General Election 2024

[ks.234]

Someone thinks Sir Keir will bring change... Though his (now paywalled) columns are mostly whatever rubbish he can type in the shortest period of time so not exactly Andrew Marr.

BORIS JOHNSON: Starmer would be the most dangerous PM since the 1970s

I just cannot believe that the British people would be so utterly mad as to hand Keir Starmer a majority on this scale.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Less chaos in government and nicer, much more decent cohort of MPs in government, shorter NHS waiting lists, GB Energy and eventually lower energy bills, a return to a rules-based asylum system, breakfast clubs in primary schools. That's a few things he can genuinely deliver as a start.

Will need to wait for manifesto for full list.

Thank you for the genuine reply.

But while there are many, many things a Labour Government can deliver, because they have adopted the self same spending rules as the Tories, with the dangerous addition of making them “ironclad”, they simply will not be able to

Less chaos in government and nicer, much more decent cohort of MPs in government,

Like Elphicke?

shorter NHS waiting lists,

Only by shovelling more public money into the private sector and making cuts elsewhere. Yes waiting lists will comedown in the short term, but in the long term further damage is being done to future viability of the NHS as a whole.

Labour has promised more privatisation of the NHS

GB Energy and eventually lower energy bills,

A public owned company to increase private investment

a return to a rules-based asylum system,

an aspiration not a promise. Repairing asylum processing will require investment, which Reeves has said is dependant on “growth”

breakfast clubs in primary schools.

Dependant on increasing tax, which Reeves has ruled out

That's a few things he can genuinely deliver as a start.

Will need to wait for manifesto for full list.

The bottom line is that because Labour have the same fiscal rules as the Tories, they will be unable to deliver any meaningful change. Any delivery on, for example waiting lists and Energy, can only come from private investment and cuts elsewhere. In other words rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship.

Where we desperately need a change of direction, Labour is full steam ahead for the same old iceberg

 

[mandryka]

Someone thinks Sir Keir will bring change... Though his (now paywalled) columns are mostly whatever rubbish he can type in the shortest period of time so not exactly Andrew Marr.

BORIS JOHNSON: Starmer would be the most dangerous PM since the 1970s

I just cannot believe that the British people would be so utterly mad as to hand Keir Starmer a majority on this scale.

www.dailymail.co.uk

He argues that despite the polls, people will think twice when they realise that Labour will mean higher taxes, a softer approach to immigration, and a dangerous defence policy.

 

[Finnegan]

Sir Keir had put the work in to convince enough people that Labour were a genuine party of government.

And those people were the CBI, the Bank of England, The Daily Mail, Telegraph, Times and Sun proprietors, editors and readers, non-doms, the Israeli embassy and racists.

He achieved this through the hard slog of lying his way to the leadership, ditching the scrapping of tuition fees, increasing the role of the private sector in the NHS, lying about renationalising public utilities, abandoning the green pledge, being slavishly pro-Israel and cheering on the slaughter of Palestinians, maintaining the two child benefit cap, promising to deport refugees more efficiently, wall to wall flag shagging, and definitely not mentioning scrapping the most repressive anti-trade union legislation in Western Europe.

 

[Tony L]

The bottom line is that because Labour have the same fiscal rules as the Tories, they will be unable to deliver any meaningful change. Any delivery on, for example waiting lists and Energy, can only come from private investment and cuts elsewhere. In other words rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship

The Tories have never had any ‘spending rules’. They spout a load of bullshit their press spread out to their idiotbase, but they never keep to any of it if there is any opportunity to put state money in their or their donor’s pockets.

FWIW I’m not expecting Labour to be any more honest. I have no trust or optimism left. It is all just bullshit fed to idiots. This is structural failure. A political system clearly unfit for purpose but endlessly boot-looping.

 

[TheDecameron]

“Change” is as much an empty page as “take back control”. It’s purposefully so for it commits Starmer to absolutely nothing more than “not this” while he points at the Tories. At least Ronseal claimed to do exactly what it said on the tin but with Keith you’ve no idea what’s in the bloody tin, just a different tin. Buy at your own risk, no money back.

 

[ks.234]

The Tories have never had any ‘spending rules’. They spout a load of bullshit their press spread out to their idiotbase, but they never keep to any of it if there is any opportunity to put state money in their or their donor’s pockets.

