Didn’t labour first propose the oil company windfall tax? The tories then saw how popular it was, so pitched it as one of their own.
‘All the same…’
PCA - no anti democratic action is supporting a veto on something the scots parliament has decided. Anti democratic action is labour having an electoral pact with the tories that gave tories 10 seats and saved Mays government leading to brexit. Anti democratic action is London labour having a policy, scottish labour voting against that same policy because the SNP and greens supported it. Anti democratic action is labour going into coalition with the tories on multiple councils to keep the SNP out. Constitutional matters are irrelevant to councils. But the pact with the tories has led to labour voting for cuts.Edinburgh has a coalition of labour tory and lib dems. Anti democratic action is refusing to acknowledge that the majority UK wide want back into the EU and thats a huge majority in Scotland
we have 4 social democratic parties in Scotland . labour would rather work with far right tories than with SNP. labours tribal hatred of the Snp because the SNP took power leads them to this absurd situation whereby they do this. Their presence at Holyrood has been one of a child having a tantrum and throwing furniture around
In Scotland vote labour get tory is a true statement. We are looking at a high probability of a labour / tory coalition in holyrood after the next scottish election
I do not vote SNP and do not support them for other reasons but I cannot vote for labour while they behave like this.
It’s good to see that many on here see there is no real political solution at the minute, but incredibly worrying that many will do anything just to get the tories out.
Considering the damage they have done, it seems like a reasonable first step to me.
It’s ‘The Comfy Sweaters Lets Not Be Too Hasty Party’ for me.
I would vote for this, where do I sign up?
I reckon each of us has two choices. Do the @BruceWee suggestion, and vote for the party that best demonstrates the values and policies you want regardless of how well they do, becasue he's right, if you don't vote for them, the two major parties will pay attention to what you are voting for. The problem with that is time...The other option is vote tactically for the party that will remove the Tories because of the very immediate and obvious damage to our society that they're doing, the problem with that is that you'll get a slight improvement, but largely the status quo.
Given where we are right now, I'm doing the latter, but I completely get why you'd choose the former.
incredibly worrying that many will do anything just to get the tories out
Unless you are waiting for some utopian bloodless revolution it's the only valid way to take the first step towards positive change.
Tories Out At All Cost is based on the real world of today in this country.
I and make others are done with pointless protest votes that just keep the Tories in. Done.
Get Labour (or Lib/Lab/Green pact... That's fine with me) in then bash them if necessary.
It’s good to see that many on here see there is no real political solution at the minute, but incredibly worrying that many will do anything just to get the tories out.
I can see lots of paths to a better UK... and every single one starts with having as few Conservative MPs as possible after the next election.
Anti democratic action is labour going into coalition with the tories on multiple councils to keep the SNP out.
That's not anti-democratic. None of the stuff you've mentioned is. You just don't like the outcome, and don't understand why opposition parties can't stop being so beastly to the government by disagreeing with them.
I can see lots of paths to a better UK… and every single one starts with having as few Conservative MPs as possible after the next election.
The problem is if you are voting for a party that advocates continuing with the current system, as a vote for Labour supports, then you are voting for yet another Tory government, possibly even worse than the current one, in 5 or 10 years time.
It's not a first step. It's the 800th step in a process that is not going in a good direction.
You have the luxury of the @BruceWee position. Use it wisely.
It's worth remembering though that all votes are not created equal. If you live in a marginal constituency then where your vote goes is going to get far more attention than a vote in a safe seat.
Without a doubt it's a dilemma, but just remember that without a fundamental change the Tories are going to be back and probably worse than before. Especially if the only people voting for no-hoper parties in marginal seats are voting for Reform.
I can see lots of paths to a better UK… and every single one starts with having as few Conservative MPs as possible after the next election.
