Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: ncRover on June 01, 2024, 06:28:32 am
-
Thought this might be an interesting thread to hear everyone’s prediction and then see who is the closest.
Keep it concise, with the size of the majority if you expect one.
I’m predicting a Labour majority of 180 seats. Just pipping the 1997 landslide.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
-
Anything could happen between now and Election Day.
Sunak could quit and Starmer could be caught on CCTV mugging a pensioner.
Only an idiot would make a prediction this far ahead of an event where there are so many variables.
(Labour with 135 seat majority).
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
-
Thought this might be an interesting thread to hear everyone’s prediction and then see who is the closest.
Keep it concise, with the size of the majority if you expect one.
I’m predicting a Labour majority of 180 seats. Just pipping the 1997 landslide.
Nothing short of Starmer committing bestiality live on the One Show is going to shift the polls.
All that matters now is whether Labour Gets The Vote Out on polling day. Many people may think it's a foregone conclusion and not bother.
If they do, I see the possibility of a 300+ majority over all the other parties.
Low end, I'll go for 200 seats.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
You interested in buying a used car Sir?
-
Five of the last 10 polls have had the Tories at 19-21%.
That's well into the range where parties totally implode in an election.
Get 30%, you can pick up 200 seats. 27%, maybe 170.
25% and you're down to less than 150.
20% and you're off the cliff edge and down to maybe less than 50.
It happened to the Liberals in 1924, and they never ever came back to be an Election winning force again.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
You interested in buying a used car Sir?
Not off you by the way I got qualifications in Motor engineering.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
-
Labour will take Doncaster East by over 10%.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
I was in the Bay Horse a couple of nights ago and there were plenty of people in there who said they will be voting for Fletcher.
-
Alot will depend on if the tories come to a agreement with reform,just about all my friends who vote tory will vote reform at the minute
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
I was in the Bay Horse a couple of nights ago and there were plenty of people in there who said they will be voting for Fletcher.
The Bay Horse has always attracted a certain demographic in that area. Go a few yards down the road and everyone in the Ingram and Blue Bell thinks that he's a right cant
-
I read an interesting analysis that Labour's support is very broad but very shallow. It said people from all sorts of demographics will vote for them this time, but without any real attachment to them, their MPs, or their policies. No Blairmania this time.
If that's true Labour are on course for a thumping majority this time around. I'll go for around 300 seats. We'll see some big name Tories out of a job, I reckon. However that support will flake away quickly at the first sign of trouble, unless Labour makes quick progress that people can feel.
-
I read an interesting analysis that Labour's support is very broad but very shallow. It said people from all sorts of demographics will vote for them this time, but without any real attachment to them, their MPs, or their policies. No Blairmania this time.
If that's true Labour are on course for a thumping majority this time around. I'll go for around 300 seats. We'll see some big name Tories out of a job, I reckon. However that support will flake away quickly at the first sign of trouble, unless Labour makes quick progress that people can feel.
I'd agree with that.
-
Alot will depend on if the tories come to a agreement with reform,just about all my friends who vote tory will vote reform at the minute
Not a chance in a million of a deal.
What would be in it for Reform?
Farage doesn't want to properly up the Tories and help them win another 50 seats while still losing.
He wants to destroy them, then absorb the rump that's left after they've got smashed.
The plan is to rebuild a united Tory/Reform party way over to the Right. You'll see it after the Election.
-
Here we are on Derby day and it’s the GE Stakes opening the card.
The runners and riders.
No1 Blue Boy.
He’s been around for a long time and has consistently failed to get anything done. He’ll be hoping there’s plenty of rain. He’s on his 5th jockey as his previous pilots have not got him going. So the diminutive Rich Sunak takes the ride. 66/1
No 2 Rampant Red
After performing miserably in previous seasons this colts fortunes are now on the up as recent victories around the country have him as a massive favourite for the big one, although recent fall outs in the stable have cast doubt on his form. His jockey Spud Stumer has made sure he gets the ride by locking several other candidates in the weighing room. 1/5
No3 Liberally No Chance
Full marks for gamely taking part but has yet to win a race of any note. His rider has warmed up for this by getting wetter than Blue Boys jockey. 1000/1
No4 Braveheart.
Cleaned up north of the border in previous seasons but changes of trainer and the owner of his stable being arrested have severely dented his hopes. Looks sure to be swamped by Rampant Red late on. 2000/1
No5 Reform Splitter
A recent entry in the race but this colts propensity to hang alarmingly to the right might see him end the race in the car park. No chance.
10000/1
No 6 Galloway Lad
Rarely do we see a cat with a trilby on competing in a race like this but here we are, and his hopes are pinned on the race being run in Bradford. Which it isn’t. 3000000/1
And they’re off!
Galloway lad has pulled up before the first as he’s spotted a saucer of milk so he’s out of the race
Now the water jump, oh and Liberally no chance has deposited his jockey Ded Davey into the drink and out of the race.
On the first bend and Reform Splitter, as predicted has lurched further and further to the right, into the car park and was last seen heading for Trump Tower.
Onto the next and Braveheart is losing ground rapidly to Rampant Red.
That leaves Blue Boy but he’s trails Rampant Red by a mile, and oh dear Sunak has jumped off as his flight to the US is about to take off.
That leaves Rampant Red to coast home alone, to a round of applause from the crowd of 450 in their new seats.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
I was in the Bay Horse a couple of nights ago and there were plenty of people in there who said they will be voting for Fletcher.
10 people in the Bay Horse and it’s packed to the rafters, it must be the only pub around where punters declare their voting intentions
-
There's folk that drink in there that don't even know the Secomd World War is over .
I got offered some nylons for the missus last time I went there!
It's always been like that,even back in the day when Merv had it
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
Respect or not here are the predictions for how he will fare in the new Constituency
And yes I know the only Poll that counts is on July the 4th
Wonder if he will repeat his "Vote Labour and Coppard will make sure DSA does not open again " ?
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Doncaster%20East%20and%20the%20Isle%20of%20Axholme
-
I was in there recently nice pint if Timothy Taylor’s, but it was better and cheaper in Jack Hawley’s
-
There's folk that drink in there that don't even know the Secomd World War is over .
I got offered some nylons for the missus last time I went there!
It's always been like that,even back in the day when Merv had it
Sounds like just the right place for a Hound.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
My tax has increased under the Tories simply due to not increasing the personal allowance. Party of low taxation, pull the other one.
-
Labour 485 seats
Tories 66 seats
Libs 59 seats
Reform 0 seats
Green 2 seats
SNP 17 seats
Tories wiped off the political map for generations. At long last their days have long gone. What you sow.
You can fool some of the people some of the time……
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
My tax has increased under the Tories simply due to not increasing the personal allowance. Party of low taxation, pull the other one.
Do you think Labour won’t be increasing taxes?
-
I got offered some nylons for the missus last time I went there!
Fair swap.??
On topic, I do think Labour will win but realistically plenty of died in the wool Tories will believe the daily fail, so I reckon a majority of 50-80 seats.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Well that's an easy one then.
Loads of people don't get what the point of canvassing is. For the most part, it's got sod all to do with trying to convert people. It's about trying to identify where your supporters live, so on polling day, you can knock on their door and give them a nudge to vote.
If someone's virulently not on your side, that's absolutely their right and you're not going to insult them by arguing the toss with them, unless they genuinely want a civilised, open discussion. Political canvassers aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most people who don't want to talk to you will just say so, firmly but politely.
But you do get the obnoxious ones like you had today TT.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Well that's an easy one then.
Loads of people don't get what the point of canvassing is. For the most part, it's got sod all to do with trying to convert people. It's about trying to identify where your supporters live, so on polling day, you can knock on their door and give them a nudge to vote.
If someone's virulently not on your side, that's absolutely their right and you're not going to insult them by arguing the toss with them, unless they genuinely want a civilised, open discussion. Political canvassers aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most people who don't want to talk to you will just say so, firmly but politely.
But you do get the obnoxious ones like you had today TT.
.... Not at all like the "civilised, open discussions" that are adopted on this forum then, where those not on your side are called racist, stupid, petulant, selfish, thick, fascist bas**rds etc.
-
I got offered some nylons for the missus last time I went there!
Fair swap.??
On topic, I do think Labour will win but realistically plenty of died in the wool Tories will believe the daily fail, so I reckon a majority of 50-80 seats.
It probably was.
However,they were more interested in some saucy copies of People’s Friend coastal views than the missus.
Election prediction,big tory loss and people claiming they have switched sides.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Well that's an easy one then.
Loads of people don't get what the point of canvassing is. For the most part, it's got sod all to do with trying to convert people. It's about trying to identify where your supporters live, so on polling day, you can knock on their door and give them a nudge to vote.
If someone's virulently not on your side, that's absolutely their right and you're not going to insult them by arguing the toss with them, unless they genuinely want a civilised, open discussion. Political canvassers aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most people who don't want to talk to you will just say so, firmly but politely.
But you do get the obnoxious ones like you had today TT.
.... Not at all like the "civilised, open discussions" that are adopted on this forum then, where those not on your side are called racist, stupid, petulant, selfish, thick, fascist bas**rds etc.
Yeah,leave those snowflake,loony lefties,woke,namby parties to it.
Not bitter at all?
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Well that's an easy one then.
Loads of people don't get what the point of canvassing is. For the most part, it's got sod all to do with trying to convert people. It's about trying to identify where your supporters live, so on polling day, you can knock on their door and give them a nudge to vote.
If someone's virulently not on your side, that's absolutely their right and you're not going to insult them by arguing the toss with them, unless they genuinely want a civilised, open discussion. Political canvassers aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most people who don't want to talk to you will just say so, firmly but politely.
But you do get the obnoxious ones like you had today TT.
.... Not at all like the "civilised, open discussions" that are adopted on this forum then, where those not on your side are called racist, stupid, petulant, selfish, thick, fascist bas**rds etc.
Yeah,leave those snowflake,loony lefties,woke,namby parties to it.
Obviously not, hence the response TT got from some of the punters while out canvassing.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Did you knock at BB's,Hound's,Sellby date's,Sproty's,DD's,Ldr's,Belt's door by any chance?
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
Well that's an easy one then.
Loads of people don't get what the point of canvassing is. For the most part, it's got sod all to do with trying to convert people. It's about trying to identify where your supporters live, so on polling day, you can knock on their door and give them a nudge to vote.
If someone's virulently not on your side, that's absolutely their right and you're not going to insult them by arguing the toss with them, unless they genuinely want a civilised, open discussion. Political canvassers aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.