FWIW I’m not expecting Labour to be any more honest. I have no trust or optimism left. It is all just bullshit fed to idiots. This is structural failure. A political system clearly unfit for purpose but endlessly boot-looping.

The Tories have do have “fiscal rules”, but they do not apply them consistently because it would be bad for the economy (and very bad for “bungs” to party donors). Fiscal rules can mean anything any government likes and can be ch ged on a whim. The ones we have now are there to put an artificial constraint on public investment.

Labour has adopted Hunt’s rules, but decided to make them “ironclad” which obviously makes them even more constraining.

I absolutely agree that Labour will be no better than the Tories. Starmer’s record on honesty, will likely make them a lot worse on integrity and their rules will make them worse on overall public investment.

 

[Seanm]

Pudgy eyed. And I would be very surprised if I have ever called him a four-letter word that needs blanking out.

He has sensibly started wearing glasses to de-emphasize his rather small, pudgy eyes. He has improved all round. From PMQs to campaigning. Clearly a quick learner. Helped (massively), of course, by the Tory lunacy, but Sir Keir had put the work in to convince enough people that Labour were a genuine party of government.

Of course, I will change my mind when I see he is capable of delivering a Labour government. That is what he is there to do and he deserves support for doing it.

Perhaps him joining the shadowy Trilateral Commission is the most concerning (an unusual and strange thing for him to do), but overall I look forward to his election as PM.

Thanks. As Finnegan says it’s a very small selectorate that he’s managed to convince, and he’s a hostage to them. He remains a remarkably unpopular leader, and that’s with the life-support turned on. All the selectorate have to do is flick a switch. Worth keeping in mind with regards to what we can expect from them in government: they’re on a very tight leash. Also worth noting that *this is how they like it*: they’d far rather be beholden to the media, the Treasury, the City and business owners than [shudder] their own members.

 

[paulfromcamden]

From two days ago....

Conservative HQ have emailed asking for candidates in almost 100 seats
When candidates ask when the deadline is, they have been told it’s 48 hours, according to 2 I’ve spoken to

https://twitter.com/x/status/1793702331961450798

 

[kendo]

From two days ago....

Conservative HQ have emailed asking for candidates in almost 100 seats
When candidates ask when the deadline is, they have been told it’s 48 hours, according to 2 I’ve spoken to

https://twitter.com/x/status/1793702331961450798

An opportunity for reformed characters to offer their services?

 

[paulfromcamden]

An opportunity for reformed characters to offer their services?

I give it until Thursday before they start touring the prisons offering pardons to lifers if they'll stand as a Tory MP.

 

[Seanm]

From two days ago....

Conservative HQ have emailed asking for candidates in almost 100 seats
When candidates ask when the deadline is, they have been told it’s 48 hours, according to 2 I’ve spoken to

https://twitter.com/x/status/1793702331961450798

Labour not that well placed either on this score. In Labour’s case it’s down to control freakery and factionalism: the right will not countenance local candidate selection or left wing candidates, they insist on parachuting in people from their own shitty patronage networks.

Revealed: Member anger as around 100 Labour candidates still not unveiled​

Revealed: Member anger as around 100 Labour candidates still not unveiled - LabourList

Labour has approximately 100 general election candidates left to publicly announce, LabourList can reveal, despite the party twice…

labourlist.org

A bit of chaos on this score might offer a glimmer of hope, I don’t know. The nightmare scenario is 200 new Labour MPs all cast in the image of Wes Streeting: ex-student Labour, private health execs in-waiting. If they end up having to drag random people in off the street we’ll stand a much better chance of getting a few actual human beings in parliament.

 

[gavreid]

And those people were the CBI, the Bank of England, The Daily Mail, Telegraph, Times and Sun proprietors, editors and readers, non-doms, the Israeli embassy and racists.

He achieved this through the hard slog of lying his way to the leadership, ditching the scrapping of tuition fees, increasing the role of the private sector in the NHS, lying about renationalising public utilities, abandoning the green pledge, being slavishly pro-Israel and cheering on the slaughter of Palestinians, maintaining the two child benefit cap, promising to deport refugees more efficiently, wall to wall flag shagging, and definitely not mentioning scrapping the most repressive anti-trade union legislation in Western Europe.

