|
Post by manchesterman on May 30, 2020 16:22:36 GMT
I apologise when I think I have made a mistake...its a habit politicians should try sometime
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:24:07 GMT
Post by Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith on May 30, 2020 16:24:07 GMT
I apologise when I think I have made a mistake...its a habit politicians should try sometime
But the worlds not round.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:27:09 GMT
Post by manchesterman on May 30, 2020 16:27:09 GMT
Perhaps so but we'll come to that bridge when we cross it This has been the problem, though. It should have started a couple of years ago, but because so many within the party wanted to engineer staying in, it didn't. Isn't it high time that it accepts that we really have left the EU and starts to talk about this in ways that don't suggest impending doom? And accepts that people didn;t vote to leave because they are stupid, racist, or whatever else - I'm sure some who voted leave might well be, but ultimately they voted leave because they no longer wanted to be part of the EU and if Labour had done what Jeremy wanted them to do - back signing article 50 without delay and then reach out for a cross party solution, then the country would have left the EU a couple of years before the election Small point of order please. What jeremy (or indeed Labour) thought was the right thing to do in 2017-2019 was irrelevant to the outcome as they werent in government and the actual gorvernment had no desire to reach a cross-party solution. As that would never have happened the country wouldnt have "left the EU a couple of years before the election". What would have happened, regardless of Labour policy, is what actually happened. I know some of the Corbyn fans thought that they did "win" the 2017 GE but I can confirm that they didnt
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:29:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 16:29:38 GMT
This has been the problem, though. It should have started a couple of years ago, but because so many within the party wanted to engineer staying in, it didn't. Isn't it high time that it accepts that we really have left the EU and starts to talk about this in ways that don't suggest impending doom? And accepts that people didn;t vote to leave because they are stupid, racist, or whatever else - I'm sure some who voted leave might well be, but ultimately they voted leave because they no longer wanted to be part of the EU and if Labour had done what Jeremy wanted them to do - back signing article 50 without delay and then reach out for a cross party solution, then the country would have left the EU a couple of years before the election Small point of order please. What jeremy (or indeed Labour) thought was the right thing to do in 2017-2019 was irrelevant to the outcome as they werent in government and the actual gorvernment had no desire to reach a cross-party solution. As that would never have happened the country wouldnt have "left the EU a couple of years before the election". What would have happened, regardless of Labour policy, is what actually happened. I know some of the Corbyn fans thought that they did "win" the 2017 GE but I can confirm that they didnt though that's tge fault of those who put the bar so low for Corbyn fans to step over in 2017
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:33:51 GMT
Post by carlton43 on May 30, 2020 16:33:51 GMT
It might not mean much, but your insights would be missed here. Yes, and much more so than the Molotov-Ribbentrop sociopaths. If, as I suspect, you have me slotted for the 'Ribbentrop sociopath', a fun fact to muse upon is that but for the untimely intervention of WW2, he would very probably have been one of my God Parents.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 30, 2020 16:36:23 GMT
Yes, and much more so than the Molotov-Ribbentrop sociopaths. If, as I suspect, you have me slotted for the 'Ribbentrop sociopath', a fun fact to muse upon is that but for the untimely intervention of WW2, he would very probably have been one of my God Parents. You can't leave us hanging like that!
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:39:01 GMT
Post by manchesterman on May 30, 2020 16:39:01 GMT
Small point of order please. What jeremy (or indeed Labour) thought was the right thing to do in 2017-2019 was irrelevant to the outcome as they werent in government and the actual gorvernment had no desire to reach a cross-party solution. As that would never have happened the country wouldnt have "left the EU a couple of years before the election". What would have happened, regardless of Labour policy, is what actually happened. I know some of the Corbyn fans thought that they did "win" the 2017 GE but I can confirm that they didnt though that's tge fault of those who put the bar so low for Corbyn fans to step over in 2017 relevance to the Tories being in power so Labour policy being irrelevant to what actually happened?