Most people who don't want to talk to you will just say so, firmly but politely.
But you do get the obnoxious ones like you had today TT.
.... Not at all like the "civilised, open discussions" that are adopted on this forum then, where those not on your side are called racist, stupid, petulant, selfish, thick, fascist bas**rds etc.
Yeah,leave those snowflake,loony lefties,woke,namby parties to it.
Obviously not, hence the response TT got from some of the punters while out canvassing.
I wouldn’t mind, but as BST says, you’re not out to convert people when out canvassing, I wouldnt do it if we were.
Just trying to gauge the mood and offer any help on polling day if they need it.
So many people don’t seem to give a toss though.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
-
Wonder if Reforms success ends with the Tories being interested in supporting PR.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
Here's a thought DD.
The polls are as they are because the Tories have been a car crash.
How's this for another thought? After being so bad for so long, it would be far more worrying for our democracy if the Tories won 300 seats.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
I was in the Bay Horse a couple of nights ago and there were plenty of people in there who said they will be voting for Fletcher.
10 people in the Bay Horse and it’s packed to the rafters, it must be the only pub around where punters declare their voting intentions
You obviously haven’t been in since it re opened if you think that ten is a big number in there.
Maybe midweek but the Ingram and Blue Bell are virtually deserted midweek.
The Ingram owner is a mate and says as much himself.
-
Been out canvassing this morning for the Labour Party in the leafier part of our village.
Interesting how the majority aren’t interested in Politics and quickly close the door, and some are openly hostile.
One bloke answered the door, I said why I was knocking, he told me to F**k off.
Which is a first.
I remember going out canvassing way back in 1983 around Chingford way as I remember. It was a favour for a mate and it was a nightmare, we had all sorts of threats thrown at us, dogs let loose, threatened with cricket bats, the lot! Those people were not going to speak to a Labour canvasser that’s for sure.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Most of Iberians posts are insulting or fishing for responses dd.
Just look at his posts today alone and they sum him up to a tee.
Just ignore him and he gets more hyped up and posts even more crap.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
Why not? He has inherited The isle of Axholme and
Has a lot of respect due to hard work in the rest of his area
He has no respect in Hatfield and Thorne
Pal of mine who lives at Thorne says the same. Thinks the guy is a chancer who tries to hang onto the coat tails of those who actually do stuff. He voted for him last time out too, but now says he’s going back to Labour.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
Here's a thought DD.
The polls are as they are because the Tories have been a car crash.
How's this for another thought? After being so bad for so long, it would be far more worrying for our democracy if the Tories won 300 seats.
Everyone's aware of the car crash that is the Tory party (especially the ones legging it pronto)and every man and his dog is looking for a vast improvement.
Is a vast improvement any party having 70% of the seats in the house?
-
DD.
Given the system that we have, genuinely what is the alternative?
By the way, Attlee's Govt won about 70% of the seats in 1945. I don't recall us being a banana republic then.
And frankly, your worries would be a lot more convincing if you'd raised them in 2019, when a clear majority of voters voted for parties who were not in favour of an immediate Brexit. Yet a party in favour of an immediate Brexit won 56% of the seats and was able to push through a deal that had never been discussed during the referendum.
I may be wrong, but I don't recall hearing you call that a threat to democracy.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Because you talk absolute bolloxs lad.
And you get likes from similar minded cretins.
Every post you make is so hypothetical it becomes absurd.
Imagine if Diane Abbot became PM,chaos.
Imagine if Boris became PM,true Brit.
Imagine if one day you could talk some sense.
Ah,that's bollax too.
-
DD.
Given the system that we have, genuinely what is the alternative?
By the way, Attlee's Govt won about 70% of the seats in 1945. I don't recall us being a banana republic then.
And frankly, your worries would be a lot more convincing if you'd raised them in 2019, when a clear majority of voters voted for parties who were not in favour of an immediate Brexit. Yet a party in favour of an immediate Brexit won 56% of the seats and was able to push through a deal that had never been discussed during the referendum.
I may be wrong, but I don't recall hearing you call that a threat to democracy.
Unfortunately the system we have is not an aid in this situation (i'd have said that if they were predicting 400+ seats for anyone)
The election in 1945 can be fairly put to one side as a complete one of. After what the country had just endured, anything other than a massive coming together of the whole nation would of been weird in the extreme.
The Brexit debacle (because that's what it was and is) was a failure of all sides to properly prepair the electorate for the referendum. With all the "hyperbole" from all sides you could say the average punter never had a chance to make a reasonable and informed decision from what was available. Not everyone is as knowing and knowledgeable in politics as some!
There should of been a super majority clause in the vote if it was to be more than just advisory. But i guess this is what you get when a government can ride roughshod over everything because of its perceived majority.
What's to stop another government riding roughshod over parliament with its "massive" majority?
-
DD.
Given the system that we have, genuinely what is the alternative?
By the way, Attlee's Govt won about 70% of the seats in 1945. I don't recall us being a banana republic then.
And frankly, your worries would be a lot more convincing if you'd raised them in 2019, when a clear majority of voters voted for parties who were not in favour of an immediate Brexit. Yet a party in favour of an immediate Brexit won 56% of the seats and was able to push through a deal that had never been discussed during the referendum.
I may be wrong, but I don't recall hearing you call that a threat to democracy.
Unfortunately the system we have is not an aid in this situation (i'd have said that if they were predicting 400+ seats for anyone)
The election in 1945 can be fairly put to one side as a complete one of. After what the country had just endured, anything other than a massive coming together of the whole nation would of been weird in the extreme.
The Brexit debacle (because that's what it was and is) was a failure of all sides to properly prepair the electorate for the referendum. With all the "hyperbole" from all sides you could say the average punter never had a chance to make a reasonable and informed decision from what was available. Not everyone is as knowing and knowledgeable in politics as some!
There should of been a super majority clause in the vote if it was to be more than just advisory. But i guess this is what you get when a government can ride roughshod over everything because of its perceived majority.
What's to stop another government riding roughshod over parliament with its "massive" majority?
We've had 15 years of that. You don't seem to have much of an opinion about it.
However,you have such strong opinions about what will(in your opinion),or possibly might/might not happen in the future.
You are Russel Grant,and I claim my fluffy jumper.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Because you talk absolute bolloxs lad.
And you get likes from similar minded cretins.
Every post you make is so hypothetical it becomes absurd.
Imagine if Diane Abbot became PM,chaos.
Imagine if Boris became PM,true Brit.
Imagine if one day you could talk some sense.
Ah,that's bollax too.
I take it thats you not capable of debate then.
Good to know i don't need to waste an more time on you,
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Because you talk absolute bolloxs lad.
And you get likes from similar minded cretins.
Every post you make is so hypothetical it becomes absurd.
Imagine if Diane Abbot became PM,chaos.
Imagine if Boris became PM,true Brit.
Imagine if one day you could talk some sense.
Ah,that's bollax too.
I take it thats you not capable of debate then.
Good to know i don't need to waste an more time on you,
DD,you have never once debated.
Unless of course you consider 'Ginger Minger' being a debate.
You just rant,het red in the face and post shite that even the Daily Heil editorial would turn away.
When you are capable of posting anything dirty of debate I will reply,til then keep going gammon.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Because you talk absolute bolloxs lad.
And you get likes from similar minded cretins.
Every post you make is so hypothetical it becomes absurd.
Imagine if Diane Abbot became PM,chaos.
Imagine if Boris became PM,true Brit.
Imagine if one day you could talk some sense.
Ah,that's bollax too.
I take it thats you not capable of debate then.
Good to know i don't need to waste an more time on you,
DD,you have never once debated.
Unless of course you consider 'Ginger Minger' being a debate.
You just rant,het red in the face and post shite that even the Daily Heil editorial would turn away.
When you are capable of posting anything dirty of debate I will reply,til then keep going gammon.
Not quite sure what you've just posted there, sounds like some sad old loser busting a gut.
Your just reinforcing what everyone else on this forum thinks of you.
And its not pretty.
-
Well then... a 6% swing towards Labour in tonight's Opinium poll. We're over a week into the election campaign and the Tories have made absolutely no progress in the polls. This is existential.
-
Really?
Would that be reinforcing random bollox?
There's a few of you out there.
-
:woohoo:
Well then... a 6% swing towards Labour in tonight's Opinium poll. We're over a week into the election campaign and the Tories have made absolutely no progress in the polls. This is existential.
Thanks x for getting it back on topic ,rather that people ranting about what might happen.
Labour will win,no doubt and Tories thay changes their votes with their overcoats will complain.
-
DD.
It WASN'T a massive coming together of the nation in 1945. Churchill said if Labour won, they'd impose a state military police like the Gestapo. 36% of the electorate voted for him after he said that.
Labour won 47% of the vote and 62% of the seats.
That's how our system was always designed to work. It's supposed to give power to an Executive (the Govt) if they have enough seats to be able to push their legislation through Parliament.
-
I read an interesting analysis that Labour's support is very broad but very shallow. It said people from all sorts of demographics will vote for them this time, but without any real attachment to them, their MPs, or their policies. No Blairmania this time.
If that's true Labour are on course for a thumping majority this time around. I'll go for around 300 seats. We'll see some big name Tories out of a job, I reckon. However that support will flake away quickly at the first sign of trouble, unless Labour makes quick progress that people can feel.
I would say that's true - and also what the polls are showing. People are not particuarly keen on Starmer's Labour - but they hate Sunak's Tories (other than in the Bay Horse in Thorne of course).
I have been out on the bike through deepest Wiltshire and Somerset today - about 75 - 80 miles. Think I saw two Labour posters, loads of Green Party, even more Lib Dems - not one Tory. Think I went through four, maybe five constituencies, all Tory bar one, and not one poster.
-
Wilts, The Bay Horse is in Hatfield.
Oddly enough though I went to Thorne this morning to get some flowers to give to the wife of a friend who died last week.
I didn’t see one single Labour poster in a window despite walking half a mile from where I parked into the shopping street I visited.
I should say that I didn’t see any Tory ones either.
-
Labour to win but not by as much as the polls suggest now.
Shy Tories.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
That's fair enough but what have you seen from Starmer to think he would be like Johnson and Sunak?
Johnson tried to close down Parliament to get his way and when Sunak was told his policy was against International Law he tried to get International Law declared illegal!
I certainly dont agree with all Starmer has done and the way he has done it, to change the Labour Party, but he hasn't broken any laws? Or is likely to whatever majority he has.