Whereas I see removing the tories and replacing them with the current Labour party a path for the Tories to return in an election or two and push the country even further into a right wing oligarchy. The tories and their ideology are a cancer, replacing them with Starmers labour is treating cancer with painkillers, it will mask the pain in the short term, but it will cure nothing.
never vote labour, the current tories are clowns but there is no situation labour cant make worse
It is PCA because its disguised and hidden. How many folk voted labour thinking that that meant more tory power - thats the issue. If it was discussed publicly beforehand you would be right. But it wasn't. Everyone knows that the SNP and greens work together. the fact that labour and tories are working together is hidden and denied
Do you really think labour supporters wanted coalitions with tories and this hidden electoral pact?
On Edinburgh council two councilors were suspended by the party for refusing to vote for the coalition with the tories.
What about labour in Scotland voting against Scots government proposals that are London labour policy? Its happened more than once.
Or how about the labour candidate in Rutherglen having to repudiate key parts of labour policy?
Its nothing to do with constitutional affairs anyway - its about a tribal hatred of the SNP because the SNP took power.
Labour in Scotland have forgotton who the enemy is
Whereas I see removing the tories and replacing them with the current Labour party a path for the Tories to return in an election or two and push the country even further into a right wing oligarchy.
If the Conservatives win another term... things won't stay as they are... they will further embed their political advantages... more first past the post... more legal limits on unions... more restrictions on those that speak out against them. If we don't get the Tories out this time, we won't get the "status quo", things will keep getting worse. This election is not just a protest about what the Tories have done over the last decade and more, but the only chance to stop what they will do to this country over the next decade and more. To let them carry on ruling after the next election... because you're worried about them coming back and ruling again after a future one... that's scary logic.
then you are voting for yet another Tory government, possibly even worse than the current one, in 5 or 10 years time.
Maybe, maybe not, as you say yourself the party will want to know why you're not voting for it, if most tell them they're too extremely right wing, they'll adjust accordingly, no? Besides which, regardless of how a country organises its voting and parliamentary chamber there will always be right wing parties, they ain't going away.
then you are voting for yet another Tory government, possibly even worse than the current one, in 5 or 10 years time.
But what ion the majority of people felt their lives/teh country was better under Labour. Why would they switch back to Tories. It will largely be in Labours hands to prove it can be better, even if not dramatically so.
The problem is if you are voting for a party that advocates continuing with the current system, as a vote for Labour supports, then you are voting for yet another Tory government, possibly even worse than the current one, in 5 or 10 years time.
So who do I vote for in order to get the Tories out?
If you feel so strongly that labour's position on x,y, or z is too awful to contemplate you can always get involved. Alternatively piss and moan on a mountain bike forum. This country simply can't afford another Tory government. Public Services are in an appalling state. If you can't vote Labour because Iraq or Libdem because tuition fees you're enabling the party that is systematically taking the country apart. There is no perfect party.
that’s scary logic.
Voting for a continuation of the current system and expecting the current system to change is scary logic.
If you feel so strongly that labour’s position on x,y, or z is too awful to contemplate you can always get involved.
I could do but I suspect my views would get me kicked out shortly after joining. Based on recent purges, at least.
This country simply can’t afford another Tory government.
That's unfortunate because that's what it's going to get. Another extreme right wing tory government chasing the votes of Reform and UKIP.
Voting for a continuation of the current system and expecting the current system to change is scary logic.
The current system is going to change... if we leave the Tories to it... they keep shifting the goalposts to favour themselves... and they get to do that by winning elections... despite most people who cast their vote voting for other parties. We let them rule based on minority support. As voters, we keep putting them in office. By not voting because "they're all the same". Or by splitting the opposition vote by not getting wise to how our voting system currently works.
That’s unfortunate because that’s what it’s going to get.
By your own theory though if you vote for the policies you want to see, the two major parties will follow you?
Another extreme right wing tory government chasing the votes of Reform and UKIP.
No you won't, becasue following your own theory of voting for policies you want to see enacted, the two major parties will follow you remember? The vast majority of folks in the UK lean slightly left or slightly right. Reform and UKIP won't be worth chasing as they'll be so small as to be irrelevant. According to you.
Edit: You can see this in action in the USA right now. In this off-election year, recently held local elections have seen the Republican vote collapse, why? Abortion rights. It's wildly unpopular, so even die hard republicans are holding their noses and voting democrat becasue they've rejected this policy, regardless of the fact that it's been a clarion call of the right wing evangelical vote for decades now. It will force the Republicans to act faster than the arguments about Trump will.