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 16:59:28 GMT
via mobile
Post by Merseymike on May 30, 2020 16:59:28 GMT
This has been the problem, though. It should have started a couple of years ago, but because so many within the party wanted to engineer staying in, it didn't. Isn't it high time that it accepts that we really have left the EU and starts to talk about this in ways that don't suggest impending doom? And accepts that people didn;t vote to leave because they are stupid, racist, or whatever else - I'm sure some who voted leave might well be, but ultimately they voted leave because they no longer wanted to be part of the EU and if Labour had done what Jeremy wanted them to do - back signing article 50 without delay and then reach out for a cross party solution, then the country would have left the EU a couple of years before the election Small point of order please. What jeremy (or indeed Labour) thought was the right thing to do in 2017-2019 was irrelevant to the outcome as they werent in government and the actual gorvernment had no desire to reach a cross-party solution. As that would never have happened the country wouldnt have "left the EU a couple of years before the election". What would have happened, regardless of Labour policy, is what actually happened. I know some of the Corbyn fans thought that they did "win" the 2017 GE but I can confirm that they didnt I think you are being really naive. Labour could have actively reached out and said to May - who was under pressure herself from her own hardliners - let's get a cross party solution Truth is that we had an instinctive Leaver leading the remain party. Though he did vote remain. And a marginal Remainer leading the Leave party. That was a situation which could have led to a reasonable Leave outcome. And I think the Government could have taken that up. But Labour didn't want it. They wanted to remain. That's why they didn't abstain on May's deal either although it is no secret that the realistic people in the party really wanted it to go through. The reason we are where we are is because of the remainers.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 17:55:18 GMT
Post by No Offence Alan on May 30, 2020 17:55:18 GMT
I just has a look at the polls directly after the UK fell out of the ERM in September 92, often cited as the straw that broke the camel’s back of Major’s government, and the polls immediately after have a small shift, the Tories went from low 40s to high 30s. But the slide kept on going, and by November they were at low 30s from which they never recovered, so we still have to wait and see if this Cummings affair has had a similar effect. I dont think ERM was what lost the Tories the 97 election. It was a combination of : expenses scandals, division (the bastards), 18 years of the same govt (change), the prospect of a moderate alternative PM who wasnt going to "scare the horses". The expenses scandals came much later (2009).
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on May 30, 2020 17:56:18 GMT
I dont think ERM was what lost the Tories the 97 election. It was a combination of : expenses scandals, division (the bastards), 18 years of the same govt (change), the prospect of a moderate alternative PM who wasnt going to "scare the horses". The expenses scandals came much later (2009). Maybe he was thinking of "back to basics / sleaze" ?
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 18:10:55 GMT
Post by matureleft on May 30, 2020 18:10:55 GMT
Starmer has actually opposed an extension which is reassuring Hmmmmm I'm really not sure. Perhaps I'm being too machiavellian here, but how about he has already decided that he wants Labour to be the rejoin party, and that the best bet is to let No Deal happen, which he thinks will be a disaster. So, we leave, no extension, thus no deal, and in his mind that means it will be a disaster and will place Labour in a better place to be a rejoin party next time as the electorate will want to rejoin.... If this isn't the case, then Labour needs to get on with some creative thinking for a Britain outside the EU, because so far its been entirely absentWe have agreed on this before. There was no evidence of any thinking on this under the former leader and his team, nor has there been much sign of thought in the various left of centre think tanks. Not that Labour is alone on this. The Tory vision is pretty vague (and arguably deliberately so - there are some who favour the low-tax, minimal regulation model, some who seem keen on a strong, even subservient transatlantic relationship, and so on, and others who don't want to frighten the horses with such stuff.)
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 18:40:20 GMT
Post by justin124 on May 30, 2020 18:40:20 GMT
If Labour recovers to 38% across GB in 2024, I would expect the party to exceed 25% in Scotland too. How many seats they would win is far from clear.
