[The Earl of Chesterfield]

 turrhall, on 03 May 2024 - 10:34 PM, said:

Even as a starmer loyalist you must be able to see that the labour right nuking the party to take control and then proceeding to get less vote share than in 2017, against a Tory party even weaker than it was under teresa may, is a humourous turn of events? Really wouldn't worry about it though, very much doubt this is accurate - Labour will still get a massive majority.

As always, maybe if the current iteration of the LP offered the left something (anything!) that they wanted, they'd be more inclined hold their noses and vote for them. Personally, I'm not voting for a party that has moved so far from my own politics that they don't represent me at all on the basis that they aren't the tories.

Good example of this has been today whenever a council has been lost in an area with a higher than average muslim population every labour member or labour-affiliated journalist has been basically saying 'oh well, lotta muslims in this area, that's why we lost' as if muslims are some sort of 5th columnist hindrance to democracy rather than citizens of this country who want to vote for a party that to represent them politically.

Again, we're really not too far apart.

My thoughts on Gaza and the Netanyahu regime are, as repeatedly stated on the appropriate thread, much closer to our Muslim friends than Starmer's.

In fact it appears the party has taken a cynical decision there're more votes to be won by paralleling the government line than standing by traditional supporters.

Irony is though, we're now seeing the same Islamophobes who accused Labour of pandering to certain constituencies (remember the sneers surrounding Starmer's supposedly absent poppy?) gloating over pro Palestinian independents being elected.

The very characters - specifically GeeBeebies presenters - also inferring those councillors will somehow impede grooming investigations.

I understand and accept your differences with the current Labour Party. Legitimate differences based upon a moral standpoint. But surely the priority here is calling out their hypocritical jibes rather than, in appearance at least, echoing them....?

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 04 May 2024 - 07:14 AM

[turrhall]

 The Earl of Chesterfield, on 04 May 2024 - 06:32 AM, said:

Again, we're really not too far apart.

My thoughts on Gaza and the Netanyahu regime are, as repeatedly stated on the appropriate thread, much closer to our Muslim friends than Starmer's.

In fact it appears the party has taken a cynical decision there're more votes to be won by paralleling the government line than standing by traditional supporters.

Irony is though, we're now seeing the same Islamophobes who accused Labour of pandering to certain constituencies (remember the sneers surrounding Starmer's supposedly absent poppy?) gloating over pro Palestinian independents being elected.

The very characters - specifically GeeBeebies presenters - also inferring those councillors will somehow impede grooming investigations.

I understand and accept your differences with the current Labour Party. Legitimate differences based upon a moral standpoint. But surely the priority here is calling out their hypocritical jibes rather than, in appearance at least, echoing them....?

Look, I have seen you talking about Gaza on here and you're always on the right side on that.

Labour clearly has a problem with islamophobia - https://twitter.com/...siEuXdrzIA&s=19

Labour deny the person who said this is involved with Labour, but the journo won't reveal who it was because they're a source. But thought what they said was fine until people pointed out it was actually quite racist.

I hate the Tories, I will always hate them and never vote for them, but I have expectations for the Labour Party. If they don't meet them, I can't vote for them, and that bar isn't even that high.

[Mr Mercury]

Well anyone else leave Labour due to disagreeing with KS stance on Gaza?
https://news.sky.com...ection-13129800

[calvin plummers socks]

I do think KS should have told that rancid old witch Elphicke to do one

[isleaiw1]

calvin plummers socks, on 08 May 2024 - 11:57 AM, said:

I do think KS should have told that rancid old witch Elphicke to do one

Standing down at the next election apparently so clearly wanted 5 min of glory.... an interesting one just 12 months after she wrote an article saying you couldnt trust Labour on borders. Clearly a Boris fan just sticking the knife in judging by what I read...describing the Tories under Boris as centrist. I think she meant opportunist, populist, cronyist....

I assume Reform will win in Dover next time

[calvin plummers socks]

 isleaiw1, on 08 May 2024 - 12:40 PM, said:

Standing down at the next election apparently so clearly wanted 5 min of glory.... an interesting one just 12 months after she wrote an article saying you couldnt trust Labour on borders. Clearly a Boris fan just sticking the knife in judging by what I read...describing the Tories under Boris as centrist. I think she meant opportunist, populist, cronyist....