I guess if he does act like a tinpot dictator as Johnson and Sunak have done then he can look forward to their fate in 5 years time.
As per hounds post above - what's the point in the personal attacks it's just boring. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with what danumdon has posted here. I dont agree with him, but it's fair enough of him to ask.
-
Wilts, The Bay Horse is in Hatfield.
Oddly enough though I went to Thorne this morning to get some flowers to give to the wife of a friend who died last week.
I didn’t see one single Labour poster in a window despite walking half a mile from where I parked into the shopping street I visited.
I should say that I didn’t see any Tory ones either.
Clearly I have never been in it! I have been in the one in Garthorpe - which closed about 20 years ago!
Cheers hound.
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Most of Iberians posts are insulting or fishing for responses dd.
Just look at his posts today alone and they sum him up to a tee.
Just ignore him and he gets more hyped up and posts even more crap.
Lovely post old lad
-
Some of the polls quoting figures like we've seen are scary and dangerous for democracy.
For an elected government to have way over 400 seats and the main opposition to be numbered in the 60's is quite frankly what you would expect in some tinpot, despot nations that have democracy as a veil for rampant dictatorial or fascist behaviour.
I'm not saying Starmer's party are either of the above but it does make you wonder where the direction of travel would be with a party having this kind of majority?
Would i be wrong in saying that a win like this would make any produced manifesto worthless after 22.01 on July 4th?
Would the temptation to strip out the manifesto that the election had been fought on to produce a new and much more radical direction be too great for Starmer to resist? or would it be approached in a sensible and pragmatic manner?
I'm thinking the former, Starmer is odds on to win with a massive majority, the vested interests in the back rooms will be tempted to go full on and attempt to correct some perceived wrongs very early and quickly, this in itself could well produce some kickback in the acceptance of this type of skulduggery.
The feelgood factor that many will have could change very quickly to something very different. Im hoping that sensible and clever people in the party fight this urge.
The economy is still very fragile with a great many grey clouds on the horizon, any one of them could turn at a moments notice and quite easily drop a massive pile of sh*t in our general direction.
People could turn and change very quickly in this type of scenario, sometimes going all in like this can turn jubilation into nationwide despair very quickly.
The warning signs are there and the party leadership need to be level headed and strong, something we have not yet seen, unfortunately.
We will soon know the direction of travel.
I can summarise all those points and hypothetical questions.
You are wrong.
Why the constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting in everything you pit on here?
You just can't help yourself.
If you consider what i've posted as "constant hyperbolism,Dail Heil posting" then stand up and debate exactly why YOU think so.
Posting constant crap to everything that people post won't cut it fella, most already think your a one trick pony, and its gone well past its sell by.
Most of Iberians posts are insulting or fishing for responses dd.
Just look at his posts today alone and they sum him up to a tee.
Just ignore him and he gets more hyped up and posts even more crap.
Lovely post old lad
The Truth hurts Iberian aye!
-
I predict there will be tears at bedtime for some on here come July 4.
-
Labour to win but not by as much as the polls suggest now.
Shy Tories.
Thank you for getting this back on topic. That is indeed a recurring phenomenon.
I think there is potential for Labour point loss if they are challenged on the details of their GB energy plan. It is currently just rhetoric.
It isn’t being branded as “net zero” it’s been branded as “clean energy”. But… Speaking to BBC Radio Scotland, Sir Keir said Labour was not planning to "turn the pipes off instantaneously", adding oil and gas would be part of the UK's "energy mix for decades to come". So how exactly is this revolutionary compared to the Tories’ energy policy?
I think they another potential challenge to Labour is whether their promise to take £5 billion through clamping down on tax avoidance through closing non-dom loops is fund their NHS targets when they aren’t going to raise any income taxes or national insurance. The NHS isn’t an efficient beast and things will likely end up costing more than they realise. Of course there previous record is good, but it isn’t the late 90s / early 00s anymore.
There is also a chance for their private school tax plan to put more pressure on the state education system through smaller private schools going bankrupt. And then in the long run, if there’s less to tax it’s less funds raised.
Just to be clear I’m not necessarily knocking the intentions, but they have to robust. Or else voters who prioritise “sound economics” could go back to the Conservatives. That’s more of a threat to Labour quest for power than losing those on the left-wing fringes to a small handful of Greens and Independents.
-
Were there any 'shy tories' around in 97?
-
Were there any 'shy tories' around in 97?
Not sure but the Labour lead did significantly narrow in the weeks before the GE. Click on “results”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election
The difference here is that the Conservative Party are performing a lot worse than they did in the mid-90s.
But as mentioned on another post, the Labour support is potentially quite shallow. I saw Tom Harwood suggest that this election was about “punishment” more than “policy” and he may have a point to some degree. Not for whole electorate but the swing voters.
-
So there could be some 'shy labour' voters?
I would think there are many voters across the political spectrum that don't want to declare who they are going to vote for.
-
So there could be some 'shy labour' voters?
I would think there are many voters across the political spectrum that don't want to declare who they are going to vote for.
You mean some of the indignant hard-left may just end up voting Labour despite their current protestations?
It might not seem it on here or in some people’s echo chambers but they are nowhere near as important or numerous as centrist swing voters, especially in this FPTP system we have.
-
Margaret Beckett once knocked on my door whilst I was watching a particularly interesting, well-acted episode of 'Doctors'.
I didn't answer.
You don't want to encourage that type of behaviour do you?
I mean who knocks on someone's door without calling ahead to make an appointment?
(Although I may possibly make an exception in Tommy Toes case).
-
Margaret Beckett once knocked on my door whilst I was watching a particularly interesting, well-acted episode of 'Doctors'.
I didn't answer.
You don't want to encourage that type of behaviour do you?
I mean who knocks on someone's door without calling ahead to make an appointment?
(Although I may possibly make an exception in Tommy Toes case).
I wish Margaret would have knocked on my door Mug.
I’d have expressed my deep sympathy for the cruel murder of her dad Thomas A
-
So there could be some 'shy labour' voters?
I would think there are many voters across the political spectrum that don't want to declare who they are going to vote for.
You mean some of the indignant hard-left may just end up voting Labour despite their current protestations?
It might not seem it on here or in some people’s echo chambers but they are nowhere near as important or numerous as centrist swing voters, especially in this FPTP system we have.
No I mean exactly what I posted, everyone wants to back a winner and there could be plenty waiting till the last minute that go down as undecided that make their mind up when the result is beyond doubt.
-
NC
Genuine question.
After the past 14 years, how is any voter who seriously prioritised "sound economics" ever going to support the Tories again?
-
Were there any 'shy tories' around in 97?
Not sure but the Labour lead did significantly narrow in the weeks before the GE. Click on “results”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election
The difference here is that the Conservative Party are performing a lot worse than they did in the mid-90s.
But as mentioned on another post, the Labour support is potentially quite shallow. I saw Tom Harwood suggest that this election was about “punishment” more than “policy” and he may have a point to some degree. Not for whole electorate but the swing voters.
I would disagree with your assesment of Labour support being 'shallow'. The Labour support is entirely made up of people who dislike the Tories and want to vote to get them out - that's very clear whatever Tom Harwood says. OK some may vote tactically to achieve that, but it's certain the Labour vote is solid.
What's less clear is what the other voters who have abandonded the Tories, the Don't Knows, Won't Vote, Reform voters will do. Do they also want to punish the Tories - or can Sunak win them back. These are the people he is aiming to get onside - and it's not looking good for him at the moment. But yes it could still change, there is plenty of time yet.
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
-
Were there any 'shy tories' around in 97?
Not sure but the Labour lead did significantly narrow in the weeks before the GE. Click on “results”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election
The difference here is that the Conservative Party are performing a lot worse than they did in the mid-90s.
But as mentioned on another post, the Labour support is potentially quite shallow. I saw Tom Harwood suggest that this election was about “punishment” more than “policy” and he may have a point to some degree. Not for whole electorate but the swing voters.
I would disagree with your assesment of Labour support being 'shallow'. The Labour support is entirely made up of people who dislike the Tories and want to vote to get them out - that's very clear whatever Tom Harwood says. OK some may vote tactically to achieve that, but it's certain the Labour vote is solid.
What's less clear is what the other voters who have abandonded the Tories, the Don't Knows, Won't Vote, Reform voters will do. Do they also want to punish the Tories - or can Sunak win them back. These are the people he is aiming to get onside - and it's not looking good for him at the moment. But yes it could still change, there is plenty of time yet.
Here is the real existential problem for the Tories. The blue boxes in that rightmost column are going to get more numerous for the next 3-4 elections.
If they had any strategic sense whatsoever, they'd have written off this Election a year ago and started the long, hard process of figuring out how to shape Toryism so it appeals to people below 65.
But they haven't even tried.
They are a party packed with second raters and spivs. And they've gone all in on appealing to today's pensioners with Class War b*llocks.
They are in a very, very serious position. Now.
Serious question; as their old supporters die out, who out of today's younger people is ever going to vote for them?
-
NC
Genuine question.
After the past 14 years, how is any voter who seriously prioritised "sound economics" ever going to support the Tories again?
I would imagine a great many Tories are agonising over that very thought. What would someone like that do in this situation?
Id say that a great many will be struggling to know what to do, do they abstain, hold their nose and vote for Labour or Liberal or do they succumb to the dark side and vote Reform?
I'd imagine its pretty obvious to a great many on the right that some sort of Realignment is required (just as Starmer is on the verge of achieving on the left) these broad churches have muddled along for far too long for the electorate to persevere with.
Its going to depend on how many in the centre right either stay home or vote accordingly to punish this dire and discredited government as to where the majority will fall. If it's the former then it may be in the expected range(200/250) if its the latter then it could well be anything approaching a total wipeout(less than 70)
Just for reference, i don't believe what any are currently stating as their policies is true. I think we will have to wait to see what manifests itself given time and what's about to take place. Time will be needed to see things settle down and to analyse what the parties real direction of travel is.
I'm still to be convinced of any of these at this time.
-
So there could be some 'shy labour' voters?
I would think there are many voters across the political spectrum that don't want to declare who they are going to vote for.
You mean some of the indignant hard-left may just end up voting Labour despite their current protestations?
It might not seem it on here or in some people’s echo chambers but they are nowhere near as important or numerous as centrist swing voters, especially in this FPTP system we have.
No I mean exactly what I posted, everyone wants to back a winner and there could be plenty waiting till the last minute that go down as undecided that make their mind up when the result is beyond doubt.
There’s no evidence of that happening in recent history really when looking at polling in elections with clear favourites.
