. It has disappointed me how safe Starmer has gone on a few key issues. The immigration stuff, Gaza, the green stuff. I got it early days when he had to stave off the links to the toxic Corbyn brand but over the past 18 months or so since the Tories properly imploded, he's had a lot more headroom to be principled and risk upsetting some of the Daily Mail types without risking much but he still seems scared of doing so.

[RandoEFC+]

Hilarious. According to "vibes" over the past couple of days, Susan Hall was actually going to run Sadiq Khan close in London and maybe actually sneak a win. Then after the actual counting, Khan wins a third term with his greatest margin yet. Then later in the day Labour win the West Midlands mayoralty ahead of relatively popular Tory incumbent Andy Street. Days of conservative-leaning columnists pontificating about Labour needing to do more to win a majority at the next general election, up in smoke.

Conclusions from these local elections. Tory disaster. Labour lose some lefty votes to Greens and Independents but overall on course for a landslide majority at the general election. Genuinely going to see their seat count into the 400s and the Tories below 200.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

12 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Tories getting another hammering. I keep seeing people say Sunak isn't going to call an election until the latest time because why would he call one when his party is 20% behind in the polls? I find it a weird take. Unless it comes out that Starmer is a literal paedophile or something with photo evidence then the polls aren't going to get any better for the Tories over the next few months. People have made up their minds. It's in their own interests to get it over with and start to rebuild. But they're morons so they probably genuinely do think they can turn it around. All the while the country decays.

Like many, I have no great enthusiasm for Starmer but Labour will clearly be a hundred times better than the current shower. It has disappointed me how safe Starmer has gone on a few key issues. The immigration stuff, Gaza, the green stuff. I got it early days when he had to stave off the links to the toxic Corbyn brand but over the past 18 months or so since the Tories properly imploded, he's had a lot more headroom to be principled and risk upsetting some of the Daily Mail types without risking much but he still seems scared of doing so.

Literally Australias 2019 election problem. The Labor candidate presented ideas that were good, significant, and would cause the nation to develop for the better. Of course this threatened the status quo and he was buried in an avalanche of muck by the media, just like Corbyn. So next election they ran a safe election with boring mild policy changes catered to offend no one but do less. You get what you vote for.  

[RandoEFC+]

26 minutes ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

Literally Australias 2019 election problem. The Labor candidate presented ideas that were good, significant, and would cause the nation to develop for the better. Of course this threatened the status quo and he was buried in an avalanche of muck by the media, just like Corbyn. So next election they ran a safe election with boring mild policy changes catered to offend no one but do less. You get what you vote for.  

Yeah there's a large Rupert Murdoch sized shadow hanging over both of these elections. 

The greatest shame about Corbyn's Labour is that after the election hammering against Johnson's Tories, the polling showed that actually, the policy platform put forward by Labour which was centre left by most developed countries' measures but deemed quite "extremist" in the political climate that dominates the UK (and the US and Australia from what little I understand but my knowledge is mediocre so I might be wrong) was largely popular. Corbyn himself was a sitting duck having shared a platform with various anti-semites and referred to the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah as "friends". A more "conservative-looking" leader like Starmer could probably have run on a similar, fairly progressive policy platform without that personal baggage and had success because the right wing press can't really find much ammunition against him but he's played it very safe and, if anything, picked a fight with the lefty wing of the Labour party.

Centrism is better than the pretty xenophobic offer that the Tories have put forward since the referendum but Starmer has been given an open goal really and I can only hope that Labour's manifesto going into the next election is more progressive than what he has led us to expect.

[Spike]

3 hours ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

Literally Australias 2019 election problem. The Labor candidate presented ideas that were good, significant, and would cause the nation to develop for the better. Of course this threatened the status quo and he was buried in an avalanche of muck by the media, just like Corbyn. So next election they ran a safe election with boring mild policy changes catered to offend no one but do less. You get what you vote for.  

Don’t forget they said Shorten has a square shaped head, so I don’t know; don’t vote for him. Ironic considering the actual shape of Scomo’s noggin.