If the hinterlands are full of disenfranchised hard left Labour voters it could even be viable to start a hard left party in order to shift the conversation couldn't it?
Back to the pissing and moaning then...
By your own theory though if you vote for the policies you want to see, the two major parties will follow you?
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I think it's worth a try. It certainly worked for UKIP.
No you won’t, becasue following your own theory of voting for policies you want to see enacted, the two major parties will follow you remember? The vast majority of folks in the UK lean slightly left or slightly right. Reform and UKIP won’t be worth chasing as they’ll be so small as to be irrelevant. According to you.
I feel like I'm either not understanding something or you're baiting a really clever trap. Who am I in this scenario? Am I me the individual (whose individual actions make absolutely no difference to the outcome of the election), or am I representing the actions of thousands or even millions of other voters?
I don't get the don't vote labour because you'll get a worse Tory govt in next election or election but one. What is your answer?
Are you hoping that if things get so bad a new opposition will coalesce and sweep in a new era of equality
I can't stand aside and let the Tories run riot with the hope if things get bad enough something that fits my personal view of an ideal opposition with develop. Too much poverty, too much hate, climate crisis deepening.
Or by splitting the opposition vote by not getting wise to how our voting system currently works.
As I said, it worked out pretty well for UKIP.
I love the assmption that the only reason people vote Reform and risk splitting the Tory vote is because they are too stupid to understand FPTP.
That may well be the case. However, they got what they wanted. You can either learn from that or continue to vote sensibly because you are smart enough to understand FPTP.
What is your answer?
Look at the party manifestos and vote for the one that most closely matches your beliefs. Regardless of FPTP maths.
Or vote for a party that is more extreme than your beliefs. That will drag the mainstream parties in your direction as they chase your vote.
hard left party
So the only alternative, which would be significantly and fundamentally different to the current hard-right Tory government, would led by a "hard-left" party?
Despite being hard-left myself I was thinking that there might be the possibility of a social-democratic alternative, no?
It's just hard-right or hard-left?
We have 3 social democratic alternatives to labour in Scotland and at time ( before the inevitable splintering) a r real left wing party ( but not hard left) as well
Look at the party manifestos and vote for the one that most closely matches your beliefs. Regardless of FPTP maths
I am not unsympathetic to this approach - if there was a large shift to green voting it would potentially shift Labour policy - but only on environmental issues. However it's unlikely to cost Labour more than a tiny handful of seats under a FPTP system so unlikely to have much of an impact.
However, I think when we have such an horrendous government it's is posturing to not vote out the Tories, given our shitty FPTP system, if you have the chance in a swing constituency.
If you live in a rock solid safe Tory or Labour seat then fill your boots
I love the assmption that the only reason people vote Reform and risk splitting the Tory vote is because they are too stupid to understand FPTP.
No one has said this.
Remember, the Conservatives have been in power while being transformed by people (and media) with one foot in the Tory camp, one foot in the UKIP/Reform one. If, after the Tories are out of government, you see this as a path to changing the policies of a Labour led government, then I'd agree that it has merit. In the meantime, if we get another Tory one... then... it's all pointless. Dragging an opposition Labour party towards your ideal position by supporting other opposition parties, while others drag the Tories, still in power, towards theirs... no one will thank you, not least those hit hardest by yet more Tory rule.
no one will thank you, not least those hit hardest by yet more Tory rule.
And no one will thank you if a Labour government with an unassailable majority does very little or even nothing to alleviate conditions for those hit hardest by Tory rule.
BruceWee
And no one will thank you if a Labour government with an unassailable majority does very little or even nothing to alleviate conditions for those hit hardest by Tory rule.
The current Tory party is the actual, a future Labour party is still theoretical. They are bound to dump half of their manifesto pledges anyway as all parties do. That can mean both good and bad in this context.
I can only vote based on what I'm seeing now, not a theoretical future.