I assume Reform will win in Dover next time

Probably -mind you Kent is the weirdest of places

[Mr Mercury]

Labour becoming a dustbin for defectors. Clearly the new “scum” party. Even Lord Kinnock shows his disgust.
There’s no depths Starmer will plummet to to getting the keys to No10. He hasn’t got the backbone to refuse her admission and with the SNP ditching the useless racist Humzah there’s a chance the SNP may rally a little, given that, and the forecasts showing a hung Parliament I wonder if the Labour supporters have been gloating too soon.
Interesting election coming up!

[s42blue]

I have to say the acceptance of Elphicke just shows not much will change in terms of desire to be in power. Sorry indefensible and no amount of spin and photo opps will convince me otherwise. Poor KS, just poor. Even Earl can’t defend this one.

This post has been edited by s42blue: 09 May 2024 - 09:43 PM

[s42blue]

Lisa Mandy on QT not being able to defend the defection with any conviction. Elphicke should have gone Independent for a short time but wouldn’t as she’s a career politician.

Quite some time ago I thought MPs acted with integrity, possessed a greater level of awareness of events and issues. Now I think they have neither and wouldn’t cut it in the world of business.

This post has been edited by s42blue: 09 May 2024 - 10:19 PM

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

 s42blue, on 09 May 2024 - 09:42 PM, said:

I have to say the acceptance of Elphicke just shows not much will change in terms of desire to be in power. Sorry indefensible and no amount of spin and photo opps will convince me otherwise. Poor KS, just poor. Even Earl can’t defend this one.

Hey - how can I criticise a SKS for extending the same hand of reconcilliation I've so often done on here.

Embracing the repenteth sinner, and all that.

But seriously, this latest stunt - let's live in the real world and call it exactly what it is - dispells any more silly suggestions the Labour leader lacks control of his party. As did the response to wavering support over Gaza. He's ruthless. He's owning the agenda. He's calculated there're more votes to be won with his approach than lost.

And who can argue given recent poll results.

Will I defend it?

No.

Do I like it?

Again, no.

However SKS is Blair-like in understanding he must, absolutely must appeal to the middle majority of voters instead of traditional ones.

Only time will tell if he can match his three times elected predecessor or what he'll do with power if so...

[s42blue]

 The Earl of Chesterfield, on 10 May 2024 - 02:42 PM, said:

Hey - how can I criticise a SKS for extending the same hand of reconcilliation I've so often done on here.

Embracing the repenteth sinner, and all that.

But seriously, this latest stunt - let's live in the real world and call it exactly what it is - dispells any more silly suggestions the Labour leader lacks control of his party. As did the response to wavering support over Gaza. He's ruthless. He's owning the agenda. He's calculated there're more votes to be won with his approach than lost.

And who can argue given recent poll results.

Will I defend it?

No.

Do I like it?

Again, no.

However SKS is Blair-like in understanding he must, absolutely must appeal to the middle majority of voters instead of traditional ones.

Only time will tell if he can match his three times elected predecessor or what he'll do with power if so...

I hope that was tongue in cheek…

To me stronger would have been “no sorry you can’t join us” leaked tactically but it’s his ball so he can do as he wants. I just don’t think it reflects well.

Obviously he thinks it’s the right thing to do, so fair play. It definitely hasn’t landed well with lots of people. Recent results would have happened regardless. ABC. . Anyone But Conservatives

Totally agree he has to position the party very slightly left of centre. Out of interest would a centrist Labour Party appease your Socialist needs? Or is it just get in power?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

 s42blue, on 10 May 2024 - 02:54 PM, said:

I hope that was tongue in cheek…

To me stronger would have been “no sorry you can’t join us” leaked tactically but it’s his ball so he can do as he wants. I just don’t think it reflects well.

Obviously he thinks it’s the right thing to do, so fair play. It definitely hasn’t landed well with lots of people. Recent results would have happened regardless. ABC. . Anyone But Conservatives

Totally agree he has to position the party very slightly left of centre. Out of interest would a centrist Labour Party appease your Socialist needs? Or is it just get in power?

Not sure what my "socialist needs" are. I certainly have no list of uncompromising demands as seen in the pages of 'Militant' back in the day. An NHS where folk aren't waiting hours for an ambulance, days in A&E, weeks to see a GP then dying for want of treatment? Utilities focused on public need rather than private profits? A compassionate benefit and immigration system?

That'd be a start. Yet it's almost as if the tories have adopted a 'scorched earth' policy in terms of the nation's finances.

But surely the more important question is are Labour doing enough to appease your needs? As one of the moderate middle who ultimately decide elections, are they edging you towards their box?

Yeah, I know, probably as being the best of a bereft bunch. Yet I'm genuinely interested in which you'll sway as, perhaps, the 'Bob's Board' bell weather voter...

