[Politics] Labour Party meltdown incoming.......

[aolstudios]

I feel very uncomfortable with this situation if Dianne Abbott is not allowed to stand in the upcoming election yet we allow hard right Tory defectors into the party

Into the party for a fortnight, tbf

 

[Chicken Run]

Say what you like about Dianna Abbott, and plenty are:

1987 48.7% of the vote and a majority of 7,678.
1992: 57.8% and an increased majority of 10,727
1997: 65.2% and an increased majority of 15,627
2001: 61% and a decreased majority of 13,651
2005: 48.6% and a decreased majority of 7,427
2010: 55% and an increased majority of 14,461
2015: 62.9% and an increased majority of 24,008
2017: 75.1% and an increased majority of 35,139
2019: 70.3% and a decreased majority of 33,188

She's a brutally effective vote winner in her constituency

(1) Improving trade relations with the EU - hopefully once elected he'll start talking about re-joining SM / CU

(2) Private education - agree about taxation - but don't demonise it - IMO what people spend their money on (like private Healthcare) is up to them.

(3) Agree - taxation (for the very well off) has to rise - this applies to Companies too of course and closing loopholes (for both Cos. & Individuals)

Getting value for money is equally important - half the Councils in England should be binned and merged - why do we have Adur & Worthing Council AND WSCC? Why Horsham District Council AND WSCC? So much duplication and waste. Remember lots of villages have another level - Parish Councils - what a waste of time and money - Bin them.

This wastage and bloating goes for the NHS too - world's 6th largest employer - where does the money go? (BTW my wife works for the NHS and so sees the wastage first hand)

The Labour Party will win a massive landslide, but it will take two terms to get anywhere near sorting the Country out.

I’d say three

 

[Dibdab]

No longer a danger to the nation then?

Rishi Sunak to warn next few years 'most dangerous' for UK in major speech

The PM will argue in a speech that the UK is facing some of its "most transformational" years.

www.bbc.co.uk

Rishi Sunak’s scare tactics aren’t going to work against a soothing Keir Starmer | Andrew Rawnsley

As he demonstrated at the launch of his pledge cards, the Labour leader has succeeded in de-risking perceptions of his party

www.theguardian.com

Very much so. Centrist versions of the Tories started the rot to where we are and the shocking austerity that has ravaged the working and poorer classes.

 

[Rdodge30]

Please list them and explain how he broke them.

Please don't include any changes in policy or plan. The ability to CHANGE is the hallmark of strength.

Only a fool comes up with a silly arse plan and sticks with it. Only a knave inherits a silly arse plan from their predecessor (*cough* Rwanda *cough) and sticks with it.

Actually only a fool comes up with a silly ass plan in the first place

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Very much so. Centrist versions of the Tories started the rot to where we are and the shocking austerity that has ravaged the working and poorer classes.

Do you mean Blair? His was the last elected labour government. My recollection is he swept away the nasty old bollocks from Thatcher and Major and gave us 10 years to up our game as human beings which, by and large, we did.

Surely you don't mean everything was great under Thatcher and Major and the 'rot' set in only after Blair became PM?

So who would be the great left labour government of the (distant) past that delivered for you? Or are you musings purely aspirational?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Actually only a fool comes up with a silly ass plan in the first place

Perhaps a distinction needs to be made between well-meaning folly (which would be a mistake one would hope would be corrected) and malicious folly (which would be pursued to the bitter end).

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Say what you like about Diane Abbott, and plenty are:

1987 48.7% of the vote and a majority of 7,678.
1992: 57.8% and an increased majority of 10,727
1997: 65.2% and an increased majority of 15,627
2001: 61% and a decreased majority of 13,651
2005: 48.6% and a decreased majority of 7,427
2010: 55% and an increased majority of 14,461
2015: 62.9% and an increased majority of 24,008
2017: 75.1% and an increased majority of 35,139
2019: 70.3% and a decreased majority of 33,188

She's a brutally effective vote winner in her constituency

For comparison, Rishi Sunak has had majorities well over 20,000 in his constituency in the last two elections.

I'm not sure this proves much in either case other than that they both have very safe seats and aren't actually baby eating monsters.

 

[Weststander]

No, I'm quite chilled. I expect brickbats from the hard right and hard left. Starmer is that dangerous (i.e., that likely to prevail, win an election and steer calmer).

The latest on Abbott is that just like her reaction when she had her collar felt in the first place, before she wound her neck back in, it looks like she has got the wrong end of the stick again. Starmer was just asked if Abbott has been stood down and he said 'no'.

I would be tempted now, if I were Starmer, to boot her out for being mad.