Btw, I'm not trying to be an argumentative sod. I'm very aware that we*all* want change, we just disagree on the best way of achieving it. 👍
And no one will thank you if a Labour government with an unassailable majority does very little or even nothing to alleviate conditions for those hit hardest by Tory rule.
There'll be another election... I'm not voting now based on their record in 6 years time. And anyway, I'm not saying vote Labour no matter what... I'm saying vote to not return a Tory MP in your seat... in many seats that means voting LibDem... I wish there were more seats where that meant voting Green... but that's not where we are for this election (that could change in future... anything can happen after step1... remove the Tories).
There's a bit of naive optimism going on here. We're all (well, most of us) are gagging to get the tories out but Starmer and Reeves have made perfectly clear their trickle down fiscal conservatism, their failure to support strikers and their toadying loyalty to US foreign policy. Once elected, governments have always shifted to the right. The LP has done that already. People wanting progress will have to fight for it. The posties, rail workers, nurses and doctors have risen to the challenge but a lot more of this will be required if we are to see improvements in society or else we just get more of the same.
Oh for God’s sake…I was given proper ID when they sent me here. Do you think they’re stupid on IO??
You sound very aggressive. Not sure you are the sort of person we want here. You are white and wealthy aren't you?
Well coming from Io csb is going to be busy breathing the sulfur dioxide we are producing that should help a bit with the climate change.
CSB might also be a great climber às Io is very mountainous but...then again it has very low gravity so...
For all those that are stating labour are now too far to the right a question. if the choice was a straight choice between the tories of the early 90s and the current government, who would you pick?
ultimately I get the rational brucewee is putting forward however like kelvin I don’t think this country has the luxury of waiting another 5-10 years for change, even if it’s not quite the change we want. if they get in this time round we are royally xxxed
We often blame politicians for only enacting policies based on short termism. If we want to make generational changes we have to start voting with an eye on more than one election cycle.
To make another analogy, the tories are rowing us towards the waterfall, labour are just allowing us to drift towards the waterfall, if we don't want to go over the waterfall we need to send a message that rowing away from the waterfall is how they get our votes.
I truly appreciate the time folks on here have given to elucidate their views. Thank you. It's clear that it's horribly complex to get any radical change; and that will never happen in our lifetime. Me, I could go for a benevolent dictatorship; but that ain't going to happen either. Revolution? We're not Gallic enough, anyway, look where it got the Arabs. Nothing in the mainstream appeals anymore but as many have said, a vote is not to be wasted.
Conversely, if they get in next year we’ll be over the waterfall in no time at all..
the only message voting in a Tory government sends the Torys is that they can basically get away with whatever they like as (at least with the way the voting system is rigged right now) the opposition’s vote it not unified. They won’t care what share of the votes they get, as long as they get into power then they can keep going with their wicked agenda, which is all that will matter to them
I don’t think this country has the luxury of waiting another 5-10 years for change, even if it’s not quite the change we want. if they get in this time round we are royally xxxed
It's not even a case of them getting in - I don't think they will. But Labour needs a sufficient majority to be able to legislate effectively and set themselves up for at least two terms in government. And the Tories need enough of a hiding that they recognise that far-right populism is not the route to power.
It’s clear that it’s horribly complex to get any radical change; and that will never happen in our lifetime.
I have seen radical change in my lifetime. Radical change in a relatively short period of time is perfectly feasible.
What might prove harder is achieving the sort of radical change which I can support, especially when it is dismissed as impossible to achieve.
I'd bear in mind that old quote of that politics being the art of the possible.
Are you willing to endure another 4+ years of Conservative government if the alternatives aren't what you exactly want? It seems a lot of people here are. You might need to settle for least bad.
Having supported Scottish independence since 1979. I was both excited and nervous in 2014 it was putting your ideals and beliefs on the line.
I, like many others put everything into it and lost.
However you have to try, every journey starts with the first step .
Are you willing to take 30 years of continuing neoliberalism stripping the quality of life of the many to serve a select few, for a few years pain relief where nothing changes.