Also ironic that Albanese was the safe candidate and Shorten not, given the former is from the Left faction. Labor didn’t win, Liberals lost. The tenuous grasp Labor has on Australia is a million times stronger than Labour UK, and that’s tough.

[Stan]

10 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Hilarious. According to "vibes" over the past couple of days, Susan Hall was actually going to run Sadiq Khan close in London and maybe actually sneak a win. Then after the actual counting, Khan wins a third term with his greatest margin yet. Then later in the day Labour win the West Midlands mayoralty ahead of relatively popular Tory incumbent Andy Street. Days of conservative-leaning columnists pontificating about Labour needing to do more to win a majority at the next general election, up in smoke.

Conclusions from these local elections. Tory disaster. Labour lose some lefty votes to Greens and Independents but overall on course for a landslide majority at the general election. Genuinely going to see their seat count into the 400s and the Tories below 200.

Makes me laugh when Tories talk about voter apathy as if that only works against one side. Well, they're also staying at home not voting for you, either... 

[Danny]

2 hours ago, Stan said:

Makes me laugh when Tories talk about voter apathy as if that only works against one side. Well, they're also staying at home not voting for you, either... 

Also just completely blind to the fact that they have been a key reason as to why people don't vote; austerity, windrush, covid handouts, small boats, rwanda, culture wars....none of which gives anyone a better life.

[Spike]

2 hours ago, Danny said:

Also just completely blind to the fact that they have been a key reason as to why people don't vote; austerity, windrush, covid handouts, small boats, rwanda, culture wars....none of which gives anyone a better life.

But mate, the woke PC mob wants to take away your fifth amendment rights or some shite, Piers said.

[RandoEFC+]

4 hours ago, Stan said:

Makes me laugh when Tories talk about voter apathy as if that only works against one side. Well, they're also staying at home not voting for you, either... 

I love it when they mention that there's no great enthusiasm for Starmer or Labour. Basically just admitting that they're polling terribly because everyone hates them.

[Spike]

20 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I love it when they mention that there's no great enthusiasm for Starmer or Labour. Basically just admitting that they're polling terribly because everyone hates them.

How do they win every time despite being so terribly hated?

[RandoEFC+]

49 minutes ago, Spike said:

How do they win every time despite being so terribly hated?

They're not always this hated. It's really off the charts right now. But the reasons they've won during my adult life is because they were always seen as the safe, competent party while Labour have been cast as economically illiterate since the financial crash in 2008ish and routinely have leaders that aren't trusted by the public. These perceptions haven't always been fair but the Tories have always been helped by a friendly press who will go to insane lengths to smear any centre-left leader to fuck while not batting an eyelid at bad behaviour from Tory leaders. The English public are conditioned to see privately educated posh boys like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson as being automatically intelligent and trustworthy because they've been raised to speak a bit like the royal family. That bit is weird. Labour also are responsible to an extent. Corbyn was very popular to a small section of the public but abhorrent to the rest. The Labour Party membership which tends to be made up of very politically active and left-leaning people, often straight out of university, elect their leaders, so they usually end up with leaders who appeal to their activist base but won't necessarily appeal to the masses as Prime Minister. The Tories have generally been more pragmatic when choosing their leaders. Their members care more about being in power than whether their leader is completely ideologically in line with them. Although they seem to have bucked this trend with Liz Truss and it seems likely they'll do something stupid again when they lose the election and dump Sunak.

So yeah, a combination of things. The Tories aren't usually popular per se, but the way the majority of the public is absolutely sick of them now is something like I've never seen in my life.

