General Election 2024

[Alex S]

It's shocking that the most powerful country on earth will soon be led either by a lying fascist or a doddery old chap who doesn't seem to know what day it is.

 

[gavreid]

It's shocking that the most powerful country on earth will soon be led either by a lying fascist or a doddery old chap who doesn't seem to know what day it is.

Shows how easy the day job really is - there's no way that old buffoon is doing a full day in the office every day. Whatever do the yanks imagine?

 

[Alex S]

You're being unfair. Labour explained very clearly that calling for a ceasefire is meaningless posturing and would have no effect on the conflict which is why it is absolutely crucial to get the small print right and why they couldn't support the motion backed by the SNP.

I know you're not being serious but modern politics is 95% meaningless posturing, you can sort out the fine print later. Anyway, I guess that's another thread (that I have avoided).

 

[ex brickie]

Maybe we need a US election thread . I’m surprised Trump stayed relatively calm and didn’t call out Biden as a doddery fool on TV! It was quite clever - staying calm and rattling off a list of lies which many voters will believe are the absolute truth…..

Separately we’ve had discussion on this thread about policy vs personality PMs. I do worry about Starmer standing up to dictator style leaders but let’s see…… we might be pleasantly surprised (not holding my breath )

 

[Alex S]

We have a couple of US election threads

 

[Woodface]

You're being unfair. Labour explained very clearly that calling for a ceasefire is meaningless posturing and would have no effect on the conflict which is why it is absolutely crucial to get the small print right and why they couldn't support the motion backed by the SNP.

Exactly this. Only the US has any sway over Israel.

 

[Kirk]

Every Reform candidate I've seen so far, is remarkably thick. They really do believe their own publicity and are just trotting out their ludicrous policies like parrots. Even their Messiah, Farage, can't sustain his arguments or policy proposals in the face of intelligent challenge and if he ever does get into Parliament to face political reality, he will be quickly exposed as the 'Liz Truss in Human Form', that Pie accurately described him as. A far right, self interested extreme neoliberal, using schoolboy level populism to fool the stupid. Fortunately, that same population of stupid would soon start to bite him once his House of Cards collapsed.


I'm not sufficiently informed about Corbyn's position locally, to pass comment. I'd like to see him win and act as a focus in Parliament for the Left..including Green and Lib Dem elements...though they might have different ideas.

That said, in raising the notion of the Political 'Independent', you point to some interesting issues. Corbyn and his ideology are of course well known, and anyone voting for him knows what they are getting. However, the use of 'Independent' labels can also be exceptionally dishonest.
It seems to be fortunately mostly confined to local politics at present, but this is what happened in my constituency a year or so back...

A neighbour and friend of mine is a lifelong Tory voter, as is her right, but what she fell for could catch out anyone who doesn't look a bit deeper into politics than the superficial labels. However, she is also disenchanted with the present lot, and was therefore delighted to find that in the last Local Elections here, a whole group of 'Independents' suddenly appeared. I cautioned against voting for any 'Independent' whose political motivations are obscured by the vagueness of the 'Independent' tag.. Sadly, she went ahead anyway and contributed to the victories of four candidates 'pushing' the 'grudge' agenda of their group leader. He was an ex Teacher, with some sort of grudge against the Local Council. A few moments of online research showed that he had recruited three relatives and paid all of their election expenses. Not something many people would put any effort into discovering. I'm still unsure what he achieved by getting elected. Another 'Independent' is a former BNP member, failed Ukip candidate etc.. who stood as 'Independent' and actually got elected to District Council. I know him well and he'll make a very acceptable candidate for Reform some day... Another self appointed 'Local Hero' whose online misogynist and racist views only came to light after his election, is still sitting on the Council. At least I tried...

Would prefer not to risk having any of them in Parliament - and it's unwise to underestimate far-right Populists (no matter how they come across). Our current version may not be as slick as the French or the Italian versions but it could be only a matter of time.

And here is a nice video about JC:

 

[Kirk]

You believe S'Kewer constantly changing his mind is healthy? For whom?

What makes you think he actually believed in, and intended to pursue, any of the pledges/promises he's reneged on?

Do you know what he actually believes in?

Answers on a naughty post card, to. . .

John

Back to the infamous pledges. I realise some on the left feel like Starmer did something to them (all very personal) but all he did was change his mind because he worked out that the pledges wouldn't get him into No.10. And we are. The best thing for the left to do now is to forgive and forget and work with Starmer - be in the tent, etc. Grown-ups wanted.

 

[Kirk]

The Guardian has published its leader on who we want to win the election. It’s Labour, of course. Here is an excerpt.

Decent effort from the Guardian - they see a winner.