I have never been able to buy a house, I have **** all pension, I can't vote in a way to salvage my life now in the current environment. But maybe I can do something to to change what happens for my nieces and nephews, now in their late teens, so that they are in a better position than me when they hit their 50's, and not just continue to be further generations of disposable commodities for the rich.
I’d bear in mind that old quote of that politics being the art of the possible.
I'll tell you what isn't possible, that's for the Conservative Party to remain in power forever. It simply won't happen.
What can happen though, is that the Conservative Party is replaced by another, differently named party, with the same policies repackaged.
What can happen though, is that the Conservative Party is replaced by another, differently named party, with the same policies repackaged.
I agree. The same as there will always be at least one party that attempts to attract the vote of the socially responsible/ aware... there will always be one (or more) that speaks to the I'm Alright Jack, lot too. It's name might change but the the desired direction doesn't.
@MSP 👍
Think of the children.
@ernielynch 👍
Scary prospect
@tjagain and @gordimhor 🤔
It's a tangled web
Thanks again everyone else, what a great place this is when everyone keeps their temper in check and actually discusses stuff 👍👍
if we don’t want to go over the waterfall we need to send a message that rowing away from the waterfall is how they get our votes.
How do we send that message?
mick lynch spoke at a forum at the labour party conference and his view was that (i paraphrase) a) the tories needed to removed from power at all costs b) the best way to do that was vote labour where possible or vote tactically where necessary and c) labour may not be the best fit for your beliefs but the party as it is can change and will do so even while in power. this is why it's called the struggle.
mick lynch and the rmt backed brexit IIRC, which is totally anathema to my views but i can agree with him on the above.
it was hosted by politocs joe if you want to look it up. towards the end.
work with those who align with your views where it counts or opt out of westminster politics. your choice.
edit: this isn't directed at anyone in particular, just in case anyone feels like it is directed at them, and gets their arse in their hand. not interested.
mick lynch and the rmt backed brexit
Well, that's quite the contradiction, for a union man, isn't it?
Does the union have to be his personal union, or could it be, for example, a larger union, possibly involving several of our closest European neighbours?
Corbyn was the same, I want socialism, but on my terms.....
Errm that makes you a dictator, mate.
Thanks again everyone else, what a great place this is when everyone keeps their temper in check and actually discusses stuff
I completely agree but it is worth noting that no one (I think?) has proposed voting Conservative.
I mean, I get it. They would pretty much get drowned out and that's putting it politely. In addition, the "Shy Tory" is a real phenomenon.
I think the reason I am mentioning this is that if you really want to know who to vote for you need to find out why around 24% of voters are predicted to still vote Conservative at the general election.
If nothing else it would be fascinating to know why they would vote for them.
I have my own ideas why but then I'm completely biased in my views and the only way to really find out is to ask them. Any friends or family intending to vote Conservative? Ask them their motives and see if they stack up with the cases made on here.
Well, that’s quite the contradiction, for a union man, isn’t it?
Devils advocate here.
Right or wrong, he probably believes foreign Labour was driving down wages or opportunities for British workers.
I don't agree with him but I'm guessing that's his reason? I'm guessing he must have justified his position over the years but I've never liked into it in all honesty.
I think the reason I am mentioning this is that if you really want to know who to vote for you need to find out why around 24% of voters are predicted to still vote Conservative at the general election.
If nothing else it would be fascinating to know why they would vote for them.
I can tell you as I am surrounded by Tory voters at work and where I live.
They don't like a lot of the people who are in the tory cabinet but they are still fine with how it is going as they are looking after them, hating the right people and anything but that awful Labour Party who will take all my money away and give it to less deserving people who have not worked as hard as I have.
While a lot of people on this forum would be in favour of a more equal society it is not something that they are bothered about. That is a fundamental difference which for me makes out hard to understand.
Right or wrong, he probably believes foreign Labour was driving down wages or opportunities for British workers.
I don’t agree with him but I’m guessing that’s his reason?
No it really isn't the reason. The RMT has an excellent record in negotiating wages and conditions for its members irrespective of EU membership.
No it really isn’t the reason. The RMT has an excellent record in negotiating wages and conditions for its members irrespective of EU membership.