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

They're not always this hated. It's really off the charts right now. But the reasons they've won during my adult life is because they were always seen as the safe, competent party while Labour have been cast as economically illiterate since the financial crash in 2008ish and routinely have leaders that aren't trusted by the public. These perceptions haven't always been fair but the Tories have always been helped by a friendly press who will go to insane lengths to smear any centre-left leader to fuck while not batting an eyelid at bad behaviour from Tory leaders. The English public are conditioned to see privately educated posh boys like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson as being automatically intelligent and trustworthy because they've been raised to speak a bit like the royal family. That bit is weird. Labour also are responsible to an extent. Corbyn was very popular to a small section of the public but abhorrent to the rest. The Labour Party membership which tends to be made up of very politically active and left-leaning people, often straight out of university, elect their leaders, so they usually end up with leaders who appeal to their activist base but won't necessarily appeal to the masses as Prime Minister. The Tories have generally been more pragmatic when choosing their leaders. Their members care more about being in power than whether their leader is completely ideologically in line with them. Although they seem to have bucked this trend with Liz Truss and it seems likely they'll do something stupid again when they lose the election and dump Sunak.

So yeah, a combination of things. The Tories aren't usually popular per se, but the way the majority of the public is absolutely sick of them now is something like I've never seen in my life.

Thanks for the wrote up, unfortunately it can be truncated into one sentence; ‘Exactly the same as Australia, but with accent biases’. Of course there are different cultural and historical events that are in affect, but the parallels are horrifying. 

[RandoEFC+]

Natalie Elphicke has just swapped from Tory to Labour. She's on record as having attacked trade unions over P&O Ferries' fire and rehire a couple of years ago amongst other things. She's pretty right wing and pedals the Boris Johnson fan-fiction that Rishi Sunak took over the Conservatives via a political coup.

She's the MP for Dover and is standing down at the next election, so the chosen Labour candidate is still going to stand in her seat, and this is clearly a handshake deal that she can join to make Rishi Sunak look like a tit at Prime Minister's Questions today without actually having a long-term future in the Labour Party. But she is still not remotely the type of person they should be welcoming into their tent.

I just don't get why Labour do this to themselves. They're on track for a huge win at the next election and if they're losing any votes, it's on the left. There is no need for them to make this move and risk alienating a bunch of people on the left and centre-left just to consolidate their position with centre and centre-right voters who are already overwhelming leaning towards them or at least toward not voting instead of voting Tory.

Baffling.

[Danny]

28 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Natalie Elphicke has just swapped from Tory to Labour. She's on record as having attacked trade unions over P&O Ferries' fire and rehire a couple of years ago amongst other things. She's pretty right wing and pedals the Boris Johnson fan-fiction that Rishi Sunak took over the Conservatives via a political coup.

She's the MP for Dover and is standing down at the next election, so the chosen Labour candidate is still going to stand in her seat, and this is clearly a handshake deal that she can join to make Rishi Sunak look like a tit at Prime Minister's Questions today without actually having a long-term future in the Labour Party. But she is still not remotely the type of person they should be welcoming into their tent.

I just don't get why Labour do this to themselves. They're on track for a huge win at the next election and if they're losing any votes, it's on the left. There is no need for them to make this move and risk alienating a bunch of people on the left and centre-left just to consolidate their position with centre and centre-right voters who are already overwhelming leaning towards them or at least toward not voting instead of voting Tory.

Baffling.

Does make you think that if there maybe a hung parliament, it'll probably be Labour and the Lib Dems, assuming the Lib Dems can get their shit together enough to take advantage of Starmer's shit on a stick like charisma.

[Stan]

29 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Natalie Elphicke has just swapped from Tory to Labour. She's on record as having attacked trade unions over P&O Ferries' fire and rehire a couple of years ago amongst other things. She's pretty right wing and pedals the Boris Johnson fan-fiction that Rishi Sunak took over the Conservatives via a political coup.

She's the MP for Dover and is standing down at the next election, so the chosen Labour candidate is still going to stand in her seat, and this is clearly a handshake deal that she can join to make Rishi Sunak look like a tit at Prime Minister's Questions today without actually having a long-term future in the Labour Party. But she is still not remotely the type of person they should be welcoming into their tent.

I just don't get why Labour do this to themselves. They're on track for a huge win at the next election and if they're losing any votes, it's on the left. There is no need for them to make this move and risk alienating a bunch of people on the left and centre-left just to consolidate their position with centre and centre-right voters who are already overwhelming leaning towards them or at least toward not voting instead of voting Tory.