The Tories kept a consistent ~10% lead throughout the 2019 election campaign and won on about that. But the dynamics of that election were politically unique with “getting Brexit done”. The narrow lead throughout 2010 for the Tories never really changed either.
No shy tories in 2017, but May bottled a 20% lead down to 2%. She was clear favourite.
2015 looked neck and neck until shy tories came out of nowhere and delivered a 6% Tory lead. Same in 1992.
For Labour this election is most similar to 1997. Which you brought up and I showed that their lead reduced slightly over time.
Like I said in the OP. A 1997 type majority is more likely than a 400 seat majority. What do you reckon?
-
Were there any 'shy tories' around in 97?
Not sure but the Labour lead did significantly narrow in the weeks before the GE. Click on “results”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election
The difference here is that the Conservative Party are performing a lot worse than they did in the mid-90s.
But as mentioned on another post, the Labour support is potentially quite shallow. I saw Tom Harwood suggest that this election was about “punishment” more than “policy” and he may have a point to some degree. Not for whole electorate but the swing voters.
I would disagree with your assesment of Labour support being 'shallow'. The Labour support is entirely made up of people who dislike the Tories and want to vote to get them out - that's very clear whatever Tom Harwood says. OK some may vote tactically to achieve that, but it's certain the Labour vote is solid.
What's less clear is what the other voters who have abandonded the Tories, the Don't Knows, Won't Vote, Reform voters will do. Do they also want to punish the Tories - or can Sunak win them back. These are the people he is aiming to get onside - and it's not looking good for him at the moment. But yes it could still change, there is plenty of time yet.
Here is the real existential problem for the Tories. The blue boxes in that rightmost column are going to get more numerous for the next 3-4 elections.
If they had any strategic sense whatsoever, they'd have written off this Election a year ago and started the long, hard process of figuring out how to shape Toryism so it appeals to people below 65.
But they haven't even tried.
They are a party packed with second raters and spivs. And they've gone all in on appealing to today's pensioners with Class War b*llocks.
They are in a very, very serious position. Now.
Serious question; as their old supporters die out, who out of today's younger people is ever going to vote for them?
it doesnt work like that thou, i think most people vote for who they think they will be better off with in power, i know so many people in there younger days who voted labour as they got older they switched to tories, people change when they habe earned money they want to keep it
-
That's because the Tories used to offer an economic path that did work for a large proportion of the working age population.
This lot has delivered an utter disaster for most younger workers. And their approval rating among people of working age, in particular those 18-50 is at levels lower than anything we have ever seen for a major party.
Why should a 40 year old who is never going to be able to buy a house or have a decent pension move to supporting the Tories by the time they are 70?
And then there's the B word.
Brexit was predominantly a thing supported by the old. The young didn't and don't want it. That's the defining legacy of this lot in the eyes of many younger voters. And folk don't forget.
-
I agree bst, hopefully labour will deliver what the tories have not, people will want to see that change thou and quickly, yes the greens are ahead of them and reform just behind in the under 50s, the over 50s is still very close thou and without reform they would probably be ahead
-
That's because the Tories used to offer an economic path that did work for a large proportion of the working age population.
This lot has delivered an utter disaster for most younger workers. And their approval rating among people of working age, in particular those 18-50 is at levels lower than anything we have ever seen for a major party.
Why should a 40 year old who is never going to be able to buy a house or have a decent pension move to supporting the Tories by the time they are 70?
And then there's the B word.
Brexit was predominantly a thing supported by the old. The young didn't and don't want it. That's the defining legacy of this lot in the eyes of many younger voters. And folk don't forget.
Add to that anyone with a mortgage who saw their monthly repayments jump due to the actions of Liz Truss. There will be a significant number of people whose fixed terms have recently ended or are due to end before the election. How many of those will blame the Tories for their extra £200 monthly expense?
-
Chris.
I'd agree with that.
There's evidence that a large proportion of people hark back to their youth when thinking about parties. Remembering front page negative issues that happened then.
So, some Tory supporting pensioners still talking of the IMF crisis and Winter of Discontent as reasons why Labour is incompetent.
I suspect that today's 20 and 30 year olds, when they are 70, will still remember that the Tory party put a clearly mentally ill women in Number 10 for a Clough-nite, and she damn well nearly brought the whole economy down in that time.
Things like that tend to stick in the mind.
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
I agree with most of what you have written there Wolfie.
With regards to trying to change the way people vote, there are some on here who do write in such a way that they appear to be consistently trying to do just that.
We all know that they are LP through and through but it is relentless.
On the Brexit thing, there was one poster on here who mentioned that they regret the way they voted but I can’t remember who it was.
-
I’m sure there was at least one poster on here who said he/she wouldn’t vote for the party/outcome they actually believed in, simply because some folks in here they dislike and argued with (about anything) would vote the same way.!!
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
I voted leave and now regret it, I would vote to rejoin
-
There's a lot more like you Filo.
https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/
Fascinatingly, the big move in opinion seems to have taken place in 2022. I don't recall there being any EU-related big issue then. But what there was, was the realisation that the Tories were an utter car crash.
The Year of Three PMs.
Kamikwaze's Budget
Putting a mentally ill person in Number 10.
Johnson finally and unequivocally to anyone bar Dorries and BB unveiled as a career liar.
I wonder if a chunk of the population woke up that year and realised they'd been conned in 2016?
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
I voted leave and now regret it, I would vote to rejoin
What made you regret it Filo?
-
I personally think it will still be closer than anyone can imagine. People don't like change, no matter how bad the current lot are there all some 30yr olds know?!
In my constituency Newquay/st Austell traditional liberal but been Tory for last two elections. The three way split did it's job last time and Torys stayed in. Many areas need to be very tactical. I almost wish labour wouldn't stand here.
Throw in reform party and a growing green movement and the shear splitting of the votes could really tell??
I predict another coalition! Not sure which way but wouldn't be surprised if Tories stayed in by the skins of their teeth.
-
AF.
You can make a fortune then laying off a Labour majority. Currently 1/10.
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
I voted leave and now regret it, I would vote to rejoin
What made you regret it Filo?
The one and only reason I voted leave was the issue of immigration, I never took much notice of the wider issues, more fool me
-
I was asked yesterday if I knew ANY person who voted to Leave but now says they made an error , or mistake and now regret voting the way they did and if they got another Vote they would choose rejoin
Of all the people known to the lady asking me the question she knew of nobody herself
I said actually I do know 1 person who was saying they had made a bad error 18 months after voting , but only that one
I don't know if anybody on here has said they would change the way they voted or indeed know anyone that would now
I tend not to read the Political threads or other threads that degenerate into Political debates because I have often said people won't change the way I vote and I wouldn't expect anyone to change their minds because of anything I say
I voted leave and now regret it, I would vote to rejoin
What made you regret it Filo?
The one and only reason I voted leave was the issue of immigration, I never took much notice of the wider issues, more fool me
Strange thing is, I voted remain, but on this forum, as a result, I have been called racist, selfish, thick, inconsiderate, fascist and more because I believe(d) in democracy, and accepted the result of a democratic vote.
How did YOU get away with it?
-
The issue post-referendum wasn’t about accepting the result IMHO, it was more that there was no realistic understanding of what brexit actually meant to folks in their day to day lives. Plus the shambolic handling of sorting out “deals” by successive PMs.
Getting back to this GE, people will in many cases be swayed to vote one way or another by headlines (misleading or not) or on personalities, or blinkered party tribalism.
That’s why despite the lies of Johnson, pandemic mishandling, partygate, Truss’ disastrous two minutes as PM etc, plenty of folks will still vote Tory. Some will genuinely believe it’s the correct vote, others have their heads in the sand:
So I don’t think a Labour majority would reach 3 figures.
-
There's a lot more like you Filo.
https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/
Fascinatingly, the big move in opinion seems to have taken place in 2022. I don't recall there being any EU-related big issue then. But what there was, was the realisation that the Tories were an utter car crash.
The Year of Three PMs.
Kamikwaze's Budget
Putting a mentally ill person in Number 10.
Johnson finally and unequivocally to anyone bar Dorries and BB unveiled as a career liar.
I wonder if a chunk of the population woke up that year and realised they'd been conned in 2016?
So much poster baiting going on in this section.
Why bring BB into the frame.
And is there any genuine evidence which says that there was a mentally ill PM in number ten (we all know that bst means Truss).
Despite her car crash of premiership, that is a big statement to make.
As for banging on about Brexit……….. how many more years are we doomed to hear from people who can’t accept the outcome of a democratic vote?
It’s like the kid who takes his ball in when his team is losing.
-
Again, and as above, accepting the result of the vote isn’t the same as debating how to deal with the consequences of that result.
But anyone on here trying to question what happens next, what’s practical to achieve etc after the vote, gets shot down as a bad loser or worse told to shut up because you lost.!
If you want to see what a bad loser looks like who doesn’t accept a vote result, look no further than Trump.!
-
There's a lot more like you Filo.
https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/
Fascinatingly, the big move in opinion seems to have taken place in 2022. I don't recall there being any EU-related big issue then. But what there was, was the realisation that the Tories were an utter car crash.
The Year of Three PMs.
Kamikwaze's Budget
Putting a mentally ill person in Number 10.
Johnson finally and unequivocally to anyone bar Dorries and BB unveiled as a career liar.
I wonder if a chunk of the population woke up that year and realised they'd been conned in 2016?
So much poster baiting going on in this section.
Why bring BB into the frame.
And is there any genuine evidence which says that there was a mentally ill PM in number ten (we all know that bst means Truss).
Despite her car crash of premiership, that is a big statement to make.
As for banging on about Brexit……….. how many more years are we doomed to hear from people who can’t accept the outcome of a democratic vote?
It’s like the kid who takes his ball in when his team is losing.
BST's continued condemnation of career liars would be applaudible but his support for the biggest career liar of them all makes it laughable.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
-
Again, and as above, accepting the result of the vote isn’t the same as debating how to deal with the consequences of that result.
But anyone on here trying to question what happens next, what’s practical to achieve etc after the vote, gets shot down as a bad loser or worse told to shut up because you lost.!
If you want to see what a bad loser looks like who doesn’t accept a vote result, look no further than Trump.!
Agreed on Trump IDM.
For the record, I voted Remain in the referendum.
We lost fair and square, life goes on.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
-
Righto.
-
Righto.
Oh, it was your Righto, was it?
Hope it gets better soon!
-
It was actually. Thanks.
This from BBC verify..
