- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,961
Realistically, do you think there is anything that Starmer could propose that would excite someone who has decided to remain a member of the Conservative party, despite what's happened to it over the last few years
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Sir Keir Starmer’s route to Number 10
- Thread starter Rdodge30
- Start date
Realistically, do you think there is anything that Starmer could propose that would excite someone who has decided to remain a member of the Conservative party, despite what's happened to it over the last few years
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,961
Last edited:
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,961
Well here is an absolutely excellent review of the last 12 months
Intelligent, well informed and witty, I'm guessing that was what you were asking for
nicko31
Well-known member
I'm not going to make a habit of posting links to Murdoch owned media, but this piece of client journalism is an insight to what Starmer will be dealing with in the run up to the GE
www.thesun.co.uk
It will only be a happy 2024 if UK doesn't vote in political dud Starmer
SADLY, the path into 2024 is not strewn with rose petals. This is a year of momentous choice — between sliding off a socialist cliff or sputtering back into life like an old biplane taking flight. …
www.thesun.co.uk
nicko31
Well-known member
Another wipeout in Scotland for Labour and they need a 20 point swing across the UK, if Labour do well its only a 5 point swing.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
You're assuming that the electorate* make good decisions, which is highly questionable. And I'd also question your claim that the public likes Starmer, but you can provide some evidence for this if you can find it.
*GEs are not won by a 'majority'. Cameron won in 2015 with 36.8% of those that cast a ballot, 6.4% more than Labour/Miliband got, yet that translated into 330 seats versus 232. Miliband actually got a higher % vote than Brown did (and, to add, 2017 Corbyn got a still higher % vote than Miliband):
2015 United Kingdom general election - Wikipedia
Machiavelli
Well-known member
@WATFORD zero has done a decent enough job of responding to this. Your follow-up questions are not exactly fair: you'll find out when their manifesto is released following on from the election being called (note: the Tories haven't released their manifesto yet, nor have the Lib Dems, SNP, ...).
We do know a few things though:
1, Rachel Reeves is placing stability and fiscal timidity centre-stage after the chaotic economic performance of the current party in office
2, which has watered down the bold £28bn pa green recovery plan devised by Ed Miliband to half that amount in the first half of the parliament. This might be further watered down due to 1
3, there will be a big shift in planning laws, to enable a serious upgrade in housebuilding
4, any growth will increase tax revenues, and this will go to repairing public services
5, aim is to get the national debt (not deficit) down by the end of the parliament (this is just another way of saying 1)
6, some other stuff too, which you can look up if you're that interested
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
As one example, this element causes me concern.
Firstly, a steamrollering of local planning restrictions will lead to legal repercussions from local residents and alike.
Additionally the workforce required once green fields have been bulldozed is open to question.
It's not being over critical, it's working on previous plans in various sectors being challenged and delayed on legal/ethical/moral grounds.
How it pans out in reality might be far away from a manifesto pledge
It's fine saying we need to build blah blah blah. Where's the workforce and far more importantly the materials. There's been a huge shortage of basic materials for years. Prices have gone up. It's easy to make a statement far harder to deliver.
We need a re-think. Why not use pre-fab buildings each with a proper garden, managed by on site wardens, each with a shop and basic facilities such as playgrounds.
Which proves that the present electoral system works excellentlyYou're assuming that the electorate* make good decisions, which is highly questionable. And I'd also question your claim that the public likes Starmer, but you can provide some evidence for this if you can find it.
*GEs are not won by a 'majority'. Cameron won in 2015 with 36.8% of those that cast a ballot, 6.4% more than Labour/Miliband got, yet that translated into 330 seats versus 232. Miliband actually got a higher % vote than Brown did (and, to add, 2017 Corbyn got a still higher % vote than Miliband):
2015 United Kingdom general election - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I disagree with your point about elections not being won by a 'majority'. This would mean that the majority lose the election. That's like losing weight by eating more of what you have always been eating, or f***ing for virginity.