And meanwhile, just like they did when Hughton was sacked, well know black 'spokesmen' are accusing labour of racism. Because Abbott is black. I was particularly offended by the narrative that black people vote labour purely because Labour support black people, and any whiff that this may no longer be the case will result in black people not supporting labour. What patronizing (and racist) nonsense! Anyone supporting my party on grounds of race can f*** off as far as I'm concerned.

Troy Townsend

 

[Pavilionaire]

"The chance to serve is wonderful. but there comes a time when you know that it is time to leave. That a new generation should lead."

Said Michael Gove last week. And he was absolutely right. If only Dianne Abbott had the good sense to retire gracefully, rather than causing problems for her party.

Starmer inherited a party tainted by anti-semitism. Abott then came out with a crass comment including Jewish people so - quite rightly - she had the whip removed.

She then apologised, accepted her punishment and Labour had the good grace to reinstate the whip, paving the way for both sides to part on good terms (I recognise Labour really had to do that anyway having allowed Natalie Elphicke to cross the floor from the Tory benches). Overall, I don't see that Starmer has done much wrong.

If she can't be persuaded to go step down voluntarily then given how popular she is in her constituency I don't see that letting her stand again is that risky. She's been punished for her anti-semitism which - given Stamford Hill is in her constituency with 25,000 Orthodox Jews - was pretty dumb.

 

[JBizzle]

For comparison, Rishi Sunak has had majorities well over 20,000 in his constituency in the last two elections.

I'm not sure this proves much in either case other than that they both have very safe seats and aren't actually baby eating monsters.

I don't disagree, it's historically a Labour seat, but the so-called "red wall" proved that any seat is "losable"

 

[Rdodge30]

Perhaps a distinction needs to be made between well-meaning folly (which would be a mistake one would hope would be corrected) and malicious folly (which would be pursued to the bitter end).

I think when we are talking about electioneering any kind of ridiculous nonsense that nobody in their right mind would believe to be true or even possible … and is then walked back/back tracked/sidelined or generally binned off is what makes politicians untrustworthy.

I was amused to see (in another place) both you and WZ separately lambasting people for saying politicians are all the same with the now familiar drivel of “You’re a Tory then!”

I imagine the most commonly held view on politicians with regard to trust and truth is - they’re all the same, namely untrustworthy and untruthful. I could be wrong though

I don’t think there is any doubt that Sir Keir genuinely wants to do the best for the country and he will have to learn on the job as that’s all anyone can do as Prime Minister but the £140 billion green policies in the first term was pathetic and very quickly got rolled back….. the 1.5 million new houses is well ambitious to day the least and I fully expect the length of time that will take to be extended approaching the next GE. The promise to have the highest sustainable growth is a smokescreen as to my knowledge there is no known form of measurement for sustainable growth- growth yes but sustainable? That’s just politicians double speak surely.

The most recent claim for improving the NHS is laudable…. It’s a reeeeal vote winner as well (as if he needed one!) but does anybody really think it will happen? I’m not so sure !!

 

[nevergoagain]

Bravo chaps, I only posted this to make light of the huge tory thread but in less than a day we've got 5 pages of lefty squabbling, gammon & loonie lefties comments. Well played all.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I don't disagree, it's historically a Labour seat, but the so-called "red wall" proved that any seat is "losable"

The whole point of the "red wall" was that there were a swathe of seats where the Labour vote was higher than any demographic indicator would suggest it should be - ie it was apparent that they were losable.
Nobody ever suggested that they were going to lose a load of seats in central Liverpool or Islington, and they didn't.

I'm sure the local MP in all of these hugely safe seats would stand a decent chance in an election if they chose to run as an independent, depending on the circumstances, but that's much more down to long term name recognition rather than any particular political genius on their part.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think when we are talking about electioneering any kind of ridiculous nonsense that nobody in their right mind would believe to be true or even possible … and is then walked back/back tracked/sidelined or generally binned off is what makes politicians untrustworthy.

I was amused to see (in another place) both you and WZ separately lambasting people for saying politicians are all the same with the now familiar drivel of “You’re a Tory then!”

I imagine the most commonly held view on politicians with regard to trust and truth is - they’re all the same, namely untrustworthy and untruthful. I could be wrong though

I don’t think there is any doubt that Sir Keir genuinely wants to do the best for the country and he will have to learn on the job as that’s all anyone can do as Prime Minister but the £140 billion green policies in the first term was pathetic and very quickly got rolled back….. the 1.5 million new houses is well ambitious to day the least and I fully expect the length of time that will take to be extended approaching the next GE. The promise to have the highest sustainable growth is a smokescreen as to my knowledge there is no known form of measurement for sustainable growth- growth yes but sustainable? That’s just politicians double speak surely.