Boris Johnson unveiled the Conservatives' plan to raise the threshold at which people start paying National Insurance contributions while electioneering in November 2019.
He said: "If we're lucky enough to be elected, so the first Budget we will go up to the £9,500 threshold and that will, as I say, put £500 into the pockets of everybody."
But this was incorrect. The Conservatives' own press release said the benefit from raising the threshold to £9,500 in 2020-21 would be £100 per year. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said it would be £85 per year.
Has Boris Johnson got National Insurance cut confused?
'There will be no checks on goods going from GB to NI, or NI to GB'
Mr Johnson made this promise about the Brexit deal for Northern Ireland - known as the Protocol - which he negotiated and signed.
But this assertion - in a Sky News interview in December 2019 - was simply not true. It contradicted the terms of his own deal - as we pointed out at the time.
There have indeed been checks on goods from Great Britain (GB) to Northern Ireland (NI) since the Protocol came into force on 31 December 2020. These have led to political problems in Northern Ireland and the government now wants to change the deal.
Northern Ireland Protocol: What did Boris Johnson say?
'There are hundreds of thousands - I think 400,000 - fewer families living in poverty now than there were in 2010'
When we looked into Mr Johnson's claim made in June 2020, we could find nothing in the official poverty statistics to back it up and Downing Street was unable to supply a source for the figure.
The Office of the Children's Commissioner for England, external also examined the claim. Its analysis suggested that between 2010-11 and 2018-19:
800,000 more people in families were in relative poverty
100,000 fewer people in families were in absolute poverty
Neither of which supported Mr Johnson's claim - which looks to have been incorrect.
What do we mean when we talk about poverty?
Boris Johnson's child poverty claims fact-checked
'I wear a mask wherever the rules say that I should'
Mr Johnson made this comment when asked at a news conference on 15 November 2021 whether he had worn a mask throughout his visit to Hexham Hospital a week before.
But it wasn't true - photographs emerged showing him not wearing one during the visit.
He later apologised, saying he had briefly not been wearing one and had "put it on as soon as I realised I had made that mistake".
'The guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times'
The prime minister was asked in Parliament in December 2021 whether there had been a lockdown-breaking party in Downing Street on 13 November 2020. He responded: "No, but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
The report by civil servant Sue Gray into Downing Street gatherings says there were two that day. Boris Johnson was even photographed at one of them, with at least six other people and bottles of wine.
The prime minister drinking with staff
IMAGE SOURCE, CABINET OFFICE
Image caption,
Boris Johnson pictured at Downing Street gathering on 13 November 2020
At least one person was fined for that event, so it is not true to say that the Covid guidance and rules were followed at all times.
A parliamentary committee is currently investigating whether Mr Johnson deliberately misled MPs about the matter.
Downing Street parties: What Covid rules were broken?
Did Boris Johnson mislead Parliament over parties?
'Proudly restoring the crown stamp on to the side of pint glasses'
This Boris Johnson quote from January 2022 was in a government press release listing the "opportunities of Brexit".
The crown stamp used to be required as a "conformity mark" - something showing that a product conformed with regulations - on British pint glasses. This changed in 2006 when it was replaced by the EU conformity mark CE.
But the quote was misleading. EU rules didn't stop the UK from having a crown stamp on pints before Brexit as a decorative feature (as long as it didn't overlap or become confused with the CE mark). A Conservative MEP even sought and received, external guidance on this matter in 2007.
In June 2022, government guidance, external said crown stamps would not be returning as a conformity mark on pint glasses - that would be the UKCA mark along with an M - but could be used as "a decorative mark only".
Did the EU ban crown marks on pint glasses?
Warm homes discount 'worth £140 per week'
Also in January 2022, Boris Johnson said in Parliament that the government's warm homes discount was "worth £140 per week".
This wasn't true.
It was worth £140 for the whole of the winter, not £140 a week.
Labour's Angela Rayner steps up call for 5% energy bill VAT cut
'More people in work now than before the pandemic began'
In February 2022, Mr Johnson said at Prime Minister's Questions that there were "more people in work now than before the pandemic began".
But that was incorrect - the statistics regulator had criticised him the day before for making this claim on several previous occasions.
Mr Johnson was mixing up the number of people on payrolls, which had gone up, with the number of people in work, which had not. They are not the same thing - the payroll number excludes self-employed people, for example.
Boris Johnson makes incorrect claim on jobs.
Could have cut and pasted more, but it was getting difficult.
-
Absolutely no idea. But would be very interested in seeing if the new MRP Poll (where they give a predicition for every seat) for the Daily Heil that leaves the Tories with only 66 seats is anything like accurate.
All three Doncaster seats to be won by Labour. Been a while since the Isle of Axholme (now in Doncaster East) had a Labour MP. And Sunak only just holding onto his:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_vipoll_20240531.html
Nick Fletcher will easily hold his seat and probably increase his majority Milliband and Whover will hold Theo seats, there will be a Labour majority of 30 seats , I don’t see many Tory voters voting for further tax increases!
No way will Fletcher hold his seat
The expanison of Fletchers boundaries to include Isle of Axholme muddies these waters for me. I used to work out that way, lots of those villages are serene Tory places. I tend to find people don't change votes unless it massively affects them.
Overall, it's well up in the air. I'm 43 but was well into politics as a kid, the tories have won from behind 8 balls similar to this. I also went to the miners strike march not too long ago. Labour has quite a lot of factions now and if they don't all align it won't be the landslide people are predicting. I do expect Scotland to lean back towards Labour though.
-
Maybe someone in the know can post Starmers lies?
For balance, I mean. I don’t know enough to say myself, but if there are any allegations or proven lies, let’s see them for the sake of fairness.??
-
Agree IDM.
Waiting for BB to post some.
-
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
I'm fairly neutral on all this but that seems a really outlandish statement to make. The parties and the whatsapp stuff for starters, or are you making a point of separating political lies and just being a liar in general?
-
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
Not really, but go on....
Plus he's never been in power, so changing/tweaking his party's plans in the run up to an election is just campaigning isn't it?
-
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
I was being serious, and I wasn’t having a go at you BB.
But I would like to know what his lies are?
-
I predict there will be tears at bedtime for some on here come July 4.
Who will that be, Syd?
The only tears I'll shed is if Count Binface loses his deposit.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
I'm fairly neutral on all this but that seems a really outlandish statement to make. The parties and the whatsapp stuff for starters, or are you making a point of separating political lies and just being a liar in general?
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
I was being serious, and I wasn’t having a go at you BB.
But I would like to know what his lies are?
I said political lies. Anyone of us in the spotlight 24/7 could be accused of saying an off-the-cuff remark that can be construed as a lie.
I'm talking about politicians who go against almost every principle they claim to have had to gain political votes.
Starmer beats Johnson hands down at that.
-
All politicians do that to some extent.?
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
I'm fairly neutral on all this but that seems a really outlandish statement to make. The parties and the whatsapp stuff for starters, or are you making a point of separating political lies and just being a liar in general?
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
I was being serious, and I wasn’t having a go at you BB.
But I would like to know what his lies are?
I said political lies. Anyone of us in the spotlight 24/7 could be accused of saying an off-the-cuff remark that can be construed as a lie.
I'm talking about politicians who go against almost every principle they claim to have had to gain political votes.
Starmer beats Johnson hands down at that.
Well the non-political lies BJ made were much more serious than off the cuff remarks and destroy his integirity both in and beyond politics so I don't accept your quick dismissal of that. Putting that aside I'll be sure to look at the manifesto's when they come out to see where in the political spectrum KS is now positioning labour.
-
Whether you accept my views on this is entirely up to you.
My point is people keep bringing up Johnson's lies as an excuse for supporting Starmer. My point is, that refusing to acknowledge Starmer's lies means one is simply kidding themself.
-
It was actually. Thanks.
This from BBC verify..
Boris Johnson unveiled the Conservatives' plan to raise the threshold at which people start paying National Insurance contributions while electioneering in November 2019.
He said: "If we're lucky enough to be elected, so the first Budget we will go up to the £9,500 threshold and that will, as I say, put £500 into the pockets of everybody."
But this was incorrect. The Conservatives' own press release said the benefit from raising the threshold to £9,500 in 2020-21 would be £100 per year. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said it would be £85 per year.
Has Boris Johnson got National Insurance cut confused?
'There will be no checks on goods going from GB to NI, or NI to GB'
Mr Johnson made this promise about the Brexit deal for Northern Ireland - known as the Protocol - which he negotiated and signed.
But this assertion - in a Sky News interview in December 2019 - was simply not true. It contradicted the terms of his own deal - as we pointed out at the time.
There have indeed been checks on goods from Great Britain (GB) to Northern Ireland (NI) since the Protocol came into force on 31 December 2020. These have led to political problems in Northern Ireland and the government now wants to change the deal.
Northern Ireland Protocol: What did Boris Johnson say?
'There are hundreds of thousands - I think 400,000 - fewer families living in poverty now than there were in 2010'
When we looked into Mr Johnson's claim made in June 2020, we could find nothing in the official poverty statistics to back it up and Downing Street was unable to supply a source for the figure.
The Office of the Children's Commissioner for England, external also examined the claim. Its analysis suggested that between 2010-11 and 2018-19:
800,000 more people in families were in relative poverty
100,000 fewer people in families were in absolute poverty
Neither of which supported Mr Johnson's claim - which looks to have been incorrect.
What do we mean when we talk about poverty?
Boris Johnson's child poverty claims fact-checked
'I wear a mask wherever the rules say that I should'
Mr Johnson made this comment when asked at a news conference on 15 November 2021 whether he had worn a mask throughout his visit to Hexham Hospital a week before.
But it wasn't true - photographs emerged showing him not wearing one during the visit.
He later apologised, saying he had briefly not been wearing one and had "put it on as soon as I realised I had made that mistake".
'The guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times'
The prime minister was asked in Parliament in December 2021 whether there had been a lockdown-breaking party in Downing Street on 13 November 2020. He responded: "No, but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
The report by civil servant Sue Gray into Downing Street gatherings says there were two that day. Boris Johnson was even photographed at one of them, with at least six other people and bottles of wine.
The prime minister drinking with staff
IMAGE SOURCE, CABINET OFFICE
Image caption,
Boris Johnson pictured at Downing Street gathering on 13 November 2020
At least one person was fined for that event, so it is not true to say that the Covid guidance and rules were followed at all times.
A parliamentary committee is currently investigating whether Mr Johnson deliberately misled MPs about the matter.
Downing Street parties: What Covid rules were broken?
Did Boris Johnson mislead Parliament over parties?