I realize what you meant, of course, that of those eligible to vote only around 50-70% bother to do so, and the candidate with the largest proportion of votes (the winner) may only have just over a third of the votes cast. A third of 50% is around 17 % of the electorate in the constituency. (Which is, incidentally, far greater than the % of my union that voted to boycott Israel the other year - 22 votes to 6 in a 'chapple' of over 1000).
My response to that is 'boo-hoo, tough titty'. Blame the electorate for their apathy.
The only tweak that appeals to me is this. If there are 10,000 eligible votes in a constituency, and only 7,000 of those eligible to vote bother to register to vote, and only 4,000 of them bother to vote (40% of eligible voters), then that constituency should be deemed to be too apathetic to be allowed to return an MP. f***' em. If the largest proportion of votes (the 'winner') gets only 16% of the total possible votes in the constituency, they don't deserve an MP. If the majority 'vote' is for no candidate then they get no representation. No MP.
Incidentally, if this fix is done as I describe then the present trend to disenfranchise voters by pissing about with their voter registration may stop. It will be in the interest of all parties to get as much of the constituency electorate registered and voting as possible, given that whatever wheeze one party* may introduce to disenfranchise voters will apply across the UK.
*Let's not beat around the bush. It's the tory party. And they need the 'white van person' vote, a demographic of understandably little patience for electoral registration tomfoolery.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
By far the funniest and weakest post I've read in 2024, possibly 2023 also.Which proves that the present electoral system works excellently
My response to that is 'boo-hoo, tough titty'.
*Let's not beat around the bush. It's the tory party. And they need the 'white van person' vote, a demographic of understandably little patience for electoral registration tomfoolery.
What basic materials are difficult to find?
Haven't you heard about the global prefab shortage?
Seriously, we need to be more ambitious. There is plenty of building material available to build the famous British Rabbit Hutch houses. They are going up all over the place around Faversham. Tiny gardens that will grow nothing owing to the crowd of tall rabbit hutches blocking out the sun. No infrastructure, just houses, big (half a mil jobs), and rammed in, Esat Germany style (but bigger and better built).
With the fruit rotting down here due to lack of pickers (thanks to Brexit and a lack of native workforce willing to lower themselves for the money on offer) there are hectares available to build brand new cities in the South East. It could be done 'not for profit' to keep prices down, with strict buyer eligibility (no second home investors). Unthinkable? Perhaps there may be an end to the imagination log jam once the anti-woke culture war wankers have been thrown into the sea. Maybe not.
This just reminded me of an anecdote I was told many years ago while working with a bunch of electrical engineers at National Grid (who were rather older than me).Which proves that the present electoral system works excellently
I disagree with your point about elections not being won by a 'majority'. This would mean that the majority lose the election. That's like losing weight by eating more of what you have always been eating, or f***ing for virginity.
I realize what you meant, of course, that of those eligible to vote only around 50-70% bother to do so, and the candidate with the largest proportion of votes (the winner) may only have just over a third of the votes cast. A third of 50% is around 17 % of the electorate in the constituency. (Which is, incidentally, far greater than the % of my union that voted to boycott Israel the other year - 22 votes to 6 in a 'chapple' of over 1000).
My response to that is 'boo-hoo, tough titty'. Blame the electorate for their apathy.
The only tweak that appeals to me is this. If there are 10,000 eligible votes in a constituency, and only 7,000 of those eligible to vote bother to register to vote, and only 4,000 of them bother to vote (40% of eligible voters), then that constituency should be deemed to be too apathetic to be allowed to return an MP. f***' em. If the largest proportion of votes (the 'winner') gets only 16% of the total possible votes in the constituency, they don't deserve an MP. If the majority 'vote' is for no candidate then they get no representation. No MP.
Incidentally, if this fix is done as I describe then the present trend to disenfranchise voters by pissing about with their voter registration may stop. It will be in the interest of all parties to get as much of the constituency electorate registered and voting as possible, given that whatever wheeze one party* may introduce to disenfranchise voters will apply across the UK.