 

[Richard Lines]

Removing the two-child limit would lift 300,000 children out of poverty and mean 800,000 children are in less deep poverty.

I understand that but there needs to be various means in place to discourage having more than two children in the first place. Education is one side but, like any other social challenge, a multi-pronged approach is required.

I don't pretend to have all the answers as I honestly don't fully understand the 'problem'.

Regards

Richard

 

[Tony L]

I’ve not watched it yet (just starting on Glastonbury), but Good Law Project have just put this up regarding dark-money-funded think-tanks and how they have such a grip on our politics.

 

[Alex S]

Exactly this. Only the US has any sway over Israel.

This of course is true but that doesn't mean one should cowardly stay silent, ignoring significant minorities in one's own country, and far worse, genocide in another, for fear of upsetting the right or a pathetic concept of special relationships. And I mean the right, it is pure cowardice, to avoid Mail anti-semitism headlines. I don't think the vast majority of the UK's jewish community would be outraged by the concept of strong support for an immediate ceasefire. Statesmanship requires principle and courage, Starmer is a weathervane shambling into power because his opponents are corrupt and useless.

 

[palindrome]

Back to the infamous pledges. I realise some on the left feel like Starmer did something to them (all very personal) but all he did was change his mind because he worked out that the pledges wouldn't get him into No.10. And we are. The best thing for the left to do now is to forgive and forget and work with Starmer - be in the tent, etc. Grown-ups wanted.

@Kirk

'Infamous pledges' indeed.

Pointing out that Starmer, Reeves, and Streeting et al are the visual representatives of right wing enterprise and are set to continue trashing the UK, an observation based entirely on their previous pronouncements and behaviour, doesn't make me one of your 'lefty's'; never been affiliated with any political Party, or troop. Neither have I always voted Labour.

You, on the other hand, haven't provided any real answers or rationale to the points I raised in the post you quote, instead preferring to demean by deploying your predictably patronising and juvenile insults.

You do appear to be suffering a degree of cognitive dissonance, having a hard time reconciling your political preferences with reality.

Starmer is an apologist for genocide and mass starvation, and you say work with Starmer. Says something unsavoury about you, lad.

John

 

[Woodface]

This of course is true but that doesn't mean one should cowardly stay silent, ignoring significant minorities in one's own country, and far worse, genocide in another, for fear of upsetting the right or a pathetic concept of special relationships. And I mean the right, it is pure cowardice, to avoid Mail anti-semitism headlines. I don't think the vast majority of the UK's jewish community would be outraged by the concept of strong support for an immediate ceasefire. Statesmanship requires principle and courage, Starmer is a weathervane shambling into power because his opponents are corrupt and useless.

Labour’s position has hardened on Gaza. They are not even in Government.

I can’t speak for the Jewish community & neither can you (probably). Politically it’s quite difficult but at the same time I’m not sure whether foreign policy even resonates with the electorate.

 

[Alex S]

Whether he's in government or whether it resonates with the electorate are not relevant to what I said.

 

[Seanm]

Labour’s position has hardened on Gaza. They are not even in Government.

I can’t speak for the Jewish community & neither can you (probably). Politically it’s quite difficult but at the same time I’m not sure whether foreign policy even resonates with the electorate.

Speedrunning through Labour’s many empty justifications for supporting Israel’s atrocities. 100% thought-free garbage.

 

[wulbert]

At the risk of upsetting some on the forum I'm confused as to the issue over Child Benefit and limiting it to 'only' two.

Given we need to reduce the global population overall why do we want to 'encourage' families having more than two children?

There really are far more substantial issues that need addressing.

Regards

Richard

Are you suggesting that some people make the decision to have a child (are "encouraged") based on what state benefits might be available? Is that what you did?

 

[Richard Lines]

Are you suggesting that some people make the decision to have a child (are "encouraged") based on what state benefits might be available? Is that what you did?

If only things were that simple.........., the need to control the size of the world's population is, I think we would all agree, an issue that needs addressing.

As raised above such a rigid rule would need to have flexibility to recognise such as a couple who have triplets or 'merged' families.

Directly answering your question I have no idea as to whether prospective parents deliberately consider child benefits payments as a part of their considerations to have children.

Regards

Richard

 

[paulfromcamden]

UK birth rate is already under 2 and declining.

 

[Tony L]

UK birth rate is already under 2 and declining.

Like many western nations the population weighting is increasingly unbalanced towards a non-productive elderly group who need more and more care. The inevitable result of less children and longer lifespans. This is obviously not a viable picture, which is why, despite what the gammons may think, we actually need a lot more immigration. Younger working people to pay tax and provide healthcare services etc.