'Proudly restoring the crown stamp on to the side of pint glasses'
This Boris Johnson quote from January 2022 was in a government press release listing the "opportunities of Brexit".
The crown stamp used to be required as a "conformity mark" - something showing that a product conformed with regulations - on British pint glasses. This changed in 2006 when it was replaced by the EU conformity mark CE.
But the quote was misleading. EU rules didn't stop the UK from having a crown stamp on pints before Brexit as a decorative feature (as long as it didn't overlap or become confused with the CE mark). A Conservative MEP even sought and received, external guidance on this matter in 2007.
In June 2022, government guidance, external said crown stamps would not be returning as a conformity mark on pint glasses - that would be the UKCA mark along with an M - but could be used as "a decorative mark only".
Did the EU ban crown marks on pint glasses?
Warm homes discount 'worth £140 per week'
Also in January 2022, Boris Johnson said in Parliament that the government's warm homes discount was "worth £140 per week".
This wasn't true.
It was worth £140 for the whole of the winter, not £140 a week.
Labour's Angela Rayner steps up call for 5% energy bill VAT cut
'More people in work now than before the pandemic began'
In February 2022, Mr Johnson said at Prime Minister's Questions that there were "more people in work now than before the pandemic began".
But that was incorrect - the statistics regulator had criticised him the day before for making this claim on several previous occasions.
Mr Johnson was mixing up the number of people on payrolls, which had gone up, with the number of people in work, which had not. They are not the same thing - the payroll number excludes self-employed people, for example.
Boris Johnson makes incorrect claim on jobs.
Could have cut and pasted more, but it was getting difficult.
Political lying began with Boris Johnson. Or at least that’s what British political Twitter has led us to believe. When Johnson was still UK prime minister, we would hear near-daily outbursts from the great and the good about Johnson’s endless ‘lies’. Here was a man who ‘knows a hundred different ways to lie’. A man who ‘lies and lies and lies’. According to one book-length account of Johnson’s fibs, ‘Standards of truth-telling… collapsed at the precise moment Boris Johnson and his associates entered 10 Downing Street in the early afternoon of 24 July 2019’. Apparently, his occasionally misleading statements, his spinning of statistics, amounted to a fully fledged ‘assault on truth’ itself.
Given all this pearl-clutching over the dishonesty of Johnson, often in relation to the sorts of fibs and spin politicians have always indulged in, it is striking just how muted the reaction has been to the even more flagrant deceptions of Sir Keir Starmer. Unlike Johnson, the Labour leader hasn’t simply made a series of bombastic, exaggerated statements – he has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear.
This week, Starmer admitted on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that he will abandon his pledge to scrap university tuition fees – a promise he made to the Labour membership in 2020. Other pledges he has jettisoned from his Labour leadership campaign include nationalising the utilities firms, increasing income tax on high earners, keeping freedom of movement with the EU and banning outsourcing in the NHS.
Even before Starmer became Labour leader, his flip-flopping over Brexit was shameless in the extreme. After the Leave vote and before the 2017 election, Starmer said that Brexit needed to happen as a ‘matter of principle’. It wasn’t long before that principle was betrayed and he became a leading cheerleader for a second referendum. Now that he is Labour leader he has pledged to ‘make Brexit work’ – a promise so empty that neither Leavers nor Rejoiners can really trust it.
Of course, Starmer claims that he has not abandoned these pledges at all. According to him, he has merely ‘adapted’ these positions to suit today’s straightened economic climate. This is nonsense, of course. Not least because many of Starmer’s about-turns have been over culture-war issues, which have precious little to do with taxing and spending.
Take his flip-flopping on transgenderism. At times, he’s been a strident supporter of the trans movement. In 2020, he committed Labour to introducing gender self-identification. In 2021, he admonished gender-critical feminists who say that ‘only women have a cervix’. But then, last month, in an apparent concession to biological reality, he said that ‘99.9 per cent of women haven’t got a penis’. He also promised that there would be no ‘rolling back’ of women’s sex-based rights under a Labour government. Although Starmer has left open the bizarre possibility of one in 1,000 women having penises, this is still 1,000 miles away from his earlier trans-rights pledges.
Starmer has been just as inconsistent on the big protest movements of our time. He took the knee for Black Lives Matter in early June 2020, only to dismiss its signature demand to ‘defund the police’ a few weeks later. As for Extinction Rebellion and other road-blocking green activists, he was singing their praises back in 2019. ‘Climate change is the issue of our time, and as the Extinction Rebellion protest showed us this week, the next generation is not going to forgive us if we don’t take action’, he said. Since becoming Labour leader, he’s been calling for more eco-activists to be arrested and to face longer jail time.
The about-turns are dizzying. They are not just everyday untruths. Imagine if Boris had campaigned to Get Brexit Done, and instead took us into the Euro. That is the level of political deception Keir has stooped to. So where is all the anger from the chattering classes?
Could have copied and pasted more, but couldn't be arsed.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
-
BB appears to be having his usual problem here.
He cannot or will not understand the difference between:
1) A politician who changes policies.
and
2) A man who has lied about pretty much every objective fact that ever got in his way, from bendy bananas to the text of the Withdrawal Agreement that he himself signed.
If you are determined to both sides stuff, you can convince yourself these are equivalent.
Trouble is, you make yourself look absolutely stupid.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
-
.... And BST goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on, supporting his great leader in the only possible way he can...................... By saying Boris lies, Starmer makes mistakes!
This is grown-up politics, folks!
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
I'm fairly neutral on all this but that seems a really outlandish statement to make. The parties and the whatsapp stuff for starters, or are you making a point of separating political lies and just being a liar in general?
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
I was being serious, and I wasn’t having a go at you BB.
But I would like to know what his lies are?
I said political lies. Anyone of us in the spotlight 24/7 could be accused of saying an off-the-cuff remark that can be construed as a lie.
I'm talking about politicians who go against almost every principle they claim to have had to gain political votes.
Starmer beats Johnson hands down at that.
The UK will remain in EU and under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market.
Boris Johnson's Keynote speech to the London Policy Conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYWt9k1oDmY
Boris Johnson revealed his support for the European Union’s single market in “a pro-European” letter written the year before he decided to campaign for leave, it has emerged.
The likely prime minister’s pro-EU market sympathies were said to be revealed in a letter of condolence to the wife of the late Tory politician Sir Leon Brittan, who died in January 2015.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/17/boris-johnson-support-eu-revealed-leon-brittan-widow-letter
Writing exclusively for the Daily Telegraph, London Mayor Boris Johnson said that if Britain left the EU, “we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by Brussels”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10052646/Quitting-the-EU-wont-solve-our-problems-says-Boris-Johnson.html
So was he lying then? Or when he lead Vote Leave in 2016?
-
Wilts.
That's a change of policy.
An extreme one, but a change of policy nonetheless.
Voters can decide whether they agree with a politician who changes policy.
The problem comes when politicians lie about matters of objective truth and aren't held to account.
Johnson lies about objective truth as easily as he breathes. If you don't hold that to account, rational discussion and decision making is impossible. Whatever you say to try to examine him, he'll make up an alternative reality. That's how Johnson has lived his entire life. It's why he was sacked twice from early jobs, but that didn't stop him. Because it's not a choice with him it's part of what he is.
-
Are you seriously suggesting that Starmer is a bigger liar (if he is a liar at all) than Boris Johnson?
That’s just ridiculous.
I assume your just fishing as nobody with any sense would post such a thing.
Yes, I am. Keir Starmer is a bigger political liar than Boris Johnson.
I'm fairly neutral on all this but that seems a really outlandish statement to make. The parties and the whatsapp stuff for starters, or are you making a point of separating political lies and just being a liar in general?
Where does one start with someone who has shredded just about every principle he once claimed to hold dear?
Mmmmmmmmmmm.
Hey, that's a good start!
I was being serious, and I wasn’t having a go at you BB.
But I would like to know what his lies are?
I said political lies. Anyone of us in the spotlight 24/7 could be accused of saying an off-the-cuff remark that can be construed as a lie.
I'm talking about politicians who go against almost every principle they claim to have had to gain political votes.
Starmer beats Johnson hands down at that.
The UK will remain in EU and under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market.
Boris Johnson's Keynote speech to the London Policy Conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYWt9k1oDmY
Boris Johnson revealed his support for the European Union’s single market in “a pro-European” letter written the year before he decided to campaign for leave, it has emerged.
The likely prime minister’s pro-EU market sympathies were said to be revealed in a letter of condolence to the wife of the late Tory politician Sir Leon Brittan, who died in January 2015.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/17/boris-johnson-support-eu-revealed-leon-brittan-widow-letter
Writing exclusively for the Daily Telegraph, London Mayor Boris Johnson said that if Britain left the EU, “we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by Brussels”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10052646/Quitting-the-EU-wont-solve-our-problems-says-Boris-Johnson.html
So was he lying then? Or when he lead Vote Leave in 2016?
That was his opinion at the time, and he changed it. Not unlike Starmer in that respect, although not in the way Starmer went against everything he pretended to believe in when he stabbed Corbyn in the back, and has since changed his mind about almost everything he promised since.
-
Wilts.
That's a change of policy.
An extreme one, but a change of policy nonetheless.
Voters can decide whether they agree with a politician who changes policy.
The problem comes when politicians lie about matters of objective truth and aren't held to account.
Johnson lies about objective truth as easily as he breathes. If you don't hold that to account, rational discussion and decision making is impossible. Whatever you say to try to examine him, he'll make up an alternative reality. That's how Johnson has lived his entire life. It's why he was sacked twice from early jobs, but that didn't stop him. Because it's not a choice with him it's part of what he is.
A good example of the was when he was asked what he did to relax.
He came up with a cock and bull story about making buses out of matchboxes or some such.
You could see him making it up as he was saying it, but he just couldn’t help himself.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
-
Wilts.
That's a change of policy.
An extreme one, but a change of policy nonetheless.
Voters can decide whether they agree with a politician who changes policy.
The problem comes when politicians lie about matters of objective truth and aren't held to account.
Johnson lies about objective truth as easily as he breathes. If you don't hold that to account, rational discussion and decision making is impossible. Whatever you say to try to examine him, he'll make up an alternative reality. That's how Johnson has lived his entire life. It's why he was sacked twice from early jobs, but that didn't stop him. Because it's not a choice with him it's part of what he is.
A good example of the was when he was asked what he did to relax.
He came up with a cock and bull story about making buses out of matchboxes or some such.