Fair enough, has he started his reasons why then as I genuinely don't know if he has?
It wasn't simply his reasons, it was RMT policy. Pre-referendum I attended a local trade union council debate concerning EU membership, Mick Lynch's current deputy, Eddie Dempsey, spoke in support of leave. What was discussed on that evening really can't be summed up in one or two sentences.
Edit:
https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-sets-out-six-key-reasons-for-leaving-the-eu/
Surely the reasons were fairly succinct though? Leaving the EU was going to fundamentally only change a few things, initially anyway. Freedom of movement, divergence from EU standards or rules etc?
I'm honestly curious as to why the RMT took that position?
OP to answer your question, if you like cycling, then vote for whoever is best placed to get the Conservatives out. Which in the current system is Labour if they’ve got a chance of winning in your constituency, the Liberal Democrats if they don’t.
Anything else just helps the Conservatives.
OP to answer your question, if you like cycling, then vote for whoever is best placed to get the Conservatives out. Which in the current system is Labour if they’ve got a chance of winning in your constituency, the Liberal Democrats if they don’t.
What particular cycling related policies do you like that Labour and Lib Dems have?
.
While a lot of people on this forum would be in favour of a more equal society it is not something that they are bothered about. That is a fundamental difference which for me makes out hard to understand
I think the majority of people are kept in the dark about how things work in economics. Money has to be fought for in the current system - but it's not scarce at all.
And, I think people have no benchmark for what better could mean. We're all used to a system and we believe we should work hard and we will get rewarded and the NHS is at the mercy of tax payers money etc. (obviously a lie.)
Therefore how does anyone ever break free of their understanding of society if they're not told the truth about markets/pensions/government spending/interest rates. All these things are lined up to work against you but if only you can work harder you will do okay.
The whole thing needs breaking from the current shackles of trickle-down and we need to work out what is important and make it happen.
There is zero need for things to be crumbling.
I genuinely thought COVID would be the wake-up call (the state stepping to finance stuff whilst keeping us safe, needing to look after each other etc) - but the reversions to establishment norms has been incredible.
It's a strong magnet is Neolibralism. And it's wrecking the hell out of everything.
As for this forum well there's a middle ground understanding of economics that is pure Conservative - that unlike other elements of politics has become accepted by both Labour and Tory supporters. You have left and right in concept but they've both aligned on how macro economic policy is delivered.
It is the flaw in just about every debate.
Letting Tories set the narrative is the problem for me.
To make another analogy, the tories are rowing us towards the waterfall, labour are just allowing us to drift towards the waterfall, if we don’t want to go over the waterfall we need to send a message that rowing away from the waterfall is how they get our votes.
Lovely analogy, I still don't get how you think 'We' (the wider electorate?) send a message other than by voting which of course can only really deliver one of two apparently unacceptable choices...
It might be short term thinking but right now I'm very much in the 'Torys out by whatever available means' category, if that means accepting SKS, and 'We' send our longer term messages later so be it...
It’s not even a case of them getting in – I don’t think they will. But Labour needs a sufficient majority to be able to legislate effectively and set themselves up for at least two terms in government. And the Tories need enough of a hiding that they recognise that far-right populism is not the route to power.
The problem with that is, what do they need a huge majority for?
I see nothing particularly revolutionary in what Labour are proposing. As has been said many times, they are basically saying, 'Same as the Tories but less shit.' A large majority just means a continuation of Tory policies but apparently done 'properly'.
The thing about having a small majority is parties are then limited by what they can do by the fringes. A small majority would mean the left would be able to actually exert influence over the party. A huge majority would mean they could be safely ignored. Although saying all that, I'm not even sure how much of the Left of the party is still around.
Labour aren't going to do anything once in power- They've said as much. That is what is going to limit them to being a single term government. People's lives are not going to improve under Labour and that is going to bring the Tories sweeping back in.
Which brings us to your next point. A huge defeat is not going to convince the Tories to abandon their right wing rhetoric, especially if they are leaking votes to Reform. It's going to cause them to double down on the whole fascist-lite thing they are currently doing. And then they'll win the next election.