*Let's not beat around the bush. It's the tory party. And they need the 'white van person' vote, a demographic of understandably little patience for electoral registration tomfoolery.
The Student Union at the university (I think Bradford) was dominated by the sort of student who actually cared about student politics. In other words, weirdos.
Anyway, they would occasionally pop up at the union bar and harangue the engineering students about the importance of showing solidarity with the working man. Which the engineers would ignore and block out by getting as pissed as possible as quickly as possible.
One day, the union rep appeared and announced
"Comrades, the cleaning and catering staff at the University are being oppressed! We must show solidarity with them!"
"Yeah sure mate."
"To raise funds for the noble cause, we've decided to add a 5p* surcharge to the price of a price of a pint at the Union Bar"
"Yeah su- wait, what?"
The vote that rejected that motion was voted on by near enough every member of the engineering faculty and was rejected by an enormous margin.
No, there wasn't any point to me sharing this story.
*I've taken a wild guess at what surcharge they'd have added in whatever year this was, some time around 1980.
If we do throw them in the sea this will cause silting up and land creation. Make a new town Gravesend EndHaven't you heard about the global prefab shortage?
Seriously, we need to be more ambitious. There is plenty of building material available to build the famous British Rabbit Hutch houses. They are going up all over the place around Faversham. Tiny gardens that will grow nothing owing to the crowd of tall rabbit hutches blocking out the sun. No infrastructure, just houses, big (half a mil jobs), and rammed in, Esat Germany style (but bigger and better built).
With the fruit rotting down here due to lack of pickers (thanks to Brexit and a lack of native workforce willing to lower themselves for the money on offer) there are hectares available to build brand new cities in the South East. It could be done 'not for profit' to keep prices down, with strict buyer eligibility (no second home investors). Unthinkable? Perhaps there may be an end to the imagination log jam once the anti-woke culture war wankers have been thrown into the sea. Maybe not.
I love a good anecdote
When I was a student in 1976, my mate Nils (not a student at the time - was in sixth form still) was in the student bar with me, and decided to write "anarchy" in felt pen on the wall under the bar. A student union rep saw him and told him that "A cleaner will need to wash that off and will have to use a carcinogenic solvent to do so".
Nils had a lifetime of business and entrepreneurial-ship ahead of him, following a youth of Punk Rock and antisocialism, and knew nothing of 'carcinogenesis'*
He looked at me for inspiration, and on my prompting, turned to the earnest rep and invited him to "f*** off, you trendy lefty".
*Brilliant second album
Boris Island! The proposed site of a new London airport, located east of Sheppy, with a flight path over my house.
(with ploughed-in Johnson as part of the landscaping)
He would become the hillock (change letters as required)
highflyer
Well-known member
- Jan 21, 2016
- 2,573
Ah but don't forget the 2017 election NEVER HAPPENED here on Centrist Dadsnet.
It has been leaked that his speech today mentions the population feeling "downtrodden".
So Nicky Campbell has followed up yesterdays total fail of a phone (on whether we will declare paying our cleaners after new tax laws are brought in) in with "Do you feel downtrodden?"
So callers are saying "How dare he put words into our mouths?"
"He hasn't explained what he's going to do to change things!"
f*** me, it sometimes seems that this country doesn't deserve change. "Stick with Sunk. At least we know we are sunk with Sunk. With Starmer we have no idea what will happen!"
So Nicky Campbell has followed up yesterdays total fail of a phone (on whether we will declare paying our cleaners after new tax laws are brought in) in with "Do you feel downtrodden?"
So callers are saying "How dare he put words into our mouths?"
"He hasn't explained what he's going to do to change things!"
f*** me, it sometimes seems that this country doesn't deserve change. "Stick with Sunk. At least we know we are sunk with Sunk. With Starmer we have no idea what will happen!"