You could see him making it up as he was saying it, but he just couldn’t help himself.
It's called a sense of humour in a light-hearted conversation.
Winston Churchill once said he'd be sober in the morning.......... Lying bas**rd.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Johnson said 'under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market' and then campaigned for the UK government to leave the single market.
If you dont think that's abandoning your principles then there's no point arguing with you.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Johnson said 'under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market' and then campaigned for the UK government to leave the single market.
If you dont think that's abandoning your principles then there's no point arguing with you.
Like I said to BST earlier, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Johnson said 'under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market' and then campaigned for the UK government to leave the single market.
If you dont think that's abandoning your principles then there's no point arguing with you.
Like I said to BST earlier, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
WTF has Nick Clegg go to do with any of this?
-
Here's a lie.
https://x.com/GillianKeegan/status/1797252310990499990
How does a policy that hasn't been put into practice yet, by an Opposition party cause a school to close before the policy is announced.
That's a lie in an issue of Objective Truth.
Totally different from changing a policy.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Johnson said 'under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market' and then campaigned for the UK government to leave the single market.
If you dont think that's abandoning your principles then there's no point arguing with you.
Like I said to BST earlier, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
WTF has Nick Clegg go to do with any of this?
About the same as Boris Johnson when considering voting for Keir Starmer as PM.
f**k all!
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Johnson said 'under no circumstances shall the UK government leave the single market' and then campaigned for the UK government to leave the single market.
If you dont think that's abandoning your principles then there's no point arguing with you.
Like I said to BST earlier, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
WTF has Nick Clegg go to do with any of this?
About the same as Boris Johnson when considering voting for Keir Starmer as PM.
f**k all!
Why's KS a bigger hypothetical liar than a prove liar like NC?
-
Who said owt about KS being a hypothetical liar?
Nick Clegg is no longer in politics, so his being a liar is rather scraping the bottom of the barrel as a reason to vote for Starmer.
........ Same with Boris Johnson.
-
Ok, that’s your spin on it.
However I would think most folks can see a difference between changing your views to match the (changing) political situation and to gain votes, and that of downright fibs.?
The first is politicking, and individuals can decide how much or how little importance they put on it. Are they abandoning principles or reacting to developing political realities?
And then there are outright I wasn’t there it wasn’t me lies, subsequently proven to be false.
Some Labour supporters actually want Starmer to turn his back on the manifesto that gets him into power, for a more left-wing approach.
That in my opinion is not carrying out what is promised, but unbelievably is supported by some of those who wanted a re-vote when they claimed the same thing had happened after Brexit!
So, that’s something some Labour supporters want, not actually something Starmer did differently to what was promised? Something he might (or might not) do in the future?
Not sure how that contributes to Starmer being a political liar, for something he hasn’t yet done.???
Starmer abandoned some of his key promises when he became Labour leader.
Such as.?
Today the Labour mp on the morning bbc politics programme said they would reduce net immigration. Pressed to give a target she wouldn’t put a number on it. Why? Because if they said it would go down by (say - my example) 50,000 in the first year of a Labour government, but they only achieved 20,000, they would be accused of lying.
Tories claimed to be building 40 “new” hospitals. But they haven’t, have they? Oh but refurbs and extensions count.?? Really.??
Starmer had a beer and a pizza in the office at the end of a working day.
The government had a series of “events” which turned out to be parties (email invitations about bringing bottles etc) which the PM lied about despite having been on the telly nearly every night telling us how to behave whilst blatantly ignoring their own rules. Meanwhile our late Queen sits by herself, at her husband of over 70 years’ funeral. Dignity - at a time of immense personal sorrow - personified, whilst the Tories pissed on the lockdown laws.
But hey, Starmer is somehow worse.??
I don’t doubt he’s had some changes of opinion and direction but by Christ he can’t be any worse than the current lot.!!
-
F**king hell, pick the bones out of this lot.
https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/keir-starmer-broken-promises-tuition-fees-nationalisation-u-turn/
-
So most of that talks about changes to policies set out 4 years ago, and the reason for most of the subsequent changes is a reaction to the changing financial situation. In simple terms, Labour would inherit a situation where they can’t afford to do what they ideally wanted to, 4 years before.
Would you rather they made promises based on a less than credible financial outlook?
Are they reacting to a changing situation, or just breaking promises?
-
So don't you think COVID and the invasion of Ukraine changed the country's financial situation?
-
Of course it did, so it makes sense that what Labour hoped to do in 2020 isn’t all affordable now??
They usually get panned by folks saying they can’t pay for what they promise. Now they say they won’t make promises they can’t fund, or they change because of finances.
Where’s the lies.??
And by the way, I said a changing financial situation, not what those changes were.
-
So, what Labour hoped to do in 2020 will be carried out after they gain power in July?
-
So, what Labour hoped to do in 2020 will be carried out after they gain power in July?
Not necessarily if they’ve been forced to change.
But you would expect them to implement when in government what they say now that they would do. Somethings might not work out but would there be a credible explanation at the time? More likely with Labour than with the Tories.
What point are you actually trying to make here.?
I’m not seeing owt about Starmer being a huge political liar.. more of a realist. I expect he will make mistakes too, as they all do.
-
Labour will set out its manifesto and go about trying to implement it, as all Governments do.
People can then assess whether they think it good or bad in an election in 5 years time. If Labour turn out to have deceived people, the people can vote for change.
The Brexit vote was won on a bed of straight out lies and deception about how it would be implemented and what the consequences would be. How do we hold people responsible for that, now the Liar In Chief has moved on to a 100k per month job peddling lies in the papers. Which of course is how he started.
-
But the Tories were forced to change, because of COVID and the Ukraine invasion! Surely, be Christ that was a credible explanation!
-
Labour will set out its manifesto and go about trying to implement it, as all Governments do.
People can then assess whether they think it good or bad in an election in 5 years time. If Labour turn out to have deceived people, the people can vote for change.
The Brexit vote was won on a bed of straight out lies and deception about how it would be implemented and what the consequences would be. How do we hold people responsible for that, now the Liar In Chief has moved on to a 100k per month job peddling lies in the papers. Which of course is how he started.
Na. The Brexit referendum question was: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
1) Remain a member of the European Union
2) Leave the European Union
-
But the Tories were forced to change, because of COVID and the Ukraine invasion! Surely, be Christ that was a credible explanation!
For some of the financial issues yes, but not for Johnson’s lies..
As for the hospitals, the Tory promise of 40 “new” hospitals never actually included them all being new. The plans didn’t change to be less than 40 “new” hospitals due to financial changes did they.?
And the mini budget under Truss in 2022 was badly thought out and whilst never delivered anyway, the overnight impact was to trash interest rates and hit mortgages.
Plus you were calling Starmer a liar, when all he has supposedly done is change direction - he’s not been in power yet to see what he actually does or doesn’t implement.??
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
-
The trouble with the Referendum result ( apart from the obvious) was that it was far too close and I'm surprised Cameron didn't say " for such a massive move to be carried out we will require a Voting majority of at least 66 % before we change the status quo"
I'm even MORE surprised that the Govt havent legislated for that to try and ensure B***** cannot be undone with a 52 rejoin 48 stay out vote
I have been sick of being called a remoaner by the Media for wanting another vote and I think it perfectly democratic to do so given that Farage made it clear that should the vote be close , even 51 % Remain and 49 % that he would continue to campaign until Leave won
If it's good enough for a 7 times failed MP it's good enough for me
-
According to the NAO, 11 are judged new hospitals, while 20 meet other elements of DHSC’s definition. One project in Dorset does not meet the definition.
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
-
According to the NAO, 11 are judged new hospitals, while 20 meet other elements of DHSC’s definition. One project in Dorset does not meet the definition.
Johnson's Govt instructed civil servants to call refurbishments "new hospitals" in all correspondence. Truly Orwellian abuse of language. But what do you expect from someone with his relationship with the truth?
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
No they haven’t..
And no, I don’t trust any politician absolutely. There will always be things they can’t deliver, honestly or not..
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
No, I don't think it is acceptable to deceive the public, no matter what party it is.
-
Labour will set out its manifesto and go about trying to implement it, as all Governments do.
People can then assess whether they think it good or bad in an election in 5 years time. If Labour turn out to have deceived people, the people can vote for change.
The Brexit vote was won on a bed of straight out lies and deception about how it would be implemented and what the consequences would be. How do we hold people responsible for that, now the Liar In Chief has moved on to a 100k per month job peddling lies in the papers. Which of course is how he started.
Political parties could make that point and make it a manifesto commitment to massively change it? Strangely, it appears nobody is planning to do that, perhaps because it's not a popular vote winner? We are coming up to 10 years on now, I don't see why there shouldn't be a discussion about Brexit held in the next few years.
The manifestos are key for me, Labour have said a lot of the right things but I still have a bit of concern that they'll tax me to high heaven, my biggest concern is around talk of capping pension tax allowance.
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
According to the NAO, 11 are judged new hospitals, while 20 meet other elements of DHSC’s definition. One project in Dorset does not meet the definition.
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
No, I don't think it is acceptable to deceive the public, no matter what party it is.
Yet here you are creating your own untruth to defend someone known to be a persistent liar.
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
According to the NAO, 11 are judged new hospitals, while 20 meet other elements of DHSC’s definition. One project in Dorset does not meet the definition.
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
No, I don't think it is acceptable to deceive the public, no matter what party it is.
Yet here you are creating your own untruth to defend someone known to be a persistent liar.
What?
-
The trouble with the Referendum result ( apart from the obvious) was that it was far too close and I'm surprised Cameron didn't say " for such a massive move to be carried out we will require a Voting majority of at least 66 % before we change the status quo"
I'm even MORE surprised that the Govt havent legislated for that to try and ensure B***** cannot be undone with a 52 rejoin 48 stay out vote
I have been sick of being called a remoaner by the Media for wanting another vote and I think it perfectly democratic to do so given that Farage made it clear that should the vote be close , even 51 % Remain and 49 % that he would continue to campaign until Leave won
If it's good enough for a 7 times failed MP it's good enough for me
lets say the result was remain then a year later they had another vote as it was close and it changed to leave can you honestly say that would be acceptable?
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
Can you list these new hospitals?
-
Labour will set out its manifesto and go about trying to implement it, as all Governments do.
People can then assess whether they think it good or bad in an election in 5 years time. If Labour turn out to have deceived people, the people can vote for change.
The Brexit vote was won on a bed of straight out lies and deception about how it would be implemented and what the consequences would be. How do we hold people responsible for that, now the Liar In Chief has moved on to a 100k per month job peddling lies in the papers. Which of course is how he started.