It might be short term thinking but right now I’m very much in the ‘Torys out by whatever available means’ category, if that means accepting SKS, and ‘We’ send our longer term messages later so be it…
You aren't going to get the chance to send that message. I don't see this Labour government getting more than one term.
Labour aren’t going to do anything once in power- They’ve said as much.
Manifestos aren’t published yet, but here is the policy platform signed off at conference:
But again, it doesn’t matter how many Labour MPs there are, only that there are as few Conservative MPs as possible. You only need to vote Labour if that is the best way to stop a Conservative from being your MP. In the unlikely situation you are in a Labour/Green marginal (there are a few), or a LibDem/Labour marginal, then vote for whoever will best represent you. (Same goes for SNP & PC & ScotsGreens). But if you’re in a seat that could possibly return a Conservative MP, vote smart to try and stop that happening.
The thing about having a small majority is parties are then limited by what they can do by the fringes. A small majority would mean the left would be able to actually exert influence over the party. A huge majority would mean they could be safely ignored.
Sometimes this actually works the other way round. I have seen in in councils with huge labour majorities. What happens is the party with the huge majority effectively splits and the debate becomes between the right and left of the party.
As we also saw with the huge SNP landslides that fringe candidates get elected. Now some of them are numpties but some are those who were not expected to win did so and - and we end up with folk like Mhari Black as MPs. Black was never expected to be an MP. she was standing in a no hope seat but the landslide meant she was elected and could then make her voice heard and she is well to the left of the mainstream SNP
As we also saw with the huge SNP landslides that fringe candidates get elected. Now some of them are numpties but some are those who were not expected to win did so and
That was a failure on the snp side though (the tories made a similar one).
Starmer doesnt seem to be making the same mistake with a "due diligence" check allowing them to remove anyone vaguely left wing to keep the potential mps as ideologically pure as possible.
Labour have categorically ruled out doing anything bar fiddling around the fringes. No increase in spending, no return to or even significant rapprochement with the EU, no constitutional reform. thats 3 key things ruled out leaving them with no room to make any significant changes. Three things that would radically alter the country for the better
Yep, unless there is a massive change in direction from Labour one win power then it doesn't look like anyones life is going to be noticeably different under Labour. There will be a general feeling the the government aren't such a bunch of ****s but the impact that the current bunch of ****s versus a nicer bunch of people doing pretty much the same things is going to be hard to notice when it comes to things that actually affect people.
You could say Starmer is playing a great game and keeping his position in the polls at all costs and then start to put in place stuff once in power and hasn't mentioned much or is on page 30 of the manifesto in small print but I doubt that is the case.
You mean they have said they are not going to debate in HoP or pass any legislation?
So, the argument for Labour has progressed from, 'If you don't vote Labour you're voting Tory' to being pedantic about wording? Sorry, but that doesn't really reassure me that anything is going to change for people under Labour in real terms.
But yes, I'm sure they will bring legislation. For example, it wouldn't surprise me if they continue the Tory's campaign to limit the right to protest and demonstrate, limit the ability of unions to strike, and they'll probably continue making Islamophobia as mainstream as possible.
For example, it wouldn’t surprise me if they continue the Tory’s campaign to limit the right to protest and demonstrate, limit the ability of unions to strike, and they’ll probably continue making Islamophobia as mainstream as possible.
Following the comments by the next Home Secretary yesterday I suspect that you might be right.
If I had to name the second least trustworthy Labour politician it would be Yvette Cooper. I find it astonishing just how deliberately disingenuous she can be. She definitely reads the same script as the Tories.
The promotion of Cooper for me was one of the key steps for me giong from supporting Starmer to not supporting him<br /><br />Not only is she both rightwing and a weathervane but also unrepentantly corrupt
So, the argument for Labour has progressed from, ‘If you don’t vote Labour you’re voting Tory’
Seems to me it’s moved to ‘if you vote Labour, you’re voting Tory’.
Though it could also be folks desperate, aching need to tell others they are wrong despite agreeing with them.