[isleaiw1]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 10 May 2024 - 06:29 PM, said:

Not sure what my "socialist needs" are. I certainly have no list of uncompromising demands as seen in the pages of 'Militant' back in the day. An NHS where folk aren't waiting hours for an ambulance, days in A&E, weeks to see a GP then dying for want of treatment? Utilities focused on public need rather than private profits? A compassionate benefit and immigration system?

That'd be a start. Yet it's almost as if the tories have adopted a 'scorched earth' policy in terms of the nation's finances.

But surely the more important question is are Labour doing enough to appease your needs? As one of the moderate middle who ultimately decide elections, are they edging you towards their box?

Yeah, I know, probably as being the best of a bereft bunch. Yet I'm genuinely interested in which you'll sway as, perhaps, the 'Bob's Board' bell weather voter...

I'd be interested to know how you think those things should be provided. Tax take is as high as its ever been post war, so is the extra coming from efficiency (I still remember that line, nationalise it to make it more efficient ) or are we going to raise that money from somewhere

For me it seems to be ABC (although we wont really look elsewhere as no one else can win). except in local elections where the lib dem and green increase in seats was higher than Labour as a percentage on original base...

PS Starmer will stop the boats by doing pretty much what they do know only more efficiently

[s42blue]

 The Earl of Chesterfield, on 10 May 2024 - 06:29 PM, said:

Not sure what my "socialist needs" are. I certainly have no list of uncompromising demands as seen in the pages of 'Militant' back in the day. An NHS where folk aren't waiting hours for an ambulance, days in A&E, weeks to see a GP then dying for want of treatment? Utilities focused on public need rather than private profits? A compassionate benefit and immigration system?

That'd be a start. Yet it's almost as if the tories have adopted a 'scorched earth' policy in terms of the nation's finances.

But surely the more important question is are Labour doing enough to appease your needs? As one of the moderate middle who ultimately decide elections, are they edging you towards their box?

Yeah, I know, probably as being the best of a bereft bunch. Yet I'm genuinely interested in which you'll sway as, perhaps, the 'Bob's Board' bell weather voter...

Socialist needs….as in the principles of Socialism. They’re a good start.

Moderate middle…always described myself as philanthropic capitalist 😂. I believe free market capitalism to be the way forward.

Best of a bereft bunch…I’m flattered 😂😂😂. I find the Tories unelectable. Warming to Starmer as an individual. I don’t know what I’m voting for but he’d get my x currently.

 isleaiw1, on 10 May 2024 - 07:42 PM, said:

I'd be interested to know how you think those things should be provided. Tax take is as high as its ever been post war, so is the extra coming from efficiency (I still remember that line, nationalise it to make it more efficient ) or are we going to raise that money from somewhere

For me it seems to be ABC (although we wont really look elsewhere as no one else can win). except in local elections where the lib dem and green increase in seats was higher than Labour as a percentage on original base...

PS Starmer will stop the boats by doing pretty much what they do know only more efficiently

ABC…..see it’ll catch on 😂😂

[isleaiw1]

s42blue, on 10 May 2024 - 09:29 PM, said:

Socialist needs….as in the principles of Socialism. They’re a good start.

Moderate middle…always described myself as philanthropic capitalist 😂. I believe free market capitalism to be the way forward.

Best of a bereft bunch…I’m flattered 😂😂😂. I find the Tories unelectable. Warming to Starmer as an individual. I don’t know what I’m voting for but he’d get my x currently.



ABC…..see it’ll catch on 😂😂

I consider myself a socialist - we should help those who cant but not those who wont, and the richer should help the poorer - but I am not attracted to Starmer as he doesnt seem to have too many principles other than get elected and not be Tory. That may be doing him a disservice and it may show my anti London views..

I'd like to hear how they solve the problems that Chris highlights, especially with no money. The NHS is a sacred cow but the best solutions to me as a socialist are move to a different model, where those that can afford pay privately and those who cant are looked after by the state. The NHS is massively inefficient from my experience and talking to family and friends who work in it (non medical roles) so there is a way to make it better at no extra cost...

I will vote for those who do something radical as tinkering round the edges wont work any more.

I might be swayed by fact I move from being an employee to retired in next working govt probably - I'll reach 65 but if the world is a ###### fest I may stay till 67 or later...

[isleaiw1]

s42blue, on 10 May 2024 - 09:29 PM, said:

ABC…..see it’ll catch on 😂😂

Of course it will, its a regular acronym down here!
Also means anti bribery and corruption - similar meaning then