Baffling.

Bizarre. It's like Labour are through on goal without a goalkeeper in the opposition goal, and they've still missed.

Extremely disappointing that Starmer has welcomed her with open arms, too. She's the exact kind of person to steer well clear of given her recent comments and views over past 2-3 years. She's vile and you'd think Starmer would just want as little controversy or controversial individuals in the party as possible. Welcoming Elphicke to the party just stinks of naivety and takes a backwards step after gaining so much ground in last week's locals.

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Danny said:

Does make you think that if there maybe a hung parliament, it'll probably be Labour and the Lib Dems, assuming the Lib Dems can get their shit together enough to take advantage of Starmer's shit on a stick like charisma.

I do wish people (in general) would stop using 'charisma' as a marker of a good PM or not.

Boris Johnson had lots of it and was a terrible PM.

Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak have very little to none and also made terrible PMs.

It's policies and clean personalities which make good leaders. Not least at such a treacherous time for politics these days. I'd rather Starmer be boring but get UK back on track with decisive policies and bringing people together* as opposed to having charisma and not actually getting anything done. 

 

*contentious point given that I think society is has gone past the point of no return with how divisive it is. And that I put firmly at the door of the Tories thanks to their rhetoric since they came into power and 2016 Brexit was a big catalyst for it. 

[Danny]

27 minutes ago, Stan said:

I do wish people (in general) would stop using 'charisma' as a marker of a good PM or not.

Boris Johnson had lots of it and was a terrible PM.

Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak have very little to none and also made terrible PMs.

It's policies and clean personalities which make good leaders. Not least at such a treacherous time for politics these days. I'd rather Starmer be boring but get UK back on track with decisive policies and bringing people together* as opposed to having charisma and not actually getting anything done. 

 

*contentious point given that I think society is has gone past the point of no return with how divisive it is. And that I put firmly at the door of the Tories thanks to their rhetoric since they came into power and 2016 Brexit was a big catalyst for it. 

Tbh my point was a bit reductive, but the negative about his charisma also extends to the fact that he is a twat and too much of a centrist.

[RandoEFC+]

47 minutes ago, Danny said:

Does make you think that if there maybe a hung parliament, it'll probably be Labour and the Lib Dems, assuming the Lib Dems can get their shit together enough to take advantage of Starmer's shit on a stick like charisma.

If Labour end up sinking to hung parliament territory from the poll lead they've held for ~18 months then I'll be astonished but if they take more reckless risks like they have today then it'll become a possibility.

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 hours ago, Danny said:

Tbh my point was a bit reductive, but the negative about his charisma also extends to the fact that he is a twat and too much of a centrist.

Considering how so much of the electorate is pretty conservative, a centrist is more likely to win an election than someone who's actually left wing.

It's a sad, but true, political reality. With disaster capitalists dragging the UK down for well over a decade all while they profit from the growing wealth gap, I'll take a centrist twat any day over those dickheads. It's not ideal, but when you've got a bunch of moron voters not realise there's a class war being waged, it's at least a reprieve from tories maliciously fucking up the country.

I also agree with @Stan, fuck charisma - with politicians all that matters is the policies and not being corrupt.

[Spike]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Considering how so much of the electorate is pretty conservative, a centrist is more likely to win an election than someone who's actually left wing.

It's a sad, but true, political reality. With disaster capitalists dragging the UK down for well over a decade all while they profit from the growing wealth gap, I'll take a centrist twat any day over those dickheads. It's not ideal, but when you've got a bunch of moron voters not realise there's a class war being waged, it's at least a reprieve from tories maliciously fucking up the country.

I also agree with @Stan, fuck charisma - with politicians all that matters is the policies and not being corrupt.

It's just that centrists in the west will typically always benefit those that are conservative more than the working class. The window is set to conservative, not left, a centrist makes comprises with the establishment not the fringe. Is it better? Maybe.

[MUFC]