Deal with Ofsted, scrap Academies, nothing on social care, council funding etc etc. Plus the big one of public sector pay. Abysmal doesn't begin to describe it all...

 

[kendo]

I give it until Thursday before they start touring the prisons offering pardons to lifers if they'll stand as a Tory MP.

I think press-gangs would have a better chance...

 

[Finnegan]

Deal with Ofsted, scrap Academies, nothing on social care, council funding etc etc. Plus the big one of public sector pay. Abysmal doesn't begin to describe it all...

I posted a link from the Guardian the other day detailing just how low Starmer’s personal popularity ratings were. We’re all chomping at the bit to get rid of the Cameron/ May/ Johnson/ Truss/ Sunak incarnation of the Tories, I get it. But the boundaries between the enthusiasm to dump the Tories and dislike and mistrust of Starmer are being blurred too much.

I genuinely can’t understand what Sunak is playing at. He seems like a lemming leaping suicidally off a cliff (not that I CGAF).

 

[ks.234]

Thanks. As Finnegan says it’s a very small selectorate that he’s managed to convince, and he’s a hostage to them. He remains a remarkably unpopular leader, and that’s with the life-support turned on. All the selectorate have to do is flick a switch. Worth keeping in mind with regards to what we can expect from them in government: they’re on a very tight leash. Also worth noting that *this is how they like it*: they’d far rather be beholden to the media, the Treasury, the City and business owners than [shudder] their own members.

If we look at this historically, the selectorate always were in charge until less than a century ago when the electorate had a say. Just as the electorate gained their say by a series of small steps gained in blood, since the turn of the century the selectorate have been using all in their power to take small, quiet, steps backwards to restore the balance in their favour again.

The selectorate is nothing new. Democracy is.

The selectorate have used their power advantage with a singular purpose to their own narrow ends. The electorate, not so much.

By that I agree that the power of the selectorate is overwhelmingly the significant factor as to why we where are we are today. But is the electorate exploiting what little power it has gained to the ends of the greater good as much as it could?

 

[gavreid]

I genuinely can’t understand what Sunak is playing at. He seems like a lemming leaping suicidally off a cliff (not that I CGAF).

No scope for the planned tax cuts in the Autumn so they calculate better to go now, I reckon. My money was always on a summer election - before Sunak could be overthrown!

 

[Finnegan]

No scope for the planned tax cuts in the Autumn so they calculate better to go now, I reckon. My money was always on a summer election - before Sunak could be overthrown!

Yeah sure, I get that. But not even informing his own cabinet and not allowing enough time to properly select candidates; given the swathes of old faces stepping down. In situ constituency MP’s are generally better placed to attract votes than total newcomers.

Is he truly just a spoilt little rich brat who became PM purely for his own amusement and couldn’t really GAF if the Tories get decimated as he’s simply headed back over to sunny California? Yup, guess he must be. And I’m enjoying every second of it. Get the popcorn in.

 

[kensalriser]

I posted a link from the Guardian the other day detailing just how low Starmer’s personal popularity ratings were. We’re all chomping at the bit to get rid of the Cameron/ May/ Johnson/ Truss/ Sunak incarnation of the Tories, I get it. But the boundaries between the enthusiasm to dump the Tories and dislike and mistrust of Starmer are being blurred too much.

I genuinely can’t understand what Sunak is playing at. He seems like a lemming leaping suicidally off a cliff (not that I CGAF).

Sunak has zero political nous. He fell into his current position by default - he couldn't even beat the patently nationally unelectable Liz Truss in a leadership contest.

 

[Finnegan]

he couldn't even beat the patently nationally unelectable Liz Truss in a leadership contest.

Yes, but that had more to do with Tory racism that could never countenance “one of them” as party leader. Even a lettuce could see that he was marginally more competent than the psychopathic Truss.

 

[wacko]

Yeah sure, I get that. But not even informing his own cabinet and not allowing enough time to properly select candidates; given the swathes of old faces stepping down. In situ constituency MP’s are generally better placed to attract votes than total newcomers.

Is he truly just a spoilt little rich brat who became PM purely for his own amusement and couldn’t really GAF if the Tories get decimated as he’s simply headed back over to sunny California? Yup, guess he must be. And I’m enjoying every second of it. Get the popcorn in.

Perhaps daddy-in-law wants him in the family business asap.