Political parties could make that point and make it a manifesto commitment to massively change it? Strangely, it appears nobody is planning to do that, perhaps because it's not a popular vote winner? We are coming up to 10 years on now, I don't see why there shouldn't be a discussion about Brexit held in the next few years.
The manifestos are key for me, Labour have said a lot of the right things but I still have a bit of concern that they'll tax me to high heaven, my biggest concern is around talk of capping pension tax allowance.
Personally, I wouldn't mind paying higher taxes as long as there's a clear return in these taxes for the nation. Right now, I am taxed quite a bit but have no idea at all where that money is being used as public services are a shambles.
-
If you want to know why we are paying the highest tax since the War for services that are falling apart, start here.
https://x.com/BenChu_/status/1797249151983317033
The income of workers has barely risen in 14 years under this lot. Absolutely unprecedented since the time of the Napoleonic Wars.
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
According to the NAO, 11 are judged new hospitals, while 20 meet other elements of DHSC’s definition. One project in Dorset does not meet the definition.
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
No, I don't think it is acceptable to deceive the public, no matter what party it is.
Yet here you are creating your own untruth to defend someone known to be a persistent liar.
What?
In 2019 Johnson promised there would be 40 new hospitals by 2030.
In 2020 Sunak changed the definition of a 'new' hospital to incude renovation of an old one.
In August 2023 the NAO reported that at best 32 of the 'new' hospitals would be completed by 2030.
In November 2023 the PAC reported even this was unlikely to happen.
As of January 2024 no 'new' hospital had been completed.
https://lowdownnhs.info/analysis/new-hospitals-the-chaos-continues/
What I believe pies is saying, and he can correct me if I am wrong, is that in the same thread you have said you hate liars whilst posting a known and proven lie.
-
Today will be a busy day of polls. The first is a poll of GB News viewers:
May 30th-31st
LAB: 46% (+7)
CON: 25% (-3)
REF: 18% (-2)
LDEM: 6% (-)
GRN: 2% (-1)
If the Tories are losing these voters to Labour, then their outlook really isn't positive.
-
And now for Redfield & Wilton who used a sample size of c.10,000:
31/5 - 2/6:
Labour 46% (–)
Conservative 20% (-3)
Reform 14% (+1)
Lib Dem 10% (+1)
Green 5% (–)
SNP 2% (-1)
Other 2% (-1)
-
YouGov projection:
Labour: 422 (+220 from GE2019)
Conservative: 140 (-225)
Lib Dem: 48 (+37)
SNP: 17 (-31)
Green: 2 (+1)
PC: 2 (-2)
Reform UK: 0 (=)
-
Oh dear… maybe the Faiza Shaheen news hasn’t filtered through the full population yet?
-
Oh dear… maybe the Faiza Shaheen news hasn’t filtered through the full population yet?
Do you know what mate, I bet that isn’t far from the truth.
The general public at large probably will not have heard of her and have no knowledge of the current situation with her.
-
Let's be honest, Keith doesn't really have to do anything now. The next few weeks will be a cakewalk for him.
It's when he gets in that the problems will begin. I don't envy him.
-
32 of the 40 promised new hospitals have been built. The promise was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
If you think Starmer says nothing but the truth then your trust in him is greater than probably half of the members of the party he leads.
When someone promises 40 NEW hospitals do you think it acceptable to include renovations or new wings as a completely NEW hospital?
No, I don't think it is acceptable to deceive the public, no matter what party it is.
Strange way of saying yes or no but I'll take it as a no 32 New hospitals haven't been built
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
-
Today will be a busy day of polls. The first is a poll of GB News viewers:
May 30th-31st
LAB: 46% (+7)
CON: 25% (-3)
REF: 18% (-2)
LDEM: 6% (-)
GRN: 2% (-1)
If the Tories are losing these voters to Labour, then their outlook really isn't positive.
Chris bx.
I think that survey should be dismissed immediately.
There's only one monster that watches GBnews,unfortunately it has a couple of hundred different heads.
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
But they are not all “new” hospitals are they.?
-
I predict the establishment will end up with around 550 to 600 seats, so as ever, no change on the swingometer there. But at least the people had their month of intense debate and distractions, and a special day out feeling they matter.
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
But they are not all “new” hospitals are they.?
They classed extensions and refurbishments as new builds along with completely new hospitals built on new or current sites.
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
And Rich-ie still insisting 40 NEW hospitals to be built by 2030
Does that mean if they are not and Labour win the election that it will be their fault?
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
But they are not all “new” hospitals are they.?
They classed extensions and refurbishments as new builds along with completely new hospitals built on new or current sites.
Not when Johnson first announced them in 2019 they weren't. He announced he would build 40 brand new hospitals.
As you appear to have missed my post #159 above here it is again:
In 2019 Johnson promised there would be 40 new hospitals by 2030.
In 2020 Sunak changed the definition of a 'new' hospital to incude renovation of an old one.
In August 2023 the NAO reported that at best 32 of the 'new' hospitals would be completed by 2030.
In November 2023 the PAC reported even this was unlikely to happen.
As of January 2024 no 'new' hospital had been completed.
https://lowdownnhs.info/analysis/new-hospitals-the-chaos-continues/
What I believe pies is saying, and he can correct me if I am wrong, is that in the same thread you have said you hate liars whilst posting a known and proven lie.
-
I predict the establishment will end up with around 550 to 600 seats, so as ever, no change on the swingometer there. But at least the people had their month of intense debate and distractions, and a special day out feeling they matter.
Unfortunately this will be the defining message we will all be able to take from this election when its done and dusted.
Will be intriguing to see how the two main parties can make their manifestoes read differently when in effect they will be delivering something very much similar as to make any difference to the electorate at large.
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
And Rich-ie still insisting 40 NEW hospitals to be built by 2030
Does that mean if they are not and Labour win the election that it will be their fault?
No, on the contrary, Labour will blame the Tories!
-
AND from 3 posts above (173) Liar Johnson also promised Care package was ready to hit the ground running in his inaugural Lie Speech outside Number 10 and for good measure said there were no Parties in Downing Street but if there were " they all followed the Rules of the day "
-
AND from 3 posts above (173) Liar Johnson also promised Care package was ready to hit the ground running in his inaugural Lie Speech outside Number 10 and for good measure said there were no Parties in Downing Street but if there were " they all followed the Rules of the day "
Tony Blair was the biggest liar, he and Mandelson were true ‘Spin’ Doctors.
-
I wonder if one was offered 40 new cars as part of a business deal and you received a bunch of old cars some with 1 new tyre or a nodding dog on the back shelf others with a cheap respray one would consider it a good deal?
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
But they are not all “new” hospitals are they.?
They classed extensions and refurbishments as new builds along with completely new hospitals built on new or current sites.
so it was b*llocks then.?
-
Looks like it, although the Labour Party is committed to the programme, apparently.
By the way, IDM, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
-
I meant to say that 32 of the 40 promised new hospitals SHOULD have been built (by 2030). The plan was to have all 40 completed between 2021 and 2030.
But they are not all “new” hospitals are they.?
They classed extensions and refurbishments as new builds along with completely new hospitals built on new or current sites.
so it was b*llocks then.?
Maybe in a very small part of Bentley it's considered a good deal .............
-
Looks like it, although the Labour Party is committed to the programme, apparently.
By the way, IDM, your continued condemnation of a career liar would be applaudable but your support for the biggest career liar of all makes it laughable.
Utter nonsense. A no point have I said which party I will vote for. Won’t be conservative as they’ve repeatedly failed. Whoever comes next may well fail too, but we won’t know yet.
You keep banging on about Starmer being a huge liar, but all you come up with is changes of direction. He’s not been in power yet to have a chance not to deliver promises.
Yet Farage only a few days ago wasn’t going to stand, now he is, and as a party leader. Does that make him a liar? Or was he just playing games?
-
Funny that, at no point have I said which party I will vote for either. It won't be Labour though, because its leader is a political liar.
"Keir Starmer lied to become Labour leader: it’s really that simple.
It’s not about changing circumstances. He just knew Labour members were left-wing so he had to say things he didn’t really believe to become Labour leader."
Owen Jones.
-
Funny that, at no point have I said which party I will vote for either. It won't be Labour though, because its leader is a political liar.
"Keir Starmer lied to become Labour leader: it’s really that simple.
It’s not about changing circumstances. He just knew Labour members were left-wing so he had to say things he didn’t really believe to become Labour leader."
Owen Jones.
Its a pity that we don't have a law that requires a party that forms government to work with their manifesto pledges and only change track if the circumstances change at that time.
What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along.
We've just had a government do this exact thing over the last 14 years, should we really be accepting another bunch of charlatans?
-
"What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along."
And when has that ever happened?
-
"What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along."
And when has that ever happened?
If that's so, why the outrage about the failing 40 new hospital programme?
-
Funny that, at no point have I said which party I will vote for either. It won't be Labour though, because its leader is a political liar.
"Keir Starmer lied to become Labour leader: it’s really that simple.
It’s not about changing circumstances. He just knew Labour members were left-wing so he had to say things he didn’t really believe to become Labour leader."
Owen Jones.
Do you believe everyting Owen Jones says? Or just pick and choose what you want to believe - because he says a lot of things about Tory politicans as well?
-
I believe anyone if they confirm my thoughts on something.
Don't you?
-
People believe what they want to believe and quote “superb journalists” and “brilliant economists” to demonstrate what they want others to believe.
Some even quote from The Guardian because that is where their evidence comes from.
It doesn’t always, and sometimes never, convinces other people that it is correct.
-
"What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along."
And when has that ever happened?
Did you actually read the post fully?
Ive just said the recent incarnations of this Tory government.
You know the ones that you have constantly whinged about since forever!
-
"What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along."
And when has that ever happened?
Did you actually read the post fully?
Ive just said the recent incarnations of this Tory government.
You know the ones that you have constantly whinged about since forever!
And what examples do you have of even the recent Tory Govts winning an election then wholesale ripping up manifesto pledges?
-
"What the electorate don't want to see is a government who ride in on the coat tails of a published manifesto and immediately change track, abandon all their pledges and proceed to enact their original plans all along."
And when has that ever happened?
Did you actually read the post fully?
Ive just said the recent incarnations of this Tory government.
You know the ones that you have constantly whinged about since forever!
And what examples do you have of even the recent Tory Govts winning an election then wholesale ripping up manifesto pledges?
Sorry fella, i don't have time to indulge you.