The most recent claim for improving the NHS is laudable…. It’s a reeeeal vote winner as well (as if he needed one!) but does anybody really think it will happen? I’m not so sure !!

Labour does have a better record of handling the NHS as this graph shows.

 

[drew]

Abbott has a long record of consistently making faux pas for decades now. To blanket slander those who criticise her consistent embarrassments as racists is in extremely bad taste. It is possible to be both incompetent and an ethnic minority. Criticism is not off the table if you’re an ethnic minority. People shouldn’t be afraid to challenge views for fear of being labelled racist, an anti-semite or islamaphobe.

It is these kinds of hyperbolic generalisations which make me lose any and all respect for those to espouse them. It is the politics of hate, fear and division which are the very criticisms rightly levelled against the political right.

Shameful comment and the poster should apologise.

That is of course one view! I'm sure the right leaning press do it for other reasons.

 

[Rdodge30]

Labour does have a better record of handling the NHS as this graph shows.

No doubt, no doubt….

However:

Labour says it will create 40,000 extra appointments, scans and operations a week during its first year, if it gains power.

So over 2million extra appointments etc a year?

If I’m being honest I personally think that is extremely unlikely and will almost certainly get back tracked once in power.

 

[Gabbiano]

People will say "Starmer's just the same as Sunak" and "Starmer doesn't even have any policies" in the same breath without even a hint of irony.

Frankly Starmer is exactly what Labour need to win the election - a centrist, pragmatic and with a track record of professional competence. This is the contrast to Sunak and his band of thieves.

I'm disappointed at the welcome given to Elphicke as anyone, really the wrong move for a cheap point scoring exercise.

But the left wing of the Labour Party hand wringing about how Starmer isn't socialist enough or whatever it is they want is redundant. What they want is not what the electorate as a whole desires - Corbyn proved that quite roundly.

 

[Simster]

(1) Improving trade relations with the EU - hopefully once elected he'll start talking about re-joining SM / CU

(2) Private education - agree about taxation - but don't demonise it - IMO what people spend their money on (like private Healthcare) is up to them.

(3) Agree - taxation (for the very well off) has to rise - this applies to Companies too of course and closing loopholes (for both Cos. & Individuals)

Getting value for money is equally important - half the Councils in England should be binned and merged - why do we have Adur & Worthing Council AND WSCC? Why Horsham District Council AND WSCC? So much duplication and waste. Remember lots of villages have another level - Parish Councils - what a waste of time and money - Bin them.

This wastage and bloating goes for the NHS too - world's 6th largest employer - where does the money go? (BTW my wife works for the NHS and so sees the wastage first hand)

The Labour Party will win a massive landslide, but it will take two terms to get anywhere near sorting the Country out.

There isn't a single word I disagree with here.

I wasn't demonizing private education, to be clear, but I do think VATing it is an excellent policy. There is no reason why private education shouldn't attract tax and the more people who are in state education, the more likely the country is to demand quality. All the while a rump of people can afford to go private, there is less of a will to improve state.

You are also spot on about the NHS - my wife works indirectly for them and says the same. But my dad's story sums up the NHS - he was once running a training course to middle management in Salisbury and they laid out about 40 chairs. No word of a lie - THREE people turned up. What makes these people think it's ok to waste public money?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Nice thread concept but I'm not sure the sidelining of Abbott is a good place to start.

Let us begin. She is being defended now by the Starmer-hating hard left for apologising over her antisemitic comments. She apologised and went on an antisemitism aware course. At the age of 69 and after 40 years as an MP. But before she apologized and went on a course, this was her reaction:

Diane Abbott attacks Labour investigation as 'fraudulent'

The MP has been suspended from the party pending an inquiry into comments she made about racism.

www.bbc.co.uk

And here we go, the 'newspaper' with the best contacts in the labour party (ho, ho, ho) has delivered its verdict:

View attachment 183148

And a caller to R5 now says "Starmer is like a labour version of Major but ten times worse"...."Tony Blair... illegal war... waiting in he wings". Crikey. Grey man Starmer supports illegal war by proxy. Some on the hard right and hard left do struggle with a narrative....

I'm not a Diane Abbott fan ... or even agreer BUT I do find it rather annoying she's been labelled as antisemitic in most reports yet she also 'offended' the Irish and travellers. Just getting a bit bored of everything heading towards the antisemitic slant nowadays.

 

[Is it PotG?]

This bit about the private schools might have a negative impact.

Many of the day-to-day parents I know made significant sacrifices in order to go private.

I can see that this increase will put many borderline pupils unable to go, and subsequently add to the already overstretched demand in state schooling.

Bigger class sizes and increased places, I do hope the increment in required teaching staff has been accounted for.