|
|
hengo
Conservative
Posts: 1,689
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 18:50:05 GMT
Post by hengo on May 30, 2020 18:50:05 GMT
I voted Labour in 97 like millions of others because the Conservative government of the time was out on its feet, and Labour were fresh, full of confidence , had rejected socialism ( though they didn’t quite use those words), and were in effect offering a social democratic alternative . Among the reasons why I had come to loathe Majors government was indeed a sort of sleaze, as I saw it. There had been a proliferation of new kinds of governance arrangements across the public sector ( designed as I have commented before to distance Ministers from accountability, and also to weaken or at least reduce the scope of local government). I saw these new bodies , locally at least, largely filled with Tory placemen and women. What I didn’t expect was that New Labour would take that model and exploit it far more effectively- keeping and expanding these new governance bodies while packing them ruthlessly with their own supporters. Who are mostly still there, as neither the Coalition , nor May’s zombie administration had the focus or energy to do anything about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 19:10:07 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2020 19:10:07 GMT
If Labour recovers to 38% across GB in 2024, I would expect the party to exceed 25% in Scotland too. How many seats they would win is far from clear. it will depend on the tory share. Labour had 262 seats on 40% in 2017 and a quarter of the vote in Scotland. In 2005 Labour had a majority of 40 on 36%.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 19:18:03 GMT
Post by carlton43 on May 30, 2020 19:18:03 GMT
If, as I suspect, you have me slotted for the 'Ribbentrop sociopath', a fun fact to muse upon is that but for the untimely intervention of WW2, he would very probably have been one of my God Parents. You can't leave us hanging like that! I can and I have. A simple statement of probability more than possibility.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 20:53:32 GMT
Post by Merseymike on May 30, 2020 20:53:32 GMT
Hmmmmm I'm really not sure. Perhaps I'm being too machiavellian here, but how about he has already decided that he wants Labour to be the rejoin party, and that the best bet is to let No Deal happen, which he thinks will be a disaster. So, we leave, no extension, thus no deal, and in his mind that means it will be a disaster and will place Labour in a better place to be a rejoin party next time as the electorate will want to rejoin.... If this isn't the case, then Labour needs to get on with some creative thinking for a Britain outside the EU, because so far its been entirely absentWe have agreed on this before. There was no evidence of any thinking on this under the former leader and his team, nor has there been much sign of thought in the various left of centre think tanks. Not that Labour is alone on this. The Tory vision is pretty vague (and arguably deliberately so - there are some who favour the low-tax, minimal regulation model, some who seem keen on a strong, even subservient transatlantic relationship, and so on, and others who don't want to frighten the horses with such stuff.) I'm not disagreeing. But Labour can't carry on saying nothing indefinitey. I think the battle between the protectionists and the globalisers may be still to come, cross party.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 30, 2020 21:16:07 GMT
Post by yellowperil on May 30, 2020 21:16:07 GMT
Yes, and much more so than the Molotov-Ribbentrop sociopaths. If, as I suspect, you have me slotted for the 'Ribbentrop sociopath', a fun fact to muse upon is that but for the untimely intervention of WW2, he would very probably have been one of my God Parents. Should we be surprised?
|
|
|
YouGov
May 31, 2020 6:48:20 GMT
Post by carlton43 on May 31, 2020 6:48:20 GMT
If, as I suspect, you have me slotted for the 'Ribbentrop sociopath', a fun fact to muse upon is that but for the untimely intervention of WW2, he would very probably have been one of my God Parents. Should we be surprised? That is entirely a matter for the beholders as to the element of untoward shock (a surprise), or what is often more commonly really meant, astonishment. I think there will be little of the former but at least a degree of the latter? Casual to intimate associations with persons who subsequently acquire 'the quality of being well known' happen to many and usually before that person is 'well known' and for reasons nothing to do with subsequent well-known-ness. When that association is through a parent and/or grandparent it becomes tenuous and is in no way to be held for or against that latter person.
|
|
|
YouGov
May 31, 2020 7:31:05 GMT
Post by matureleft on May 31, 2020 7:31:05 GMT
We have agreed on this before. There was no evidence of any thinking on this under the former leader and his team, nor has there been much sign of thought in the various left of centre think tanks. Not that Labour is alone on this. The Tory vision is pretty vague (and arguably deliberately so - there are some who favour the low-tax, minimal regulation model, some who seem keen on a strong, even subservient transatlantic relationship, and so on, and others who don't want to frighten the horses with such stuff.) I'm not disagreeing. But Labour can't carry on saying nothing indefinitey. I think the battle between the protectionists and the globalisers may be still to come, cross party. You are always inclined toward binary choices! Few ‘protectionists’ want to protect every sector (otherwise you end up with gross inefficiencies, very high prices and slow adoptions of innovation). I’ve argued that narrow, short-term protection of selected sectors to allow their growth to critical mass (or ordered reorganisation in a sector facing challenge) may be reasonable. It’s also reasonable to protect local supply of some things.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 31, 2020 8:48:48 GMT
I'm not disagreeing. But Labour can't carry on saying nothing indefinitey. I think the battle between the protectionists and the globalisers may be still to come, cross party. You are always inclined toward binary choices! Few ‘protectionists’ want to protect every sector (otherwise you end up with gross inefficiencies, very high prices and slow adoptions of innovation). I’ve argued that narrow, short-term protection of selected sectors to allow their growth to critical mass (or ordered reorganisation in a sector facing challenge) may be reasonable. It’s also reasonable to protect local supply of some things. That is largely because ultimately decisions to have to be made, and one of the reasons there was so much angst about the EU was that it actually is a binary choice. We stay in or we leave. There may then be other options put forward after that choice has been made. It probably does display my belief that politics is about choices and fundamental alternatives. Your approach is almost entirely different.
|
|